Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-03-20 City Council Agenda PacketCity Council 1 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. March 20, 2017 Regular Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 PM Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the Council Chambers on the Thursday 10 days preceding the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to agendized items; up to three minutes per speaker, to be determined by the presiding officer. If you wish to address the Council on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Council, but it is very helpful. TIME ESTIMATES Time estimates are provided as part of the Council's effort to manage its time at Council meetings. Listed times are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is in progress. The Council reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change the order of items and/or to continue items to another meeting. Particular items may be heard before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur in order to best manage the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public. To ensure participation in a particular item, we suggest arriving at the beginning of the meeting and remaining until the item is called. HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW Applicants and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their remarks and up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken. Call to Order Closed Session Public Comments: Members of the public may speak to the Closed Session item(s); three minutes per speaker. 1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS THIS ITEM WILL NOT BE HEARD THIS EVENING AND BE WILL RESCHEDULED Special Orders of the Day 6:00-6:20 PM 2.Proclamation of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Honoring Roy Clay 3.Proclamation of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Honoring Loretta Green REVISED 2 March 20, 2017 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions City Manager Comments 6:20-6:30 PM Oral Communications 6:30-6:45 PM Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. Minutes Approval 6:45-6:50 PM 4.Approval of Action Minutes for the February 13 and 27, 2017 Council Meetings Consent Calendar 6:50-6:55 PM Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members. 5.Appointment of 2017 Emergency Standby Council 6.Authorize Acceptance of Relinquishment of one Parcel From the State of California (Caltrans) and the Release and Quitclaim of Nine Parcels to the State of California (Caltrans) for the 101 Auxiliary Project Between the State Route 85 (SR 85) Interchange in Mountain View and the Embarcadero Road Interchange and the Replacement of the San Francisquito Creek Bridge 7.SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Title 18 (Zoning); Chapters 18.04 (Definitions), 18.30(F) )Automobile Dealership (AD) Combining District Regulations), 18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements), and 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards); Adding Sections 18.40.160 (Replacement Project Required), 18.40.170 (Deferral of Director’s Action), and 18.42.140 (Housing Inventory Sites Small Lot Consolidation); and Repealing Chapter 10.70 (Trip Reduction and Travel Demand). The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15061(b)(3) (FIRST READING: February 27, 2017 PASSED: 8-0 Tanaka absent) 8.1470 Monte Bello Road [16PLN-00180]: Approval of a Site and Design Review to Allow the Replacement of an Existing 24-foot Long Wooden Bridge Across an Unnamed Tributary to Steven's Creek With a new 45 to 50-foot Long Steel Bridge and to Construct a new 45 to 50-foot Long Steel Bridge Across Steven's Creek. Environmental Assessment: The Lead Agency, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Which was Adopted by the District on March 9, 2016. Open Space (OS) Zoning District 3 March 20, 2017 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. 9.Approval of a Construction Contract With Alcal Specialty Contracting, Inc. in an Amount Not-to-exceed $364,728 to Provide Construction Services to Replace the Existing Roof at the Cubberley Community Center Auditorium Wing 10.Approve and Authorize the City Manager to Execute Contract Amendment Number 1 to Contract Number C15157280 in the Amount of $30,000 With Project Consultant David J. Powers for Historical Evaluation of Rinconada Park Additional Services; and Approve a Budget Amendment in the Capital Improvement Fund for Rinconada Long Range Plan (Project PE-12003) in the Amount of $45,000 11.Approval of a Professional Services Agreement With SRT Consultants for a Total Not-to-exceed Amount of $708,736 for Assessment of the City's Current Water System Configuration and Recommendations to Enhance the City's Emergency Water Supply 12.Approval of Contract Amendment Number 2 With SP Plus in the Amount of $368,390 for Additional Services for Parking Permits and On-site Customer Service and to Extend the Term of the Agreement to March 15, 2019; Approval of Contract Amendment Number 2 With Serco, Inc. in the Amount of $751,224 for Enforcement of Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) District and to Extend the Term of the Agreement to May 31, 2019; Approval of Contract Amendment Number 2 With McGuire Pacific Constructors in the Amount of $181,035 for Construction Services for Evergreen Park - Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking District 13.429 University Avenue [14PLN-00222]: Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Mitigation Monitoring Plan, and a Record of Land Use Action Approving a Mixed Use Project With 28,547 Square Foot of Floor Area and two Subterranean Levels of Parking on an 11,000 Square Foot Site. Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration was Circulated From November 17, 2014 to December 12, 2014. Zoning District: CD-C (GF)(P) 14.SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Making Permanent Interim Urgency Ordinance 5330 (Limiting the Conversion of Ground Floor Retail and Retail Like Uses), With Some Modifications; Extending the Ground Floor Combining District to Certain Properties Located Downtown; Modifying the Definition of Retail; Adding Regulations to Improve Pedestrian Oriented Design Standards in the Downtown; and Related Changes. The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15308. The Planning 4 March 20, 2017 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. and Transportation Commission Recommended Approval of the Proposed Ordinance (FIRST READING: February 13, 2017 PASSED: 6-3 Fine, Kniss, Tanaka no) Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 6:55-7:00 PM 15.TEFRA HEARING: Regarding Conduit Financing for the Channing House Project Located at 850 Webster Street, Palo Alto, and Approving the Issuance of Revenue Bonds by the California Municipal Finance Authority for the Purpose of Financing and Refinancing the Acquisition, Construction, Equipping and Furnishing of Improvements to Channing House 7:00-10:00 PM 16.PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Update: Public Hearing on the Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Report and Revised Fiscal Study; Council Discussion and Direction to Staff Regarding a Preferred Planning Scenario; and Council Discussion and Direction to Staff Regarding the Organization of the Comprehensive Plan Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) Adjournment AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. 5 March 20, 2017 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Additional Information Standing Committee Meetings City / School Committee Meeting March 16, 2017 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting March 21, 2017 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting March 22, 2017 Schedule of Meetings Schedule of Meetings Tentative Agenda Tentative Agenda Informational Report Palo Alto Airport Fixed Base Operator Expiring Leases and Informational Update Public Letters to Council Set 1 Set 2 City of Palo Alto (ID # 7853) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Special Orders of the Day Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Proclamation in Honor of Roy Clay Title: Proclamation of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Honoring Roy Clay From: City Manager Lead Department: City Clerk Attachments:  Attachment A: Proclamation Honoring Roy Clay Proclamation Honoring Roy Clay WHEREAS, Palo Alto is honored to recognize long-time Palo Alto resident Roy Clay as a technology pioneer who made significant professional contributions to the rise of the computer and software industries in the community we now know as Silicon Valley; and WHEREAS, Roy Clay, who grew up in Missouri and arrived in Palo Alto in 1962, became the first African- American hired locally in high tech and went on to establish the software development facility at Hewlett Packard, managed the company’s emerging computer division, and aided in HP’s emergence as a computer company; and WHEREAS, Roy Clay was a guiding hand behind a venture capital firm’s technology investments in emerging companies like Tandem, Compaq and Intel; and WHEREAS, because of the impact of his work, Roy Clay became known as the Godfather of Silicon Valley, and in 2003 was inducted into the Silicon Valley Engineering Council’s Hall of Fame, alongside Bill Hewlett, Dave Packard, Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore; and WHEREAS, Roy Clay also founded the electrical safety test equipment company, ROD-L Electronics in 1977, served as President of San Francisco’s Olympic Club home of U.S. amateur tournaments, and served over 35 years in community organizations like JobTrain and the Girl’s Club of the Midpeninsula to improve the quality of the life of our communities; and WHEREAS, Roy Clay became the first person of color to serve on the Palo Alto City Council from 1973 to 1979, and he was Palo Alto’s first African-American Vice Mayor in 1976 and 1977. NOW, THEREFORE, I, H. Gregory Scharff, Mayor of the City of Palo Alto, on behalf of the City Council, do hereby recognize Roy Clay as a community hero and extend appreciation for his years of valuable contributions and service. Presented: February 27, 2017 ______________________________ H. Gregory Scharff Mayor City of Palo Alto (ID # 7861) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Special Orders of the Day Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Proclamation Honoring Loretta Green Title: Proclamation of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Honoring Loretta Green From: City Manager Lead Department: City Clerk Attachments:  Attachment A: Proclamation Honoring Loretta Green Proclamation Honoring Loretta Green WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto is proud to honor beloved community journalist Loretta Martin Green for her significant contributions to building a community of empathy, respect, awareness, compassion and interwoven destinies; and WHEREAS, Loretta Green was recognized as Woman of the Year by the California State Assembly by Assemblyman Joe Simitian for being the voice of our community through her work on 11 years’ worth of columns in the San Jose Mercury News. “Her columns reflected the pulse and sentiment of the public. Loretta’s gracious and elegant writing style will be greatly missed,” Assemblyman Simitian said in his proclamation upon her retirement; and WHEREAS, Loretta Green was also a reporter for 21 years with the Palo Alto Times and Palo Alto Times Tribune, and has been recognized as an outstanding professional journalist by the Associated Press, the Peninsula Press Club, and Association of Newspaper Editors; and WHEREAS, Loretta Green is a 46-year local resident who has been active in our community for decades; she has been a member of Links Inc., a Senior Fellow of the American Leadership Forum of Silicon Valley, served on the Board of Directors of the Museum of American Heritage and Stanford University Hospital, and is a longtime member of University AME Zion Church in Palo Alto; and WHEREAS, Loretta Green is the recipient of numerous awards including the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce’s Tall Trees Award in 1991 as Outstanding Professional, the Athena Award in 1988, the Mid- Peninsula YWCA’s Black Woman Award, the East Palo Alto Teen Home’s Positive Image Award, and the Career Action Center’s Woman of Vision Award; and WHEREAS, Loretta Green, in honoring you, we are honoring our community, because, as you wrote in your last column, “I want to thank you for showing me courage in the face of devastating fire, catastrophic illness, inhumane cruelty, the guns of war, wrenching loss and overwhelming moral conflict. Thank you for telling me the truth and trusting me with it. Thank you for believing that when you told me who you were, that is exactly who you would see in my story.” You wrote, “I have been fortunate enough to gain your trust and respect. You have taken me into your lives and shared your passions, your pain, your triumphs, your aspirations. We have smiled together and wept together. We have agreed and disagreed. All of it has been a blessing.” NOW, THEREFORE, I, H. Gregory Scharff, Mayor of the City of Palo Alto, on behalf of the City Council, do hereby proclaim Loretta Martin Green as a community hero and extend appreciation for her years of significant contributions, service and leadership. Presented: March 20, 2017 ______________________________ H. Gregory Scharff Mayor CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK March 20, 2017 The Honorable City Council Attention: Finance Committee Palo Alto, California Approval of Action Minutes for the February 13 and 27, 2017 Council Meetings Staff is requesting Council review and approve the attached Action Minutes. ATTACHMENTS:  Attachment A: 02-13-17 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOCX)  Attachment B: 02-27-17 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOCX) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 10 Regular Meeting February 13, 2017 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 6:09 P.M. Present: DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Holman, Kniss, Kou, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Absent: Special Orders of the Day 1. Fire Safety Month Poster Award Recognition to Palo Alto Unified School District Students for Excellence in Design, Art and Messaging (Continued From January 9, 2017). At this time Council heard Agenda Item Numbers 3 and 4. 3. Proclamation of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Honoring Pastor Paul Bains. 4. Proclamation of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Honoring Clarence B. Jones. At this time Council heard Agenda Item Number 2. 2. American Construction Inspectors Association (ACIA) Presentation of the 2016 Industry Leadership of the Year Award. 5. Appointment of Three Candidates to the Historic Resources Board (HRB) and Four Candidates to the Parks & Recreation Commission (PRC) for Terms Ending December 15, 2019; and Appointment of one Candidate to the PRC and one Candidate to the Planning & Transportation (PTC) Commission to two Unexpired Terms Ending December 15, 2018. First Round of voting for three positions on the Historic Resources Board with terms ending December 15, 2019: DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 10 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/13/17 Voting For David Bower: DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Holman, Kniss, Kou, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Voting For Beth Bunnenberg: DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Holman, Kniss, Kou, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Voting For Brandon Corey: DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Holman, Kniss, Kou, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Voting For Pat DiCicco: Beth Minor, City Clerk announced that David Bower with 9 votes, Beth Bunnenberg with 9 votes and Brandon Corey with 9 votes were appointed to the Historic Resources Board. First Round of voting for four positions on the Parks and Recreation Commission with terms ending December 15, 2019: Voting For Grant Dasher: Voting For Rebecca Eisenberg: Voting For Jeff Greenfield: DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kou, Scharff Voting For Doug Hagan: Fine, Tanaka, Wolbach Voting For Jeff LaMere: DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Kniss, Scharff, Tanaka Voting For Steven Lee: Voting For Alice Mansell: Wolbach Voting For Ryan McCauley: DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Holman, Kou, Tanaka Voting For Don McDougall: Fine, Kniss, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Voting For Keith Reckdahl: DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kniss, Kou, Scharff, Wolbach Voting For Ellen Turbow: Holman, Kniss, Kou Beth Minor, City Clerk announced that Jeff LaMere with 6 votes, Ryan McCauley with 6 votes, and Keith Reckdahl with 7 votes were appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Jeff Greenfield and Don McDougall both received 5 votes. This tie necessitates a second round of voting. Second Round of voting for one position on the Parks and Recreation DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 10 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/13/17 Commission with a term ending December 15, 2019: Voting For Jeff Greenfield: DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kou Voting For Don McDougall: Fine, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Voting For Ellen Turbow: Kniss Beth Minor, City Clerk announced that no candidate received the required five or more votes and a third round of voting is required. Third Round of voting for one position on the Parks and Recreation Commission with a term ending December 15, 2019: Voting For Jeff Greenfield: DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kou, Voting For Don McDougall: Fine, Kniss, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Beth Minor, City Clerk announced that Don McDougall with 5 votes was appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission. First Round of voting for one position on the Planning and Transportation Commission with a term ending December 15, 2018: Voting For Dexter Dawes: Voting For Claude Ezran: Voting For Brian Hamachek: Voting For David Hirsch: Voting For Natasha Kachenko: Voting For Gabriel Kralik: Voting For Susan Monk: DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Kniss, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Voting For Christian Pease: Kou Voting For Jessica Resmini: Voting For Reshma Singh: Voting For Curtis Smolar: DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 10 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/13/17 Voting For Greer Stone: Holman Beth Minor, City Clerk announced that Susan Monk with 7 votes was appointed to the Planning and Transportation Commission. First Round of voting for one position on the Parks and Recreation Commission with a term ending December 15, 2018: Voting For Jeff Greenfield: DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kou, Scharff Voting For Doug Hagan: Fine, Tanaka, Wolbach Voting For Ellen Turbow: Kniss Beth Minor, City Clerk announced that Jeff Greenfield with 5 votes was appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Study Session 6. Request for a Pre-screening Study Session to Rezone the Vacant Property at 4146 El Camino Real (Near Thain Way) From Low Density Multiple-Family Residence District (RM-15) to Medium Density Multiple-Family Residence District (RM-30). Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions None. Minutes Approval 7. Approval of Action Minutes for the January 28, 2017 Council Meeting. MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to approve the Action Minutes for the January 28, 2017 Council Meeting. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Consent Calendar MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Kou to approve Agenda Item Numbers 8-13. 8. Resolution 9667 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing Pledge Sources of Revenue for Repayment of State Revolving Fund (SRF) Loans for Planning, Design and Construction of Wastewater Treatment Enterprise Fund Facilities at the Palo Alto DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 10 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/13/17 Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP), and Repealing Resolution Number 9631.” 9. Policy and Services Committee Recommends That the City Council Accept the Auditor's Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2016. 10. Finance Committee Recommends That the City Council Accept Macias Gini & O'Connell's (MGO) Audit of the City of Palo Alto's Financial Statements as of June 30, 2016. 11. Approval of an Amendment to Stewardship Agreement Number S13147834 With Santa Clara County Fire Safe Council for an Additional Amount of $181,500 Annually for Three Years for a Total Amount Not- to-Exceed $987,630 to Implement Elements of the Foothills Fire Plan (an Interdepartmental Initiative of Fire, Community Services, and Public Works) and Extend the Term two Years to June 30, 2020. 12. Resolution 9668 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving the 2017 City of Palo Alto Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines.” 13. Approval of an Amendment of an Existing Funding Agreement With the Palo Alto Transportation Management Association (PATMA) and Silicon Valley Community Foundation Extending the Term of the Agreement for two Years (to December, 31 2018) and Providing $100,000 per Year. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Action Items 14. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Making Permanent Interim Urgency Ordinance 5330 (Limiting the Conversion of Ground Floor Retail and Retail Like Uses), With Some Modifications; Extending the Ground Floor Combining District to Certain Properties Located Downtown; Modifying the Definition of Retail; Adding Regulations to Improve Pedestrian Oriented Design Standards in the Downtown; and Related Changes. The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15308. The Planning and Transportation Commission Recommended Approval of the Proposed Ordinance. Public Hearing opened at 8:42 P.M. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 6 of 10 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/13/17 Public Hearing closed at 9:27 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to adopt the Retail Preservation Ordinance. AMENDMENT: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Motion, “remove from Section 18.30(C).040, ‘and use.’” AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to add to the Motion, “add to Section 18.04.030(114)(B), ‘not allowed on University Avenue or California Avenue’ after ‘cleaning services.’” AMENDMENT RESTATED: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to add to the Motion, “precluded laundry and cleaning services on University Avenue and California Avenue.” (New Part A) AMENDMENT PASSED: 6-3 Fine, Scharff, Tanaka no AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Kou to add to the Motion, “retain in Section 18.04.030(125), Retail Service examples.” AMENDMENT FAILED: 3-6 Filseth, Holman, Kou yes AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Motion, “add to Section 18.30(C).020(c) with ‘limited to minimum square footage needed to serve upper floors.’” AMENDMENT RESTATED: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to add to the Motion, “direct Staff to return with revised language to address the size of lobbies.” (New Part B) AMENDMENT PASSED: 7-2 Fine, Tanaka no AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to add to the Motion, “add to Sections 18.30(c).030(1), 18.30(c).030(2), and 18.30(c).030(3), ‘except on University Avenue or California Avenue.’” AMENDMENT FAILED: 3-6 Holman, Kniss, Kou yes AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to add to the Motion, “replace the second two sentences of DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 7 of 10 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/13/17 Section 18.04.160(c)(3) with, ‘the Planning Director to refer the request to the City Council.’” AMENDMENT RESTATED: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to add to the Motion, “update Section 18.04.160(c)(3) to require the Director’s Decision be placed on the Council’s Consent Calendar, subject to existing procedures.” (New Part C) AMENDMENT PASSED: 6-3 Fine, Kniss, Tanaka no AMENDMENT: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Tanaka to add to the Motion, “remove Sections 18.30(A).055 and 18.30(C).035.” AMENDMENT RESTATED: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Tanaka to add to the Motion, “to exempt Retail and Retail like uses from Sections 18.30(A).055 and 18.30(C).035.” AMENDMENT RESTATED: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Tanaka to add to the Motion, “direct Staff to prepare Design Standards to promote pedestrian oriented design and require visual access into the ground floor of buildings to a depth of three feet.” INCORPORATED INTO THE AMENDMENT WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Amendment, “for the Ground Floor (GF) and Retail Shopping (R) Combining Districts” after “Design Standards.” AMENDMENT AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Tanaka to add to the Motion, “direct Staff to prepare Design Standards for the Ground Floor (GF) and Retail Shopping (R) Combining Districts to promote pedestrian oriented design and require visual access into the ground floor of buildings to a depth of three feet.” (New Part D) AMENDMENT AS AMENDED PASSED: 6-3 DuBois, Holman, Kou no AMENDMENT: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Tanaka to remove Section 12 from the Ordinance. AMENDMENT FAILED: 3-6 Fine, Kniss, Tanaka yes AMENDMENT: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to add to the Motion, “direct Staff to explore exempting Downtown from Section 18.16.040(b).” (New Part E) AMENDMENT PASSED: 6-3 DuBois, Holman, Kou no DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 8 of 10 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/13/17 AMENDMENT: Council Member Tanaka moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to add to the Motion, “remove Section 18.30(C).030(b).” AMENDMENT FAILED: 3-6 Fine, Kniss, Tanaka yes AMENDMENT: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to add to the Motion, “limit application of the Ordinance to Downtown.” AMENDMENT FAILED: 3-6 Fine, Kniss, Tanaka yes AMENDMENT: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to add to the Motion, “remove Section 18.04.030(125.1)(K).” (New Part F) AMENDMENT PASSED: 8-1 Holman no AMENDMENT: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to add to the Motion, “remove Section 18.04.030(125.1)(J).” (New Part G) AMENDMENT PASSED: 5-4 DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kou no AMENDMENT: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to add to the Motion, “remove from Section 18.040.030(114)(H), ‘intended for an individual or small group of 15 or fewer students/customers at one time (see “commercial recreation” for other activities).’” AMENDMENT RESTATED: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to add to the Motion, “replace Section 18.040.030(114)(H) with, ‘fitness and exercise studios or similar uses of 5,000 square feet or less.’” AMENDMENT RESTATED: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to add to the Motion, “replace Section 18.040.030(114)(H) with, ‘fitness and exercise studios or similar uses of 2,500 square feet or less.’” AMENDMENT RESTATED: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to add to the Motion, “replace Section 18.040.030(114)(H) with, ‘fitness and exercise studios or similar uses of 1,800 square feet or less.’” (New Part H) AMENDMENT AS AMENDED PASSED: 7-2 Holman, Kou no AMENDMENT: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to add to the Motion, “direct Staff to bring this Ordinance back to Council for review on a biennial basis.” DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 9 of 10 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/13/17 AMENDMENT FAILED: 4-5 Fine, Kniss, Tanaka, Wolbach yes AMENDMENT: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to add to the Motion, “direct Staff to allow in the RT-35 District on properties with frontage on Alma Street between Channing Avenue and Lincoln Avenue to be replaced by a private education facility. Property owners would be prohibited from converting a discontinued retail use to a private school and then to office.” (New Part I) AMENDMENT PASSED: 5-4 DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kou no MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to adopt the Retail Preservation Ordinance including the following changes: A. Precluded laundry and cleaning services on University Avenue and California Avenue; and B. Direct Staff to return with revised language to address the size of lobbies; and C. Update Section 18.04.160(c)(3) to require the Director’s Decision be placed on the Council’s Consent Calendar, subject to existing procedures; and D. Direct Staff to prepare Design Standards for the Ground Floor (GF) and Retail Shopping (R) Combining Districts to promote pedestrian oriented design and require visual access into the ground floor of buildings to a depth of three feet; and E. Direct Staff to explore exempting Downtown from Section 18.16.040(b); and F. Remove Section 18.04.030(125.1)(K); and G. Remove Section 18.04.030(125.1)(J); and H. Replace Section 18.040.030(114)(H) with, “fitness and exercise studios or similar uses of 1,800 square feet or less;” and I. Direct Staff to allow in the RT-35 District on properties with frontage on Alma Street between Channing Avenue and Lincoln Avenue to be replaced by a private education facility. Property owners would be prohibited from converting a discontinued retail use to a private school and then to office. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 10 of 10 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/13/17 MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 6-3 Fine, Kniss, Tanaka no 15. Adoption of a Resolution Amending Resolutions 9473 and 9577 to Continue the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program With Minor Modifications and Finding the Action Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Mayor Scharff advised he will not participate in this Agenda Item because he owns real property in the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) District. He left the meeting at 12:20 A.M. MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to continue this Agenda Item to February 27, 2017. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Scharff absent Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs None. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Council Member DuBois reported his attendance and the attendance of several other Council Members at the Chinese New Year event this past Sunday. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 12:25 A.M. CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 5 Special Meeting February 27, 2017 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 5:31 P.M. Present: DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Holman, Kniss, Kou, Scharff, Wolbach Absent: Tanaka Closed Session 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his Designees Pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (Ed Shikada, Terence Howzell, Molly Stump, Rumi Portillo) Employee Organizations: Palo Alto Fire Chiefs’ Association (FCA) Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a). MOTION: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to go into Closed Session. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Tanaka absent Council went into Closed Session at 5:32 P.M. Council returned from Closed Session at 6:03 P.M. Mayor Scharff announced no reportable action. Special Orders of the Day 2. Partner Presentation by East Palo Alto Sanitary District. 3. Proclamation of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Honoring Roy Clay. This Agenda Item continued to a date uncertain. 4. Proclamation of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Honoring Caretha and Ken Coleman. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/27/17 Study Session 5. Update on Stanford University’s General Use Permit (GUP) Application to Santa Clara County. Council Member DuBois advised he would not participate in this Agenda Item because he has a source of income from Stanford University. He left the meeting at 6:42 P.M. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions Council Member DuBois returned to the meeting at 8:11 P.M. MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to continue Agenda Item Numbers 9- Approval of a Contract With SoBi… and 11- Adoption of a Resolution Amending Resolutions 9473 and 9577… to March 6, 2017. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Tanaka absent Minutes Approval 6. Approval of Action Minutes for the January 30 and February 6, 2017 Council Meetings. MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to approve the Action Minutes for the January 30 and February 6, 2017 Council Meetings. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Tanaka absent Consent Calendar MOTION: Council Member Kou moved, seconded by Council Member Holman, third by Council Member DuBois to pull Agenda Item Number 8- 670 Los Trancos Road [16PLN-00266]… to be heard on a date uncertain. MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to approve Agenda Item Number 7. 7. Approval of a Regulatory Agreement, Declaration of Restrictive Covenants, and Option to Purchase for 3020-3038 Emerson Street (Plum Tree Apartments). The Project is Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15061(b)(3). DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/27/17 8. 670 Los Trancos Road [16PLN-00266]: Approval of a Site and Design Review to Allow the Construction of a Single Family House and Guest House With a Total of 10,959 Square Feet. Environmental Assessment: Categorically Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Pursuant to Guidelines Section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures). Zoning District: OS. 9. Approval of a Contract With SoBi for Implementation of a 350-Bicycle Bike Share Program for Five Years With no Ongoing Cost to the City Following an Investment of $1,104,550 in Capital Costs for Bicycles and "Hubs." MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Tanaka absent Action Items 10. Public Hearing: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Title 18 (Zoning), Chapters 18.04 (Definitions), 18.30(F) (Automobile Dealership (AD) Combining District Regulations), 18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements), and 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards); Adding Sections 18.40.160 (Replacement Project Required), 18.40.170 (Deferral of Director’s Action), and 18.42.140 (Housing Inventory Sites Small Lot Consolidation) and Repealing Chapter 10.70 (Trip Reduction and Travel Demand). The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Sections 15061(b)(3). Public Hearing opened and closed without public comment at 9:21 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to: A. Adopt an Ordinance amending Title 18 (Zoning Code) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code including changes outlined in the Staff Memorandum; and B. Find the Ordinance exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “Section 12 (d)(3), replace ‘three years’ with ‘year.’” (New Part A.i.) INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “Section 5 add ‘2015-2023’ after ‘sites listed in the.’” (New Part A.ii.) DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/27/17 AMENDMENT: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to add to the Motion, “replace in Section 12(d)(1)(b), ‘100’ with ‘50.’” (New Part A.iii.) AMENDMENT PASSED: 6-2 Fine, Wolbach, no, Tanaka absent AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Kou to add to the Motion, “remove from Section 2, 18.30(F).050(a)(3).” AMENDMENT FAILED: 2-6 Holman, Kou yes, Tanaka absent AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Motion, “remove Section 5 and direct Staff to return with alternate locations.” AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “replace in Section 5, 18.42.140(f) ‘30 years’ with ‘55 years.’” (New Part A.iv.) INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion “add to Section 7 (Table 4) Modification to Off… and Section 8(e) ‘and the use of shared on-street loading would not conflict with Comprehensive Plan goals and policies related to site design planning, circulation and access or urban design principles; maximum reduction in one loading space.’” (New Part A.v.) INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to remove from the Motion Part A.v., “shared.” AMENDENT: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to add to the Motion, “replace Section (k) with, ‘parking requirements for residential units less than 500 sq. ft. would be reduced 50 Percent.’” (New Part A.vi.) AMENDMENT PASSED: 6-2 Fine, Wolbach no, Tanaka absent MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to: A. Adopt an Ordinance amending Title 18 (Zoning Code) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code including changes outlined in the Staff Memorandum and the following changes: DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 2/27/17 i. Section 12 (d)(3), replace “three years” with “year;” and ii. Section 5 add “2015-2023” after “sites listed in the;” and iii. Replace in Section 12(d)(1)(b), “100” with “50;” and iv. Replace in Section 5, 18.42.140(f) “30 years” with “55 years;” and v. Add to Section 7 (Table 4) Modification to Off… and Section 8(e) “and the use of on-street loading would not conflict with Comprehensive Plan goals and policies related to site design planning, circulation and access or urban design principles; maximum reduction in one loading space;” and vi. Replace Section (k) with, “parking requirements for residential units less than 500 sq. ft. would be reduced 50 Percent;” and B. Find the Ordinance exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). MOTION FOR ORDINANCE SECTION 5 PASSED: 7-1 Holman no, Tanaka absent MOTION FOR ORDINANCE SECTIONS 1-4, 6-17 PASSED: 8-0 Tanaka absent 11. Adoption of a Resolution Amending Resolutions 9473 and 9577 to Continue the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program With Minor Modifications and Finding the Action Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (Continued From February 13, 2017) (STAFF REQUESTS THIS ITEM BE CONTINUED TO MARCH 6, 2017). Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs None. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Council Member Holman requested an update on the purpose of the second Council Retreat. Mayor Scharff announced Ed Shikada, Acting City Manager will send an update to Council Members regarding the second Council Retreat. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:24 P.M. CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK March 20, 2017 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Appointment of 2017 Emergency Standby Council Staff recommends that the City Council approve the selection of the 2017 Emergency Standby Council as follows: -Bern Beecham -Peter Drekmeier -Sid Espinosa -Jack Morton -Gail Price -Nancy Shepherd -Lanie Wheeler BACKGROUND The Charter of the City of Palo Alto provides that "the Council may by Ordinance or Resolution, provide for the preservation and continuation of government in the event of disaster which renders unavailable a majority of the Council." On August 7, 2006, the City Council adopted amendments to Section 2.12.090 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code regarding the selection procedure for the City's Emergency Standby Council. The adopted policy states that the Council shall consider the following criteria for appointments to the Emergency Standby Council: residency in the City of Palo Alto, availability, interest in serving and a lack of conflicts of interest. Seven members serve on the Emergency Standby Council. Members of the Standby Council have the authority delegated to them under Chapter 2.12 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. The members of the Emergency Standby Council continue to serve until the Council appoints or reappoints the members at the beginning of each year. Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 City of Palo Alto (ID # 7812) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 101 Auxiliary Project Parcels Relinquishments Acceptance and Release of Parcels Title: Authorize Acceptance of Relinquishment of One Parcel from the State of California (Caltrans) and the Release and Quitclaim of Nine Parcels to the State of California (Caltrans) for the 101 Auxiliary Project between the State Route 85 (SR 85) Interchange in Mountain View and the Embarcadero Road Interchange and the Replacement of the San Francisquito Creek Bridge From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager to release and quitclaim the following parcel to the State of California, Department of Transportation; Parcel 62710-1 as shown on the attached Attachment “A” 2. Authorize the City Manager to release and quitclaim the following parcels to the State of California, Department of Transportation; As shown on the attached Attachment “B” Parcel 61920-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-1”, Parcel 61931-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-2”, Parcel 61932-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-3”, Parcel 61933-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-4”, Parcel 61934-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-5”, Parcel 61935-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-6”, Parcel 61936-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-7”, Parcel 61937-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-8”. City of Palo Alto Page 2 3. Authorize the City Manager to accept the Relinquishment of the following Parcel by the State of California, Department of Transportation to City of Palo Alto. REL No. 56092 as shown on the attached Attachment “C” EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff is seeking Council approval to transfer the ownership of nine parcels from the City of Palo Alto to the State of California, Department of Transportation (State) and to accept relinquishment of a parcel by the State of California to the City of Palo Alto. Section 83 of the Street and Highway Code of State of California gives the right to the State to use any public street or highway or portion thereof which is within the boundaries of a state highway, including a traversable highway adopted or designated as a state highway that constitute a part of the right of way of such state highway without compensation being paid. The State shall have jurisdiction over and responsibility for the maintenance of the parcels. The State took possession of the parcels from the City to use in the Highway 101 improvement and San Francisquito Creek Bridge projects. City Council approval of the transfer and acceptance of the parcels will finalize the process. BACKGROUND History The Highway 101 Auxiliary Lane Project proposed to construct auxiliary lanes, extend existing second High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, and undertake associated ramp improvements including ramp widening and installing/activating ramp metering in both directions of U.S. Route 101 (US 101) in Santa Clara County between the State Route 85 (SR 85) interchange in the City of Mountain View and the Embarcadero Road interchange in the City of Palo Alto. In conjunction with this project, Caltrans has been working on another project in this area for the purpose of replacing the bridge at San Francisquito Creek and incorporating an extra opening for flood control purposes. The general purpose of these projects was to relieve existing and future traffic congestion at freeway on-ramp and off-ramp connections, improve safety along the US 101 corridor, and provide for improved local access over this segment of the US 101 corridor. The majority of the project improvements were constructed within existing State right of way. However, some minor right of way acquisitions were needed at some locations as well as temporary construction easements. The project sponsor/requestor is the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). Funding for project development, engineering, right of way, environmental documentation, construction and construction support for the project was from a combination of Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) Program funds and VTA Local Program Reserve funds. There was no federal funding for this project. The Highway 101 Auxiliary Lane Project has been completed and the bridge project should be finished by October of 2017. City of Palo Alto Page 3 DISCUSSION On November 16, 2010, the Department of Transportation of State of California, notified the City of Palo Alto of plans for Highway 101 Auxiliary Lane Project (Attachment D) Route 101 in the City of Palo Alto was to be improved by the State Department of Transportation and Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). The Department had reviewed the project’s right of way needs and it had identified a portion of right of way under the jurisdiction of the City of Palo Alto that required transfer to the State by Application of Section 83 of the Street and Highways Code (Attachment E). This transaction was to be consummated by quitclaim deeds from the City of Palo Alto to the State after the completion of the project. The Section 83 letter notifies City/State of the States’ intension to incorporate the parcel(s) into the State Highway System. Also included is a quitclaim deed which includes final plats of the parcels involved. Both the quitclaim deed and plats have been reviewed and approved by Caltrans. Caltrans also notified the City on May 20, 2013 by sending an additional Section 83 Right of Way (Attachment F) letter regarding further improvements to U.S. Route 101 in The City of Palo Alto for the purpose of the San Francisquito bridge replacement and construction of an extra opening for flood control. It was originally anticipated that the bridge would be widened to accommodate a proposed auxiliary lane on US 101. However after further studies, it was determined that the bridge, which was built in 1931, should be replaced due to its deteriorated condition. The new bridge will be larger and will carry five lanes of traffic in each direction on US 101. This letter transferred the use of parcel 62710-1 from jurisdiction of the City to Caltrans. Also included is a quitclaim deed, which includes the final plat of the subject parcel. Both the quitclaim deed and plats have been reviewed and approved by Caltrans. In addition, a separate relinquishment document is required to transfer a portion of East Bayshore Road from the State to the City. On August 15, 2016, the City received a notice of relinquishment (Attachment G) that would transfer a portion of East Bay Shore Road along US 101 shown on the attached map to the City of Palo Alto to be used as City Streets. California Transportation Commission approved the relinquishment on December 7, 2016 by approving Resolution R-3971 (as was shown on Attachment C). This portion was acquired by Caltrans from Alviso Salt Company on October 30, 1931 according to official record. The segment contains 44,609 square feet and it will not be utilized in the use of 101 Freeway. Finally, the relinquishment document, which will transfer a portion of East Bayshore Road from Caltrans is attached for Council review and acceptance. The relinquishment area is part of the public right of way of East Bay Shore to be used as a public street. The work on the US 101 Auxiliary Lanes Project in the City of Palo Alto has been completed. The transfer of land parcels (nine parcels) between the City of Palo Alto and State needs to be finalized by processing of the quitclaim deeds that are required to transfer right of way to the State by application of Section 83 of the Streets and Highways Code and the relinquishment of a parcel by the State and the acceptance by the City. The San Francisquito Creek bridge replacement work affecting parcel 62710-1 is still in progress. This parcel was transferred from City of Palo Alto Page 4 City of Palo Alto to the State of California by Section 83 of the Street and Highway Codes. The City will transfer the title to Caltrans to facilitate the administrative process prior to the completion of the project since the segment is now part of the Highway 101 freeway. RESOURCE IMPACT The transfer of parcels and the relinquishment have no resource impact on the City of Palo Alto. Caltrans will continue to maintain the properties quitclaimed to the State. City will continue to maintain the relinquishment area which is part of the public right of way of East Bay Shore to be used as a public street. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommendations of this report are consistent with Council’s priorities to support transportation infrastructure project in the City of Palo Alto. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The land transfers approved here are not considered a project or projects for the purpose of the California Environmental Quality Act. Attachments:  Attachment A: Quitclaim Deed  Attachment B: Quitcalim Deed & Exhibits A1-A8  Attachment C: Relinquishment of Righ of Way  Attachment D: Section 83 Letter Caltrans To City HWY 101  Attachment E: Street and Highway Codes - Section 70-86  Attachment F: Section 83 Letter Caltrans to City 101 Bridge  Attachment G: Relinquishment Letter Caltrans to City  Attachment H: Resolution 101 Hwy Caltrans 101 Project Attachment H ***NOT YET APPROVED*** 1 Resolution No. XXXX Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto approving quitclaiming nine right of way parcels to the State of California and acceptance of a right of way parcel from the State of California R E C I T A L S A. Caltrans embarked on the Highway 101 Auxiliary Lane Project to construct auxiliary lanes, extend existing second High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, and undertake associated ramp improvements including ramp widening and installing/activating ramp metering in both directions of U.S. Route 101 (US 101) in Santa Clara County between the State Route 85 (SR 85) interchange in the City of Mountain View and the Embarcadero Road interchange in the City of Palo Alto. In conjunction with this project, Caltrans has been working on another project in this area for the purpose of replacing the bridge at San Francisquito Creek and incorporating an extra opening for flood control purposes. B. Section 83 of the Street and Highway Code of State of California gives the right to the State to use any public street or highway or portion thereof which is within the boundaries of a state highway, including a traversable highway adopted or designated as a state highway that constitute a part of the right of way of such state highway without compensation being paid therefor. C. On November 16, 2010, the Department of Transportation of State of California, notified the City of Palo Alto of plans for Highway 101 Auxiliary Lane Project Route 101 in the City of Palo Alto was to be improved by the State Department of Transportation and Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). The Department had reviewed the project’s right of way needs and it had identified a portion of right of way under the jurisdiction of the City of Palo Alto that required transfer to the State by Application of Section 83 of the Street and Highways Code. This transaction was to be consummated by quitclaim deeds from the City of Palo Alto to the State after the completion of the project. The Section 83 letter notifies City/State of the Stats’ intension to incorporate the parcel(s) into the State Highway System. Also included is a quitclaim deed which includes final plats of the involved. Both the quitclaim deed and plats have been reviewed and approved by Caltrans. D. Caltrans notified the City on May 20, 2013 by sending an additional Section 83 Right of Way letter regarding improvements to U.S. Route 101 in The City of Palo Alto for the purpose of the San Francisquito bridge replacement and construction of an extra opening for floor control. E. On August 15, 2016, the City received a notice of relinquishment that would transfer a portion of East Bay Shore Road along US 101 shown on the attached map to the City of Palo Alto to be used as City Streets. California Transportation Commission approved the relinquishment on December 7, 2016 by approving Resolution R-3971. The segment contains 44,609 square feet and it will not be utilized in the use of 101 Freeway. Attachment H ***NOT YET APPROVED*** 2 The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The City Manager hereby is authorized to execute quitclaim deeds to transfer the following parcels from the City of Palo Alto to State of California Parcel 62710-1 as shown on the attachment “A” As shown on the attached attachment “B” Parcel 61920-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-1”, Parcel 61931-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-2”, Parcel 61932-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-3”, Parcel 61933-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-4”, Parcel 61934-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-5”, Parcel 61935-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-6”, Parcel 61936-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-7”, Parcel 61937-1 as shown on the attached Exhibit “A-8”. SECTION 2. The City Manager is authorized to accept parcel REL No. 56092 as shown on the attached attachment “C” that has been relinquished by State of California. SECTION 3. The City Council hereby finds that the grant of right of way parcels to the State of California and acceptance of the relinquishment of a right of way parcel from the state is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SECTION 4. Effective Date: This resolution shall take effect immediately following adoption. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Attachment H ***NOT YET APPROVED*** 3 City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment City of Palo Alto (ID # 7472) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Planning Code Amendments - Second Reading Title: SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Title 18 (Zoning), Chapters 18.04 (Definitions), 18.30(F) Automobile Dealership (AD) Combining District Regulations, 18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements), and 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards); Adding Sections 18.40.160 (Replacement Project Required), 18.40.170 (Deferral of Director’s Action), and 18.42.140 (Housing Inventory Sites Small Lot Consolidation); and Repealing Chapter 10.70 (Trip Reduction and Travel Demand). The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Sections 15061(b)(3) (FIRST READING: February 27, 2017 PASSED: 7-0) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council conduct a second reading and adopt the attached ordinance (Attachment A) to amend Title 18 (Zoning Code) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Background: On February 27, 2017, the City Council reviewed and adopted (on first reading) a draft ordinance updating various sections of Title 18. The updates focused on the following items: 1. Update two housing-related definitions. 2. Correct the existing loading space requirements table and include Planning Director’s discretion for adjusting loading zone requirements. 3. Add provisions to allow mechanical lift vehicle parking. 4. Require entitlement approval of replacement projects before demolition permitted. 5. Provide authority to the Planning Director to forward projects to City Council for action when deemed appropriate. City of Palo Alto Page 2 6. Add incentives to encourage consolidation of small-lots listed on the Housing Inventory Sites to support 100% affordable housing development as required by the Housing Element. 7. Clarify code language regarding when a Transportation Management Plan (TDM) is required. 8. For projects with an Automobile Dealership combining district, exempt floor area dedicated to meeting minimum parking requirements for service areas and vehicle queuing of customer cars dropping off or picking up service repair vehicles. The staff report from February 27 is available at: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/55951 Council Amendments to Ordinance: The draft ordinance has been modified to incorporate the Council’s amendments listed below that were included in the motion to adopt the ordinance.  Transportation Demand Management  Change the trip generation threshold from 100 to 50 trips [Section 11 (d)(1)(b)]  Change the ongoing monitoring from three years to annually [Section 12 (d)(3)]  Housing Inventory Sites Small Lot Consolidation - Section 5  Clarify in the initial paragraph that the identified sites are from the 2015-2023 Housing Element  Change the deed restriction term from 30 years to 55 years [section (f)]  Change the parking requirement for residential units less than 500 square feet from none to 50% of the requirement [section (k)]  Modification to Off-Street Loading Requirements - Section 7 (Table 4) and Section 8(e)  Add the clarification that the use of on-street loading would not conflict with Comprehensive Plan goals and policies related to site design planning, circulation and access or urban design principles Staff Amendments to Ordinance: Staff has made a minor change to the Section 9, Mechanical Lifts, to modify the requirements for the vehicle size accommodations. The original text specified that the lifts shall accommodate full-size sport utility vehicles, and staff has modified this requirement to require lifts to accommodate mid-size utility vehicles and full-size cars. By today’s standards, a full-size sport utility vehicle, such as a Chevrolet Suburban, generally cannot be accommodated by parking lifts due to the over-sized nature of the vehicle. The revised requirement is a more reasonable standard for lifts. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Timeline: If approved on second reading, the attached ordinance would become effective April 20, 2017. Attachments: Attachment A: Draft Ordinance (PDF) NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 1 February 13, 2017  Ordinance No. ____  Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code  (PAMC) Title 18 (Zoning), Chapters 18.04 (Definitions), 18.30(F) ((Automobile  Dealership (AD) Combining District Regulations)), 18.52 (Parking and Loading  Requirements), and 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards) Adding Sections  18.40.160 (Replacement Project Required), 18.40.170 (Deferral of Director’s Action),  and 18.42.140 (Housing Inventory Sites Small Lot Consolidation) and Repealing  Chapter 10.70 (Trip Reduction and Travel Demand)     The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows:   SECTION 1.  Section 18.04.030 (Definitions) of Chapter 18.04 (Definitions) of Title 18 (Zoning)  is amended to read as follows:  18.04.030   Definitions    (a)   Throughout this title the following words and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed in  this section.  . . .            (135.5)   “Supportive housing” means housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by  target populations, as defined by Section 53260(d) of the California Health and Safety Code, and that is  linked to on‐ or off‐site services that assist the supportive housing residents in retaining the housing,  improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in  the community.  Supportive housing shall be considered as a multiple‐family use and only subject to  those restrictions that apply to other multiple‐family uses of the same type in the same zone  a  residential use of property and shall be subject only to those restrictions that apply to other dwellings of  the same type in the same zone.  Supportive housing programs may use residential care homes wholly  or as a part of their overall facilities.  . . .    (138)  “Transitional housing” means buildings configured as rental housing developments, but  operated under program requirements that call for termination of assistance and recirculation of the  assisted units to another eligible program recipient at some predetermined future point in time, which  shall be no less than six months.  Support services may include meals, counseling, and other services, as  well as common areas for residents of the facility.  Transitional housing shall be considered a multiple‐ family use and only subject to those restrictions that apply to other multiple family uses of the same  type in the same zone residential use of property and shall be only subject to those restrictions that  apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone.  Transitional housing programs  may use residential care homes wholly or as part of their overall facilities.       SECTION 2. Section 18.30(F).050 (Site Development Regulations) of Chapter 18.30(F)  ((Automobile Dealership (AD) Combining District Regulations)) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended to read as  follows:  18.30(F).050   Site Development Regulations  NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 2 February 13, 2017  The site development regulations in this Section 18.30(F).050 apply to automobile dealership uses in the  (AD) combining district, in addition to the regulations of the underlying district. Where the regulations of  the underlying district conflict with this Section 18.30(F).050, this section shall control.  (a) Floor Area Ratio  1) The maximum floor area ratio for automobile dealership uses shall be 0.4 to 1.  2) An additional 0.2:1 FAR is permitted exclusively for automobile showroom space, for a  total FAR of 0.6:1. "Automobile showroom space" is that area for the display of new  automobiles, located only on the first floor and excluding all other uses associated with  the automobile dealership including sales office and sale of related merchandise. The  director of planning and community environment is authorized to determine whether  floor area is automobile showroom space, as described above. Floor area used for  automobile showroom space shall not be converted to any other use if the total floor  area devoted to uses other than automobile showroom space would exceed a floor area  ratio of 0.4:1 following the conversion.  3) Notwithstanding Section 18.04.030 (65), the following shall not count toward an  automobile dealership’s maximum floor area:  i. Parking facilities for required parking related to service and repair areas shall be  excluded from the calculation of gross floor area as provided in Section  18.52.040(b)(2), however, any enclosed or covered parking in excess of this  requirement shall count toward total gross floor area;   i.ii. Covered area dedicated to queuing of customer vehicles for drop off and pick up  of service vehicles shall be exempt from the calculation of gross floor area; only  one contiguous designated area shall be excluded in a development.   . . .     SECTION 3. Section 18.40.160 (Replacement Project Required) of Chapter 18.40 (General  Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) is added to read as follows:     18.40.160 Replacement Project or Discretionary Review Required  (a) No permit required under Title 2 (Administrative Code), Title 12 (Public Works and Utilities), or  Title 16 (Building Regulations) shall be issued for demolition of a single family residence or  duplex in the Low‐Density Residential District (Chapter 18.10) or Single Family Residential  District (Chapter 18.12), except for deconstruction pursuant to section 16.14.130 or where  necessary for health and safety purposes (as determined by the City’s Building Official), unless  building permit plans for a replacement project have been approved. This subsection shall also  apply to demolition of a single family residence or duplex in the Multiple Family Residential  District (Chapter 18.13) when the replacement project does not require discretionary.    (b) No permit required under Title 2 (Administrative Code), Title 12 (Public Works and Utilities), or  Title 16 (Building Regulations) shall be issued for any project requiring discretionary review  under Title 18 or Title 21, unless the application for discretionary review has been approved.  No permit required under Title 2 (Administrative Code), Title 12 (Public Works and Utilities), or Title 16  (Building Regulations) shall be issued, except for tenant improvements or where necessary for health  NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 3 February 13, 2017  and safety purposes (as determined by the City’s Building Official), unless plans for a replacement  project have been approved.   SECTION 4. Section 18.40.170 (Deferral of Director’s Action) of Chapter 18.40 (General  Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) is added to read as follows:  18.40.170   Deferral of Director’s Action  The director shall have the authority to forward projects to City Council for final action in the  circumstances listed below. No action by the Director shall be required, and the appeal process and or  request for hearing process shall not apply to such referred actions.  (a) In  the  case  of  projects  having  multiple  entitlements,  where  one  requires  City  Council approval, all entitlements may be referred to City Council for final action;  (b) Projects involving leases or agreements for the use of City‐owned property; and  (a)(c) Projects, as deemed appropriate by the director.    SECTION 5. Section 18.42.140 (Housing Inventory Sites Small Lot Consolidation) of Chapter  18.42 (Standard for Special Uses) of Title 18 (Zoning) is added to read as follows:    18.42.140 Housing Inventory Sites Small Lot Consolidation    The  following  incentives  and  standards  shall  apply  to  sites  listed  in  the  2015‐2023  Housing  Element’s  Housing  Inventory  Sites  list  and  identified  as  “small  lot,   consolidation  opportunity” that are merged to form a larger parcel for development of an  100% affordable rental or ownership housing project. For purposes of this section only, a “100%  affordable rental or ownership housing project” shall includes mixed use projects containing  ground floor retail and retail like use provided the residential square footage  is at least 85% of  the project’s  gross floor area.    (a) All projects shall comply with the respective development standards and allowable uses  as specified  in the underlying zone district, except as modified below;  (b) For HIS properties not located in the RT 35 or RT 50 zones, the RT 35 development  standards shall apply and development of a mixed use development is not required;  (c) In the case of a conflict between the provisions of this section and the RT development  standards (Chapter V, SOFA 2), this section shall control;  (d) Any HIS property in excess of 10,000 square feet prior to consolidation shall not be  entitled to any of the incentives in this section;  (e) The applicable Housing Inventory Site (HIS) can be merged with both HIS and non‐ HIS sites;  (f) The housing units shall be deed restricted as 100% affordable housing units for  no  less than 30  fewer than 55 years;  (g) Rental units shall be made affordable to households earning no more than 80%   o f the Count y’s Are a Median In co me (AM I) an d ownership un its shall be made    affordable to households earning no more than 120% of AMI;  (h) Application processing shall be prioritized throughout the planning entitlement  phase  to the maximum extent feasible;  NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 4 February 13, 2017  (i) All such projects shall be subject to Architectural Review. Site and design review  required in the Code for mixed use projects shall be waived for such projects;  (j) All subdivisions, regardless of the number of parcels created, shall be subject to  the  administrative Parcel Map subdivision process; however, maps requiring exceptions as  specified in PAMC 21.32 shall follow the standard review process;  (k) No parking is required Parking requirements for residential units less than 500 sq. ft.  shall be reduced by 50%, regardless of bedroom count;  (l) Guest parking for the residential use, as required by PAMC 18.52.040, shall be reduced  by 30%; fractional amounts shall be rounded down; and  (m) Waiver of planning entitlement fees: Waive all planning application fees except for  direct costs for consultant fees associated with  project review. This waiver shall not  include applicable parking in lieu or development impact fees.    SECTION 6. Section 18.52.040 (Off‐Street Parking, Loading, and Bicycle Facility  Requirements) of Chapter 18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended to  read as follows:  18.52.040   Off‐Street Parking, Loading, and Bicycle Facility Requirements   . . .  (c)  Tables 1, 2 and 3: Parking, Bicycle, and Loading Requirements      Tables 1 and 2 below outline vehicle and bicycle parking requirements in general and  for Parking Assessment Districts, respectively. Table 3 outlines loading requirements for each  land use. For mixed‐use projects, the requirement for each land use shall be applied and  required for the overall project.   . . .  Table 3  Minimum Off‐Street Loading Requirements  Use Gross Floor Area Loading Spaces   Required  RESIDENTIAL USES   Single‐family residential use   Two‐family residential use   Multiple‐family residential use  No requirement established 0   Dormitory, Fraternity/Sorority, or group  housing where meals are provided in  common dining facilities   Housing for the elderly or  other community facility,  where meals are provided in  common dining facilities  0 – 9,999 sq. ft. 0  10,000 – 99,999 sq. ft. 1  100,000 sq. ft. or greater 2  HEALTH CARE SERVICES   Hospitals   Convalescent facilities  0 – 9,999 sq. ft. 0  10,000 – 99,999 sq. ft. 1  NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 5 February 13, 2017  100,000 – 199,999 sq. ft. 2  200,000 sq. ft. or greater 3                                       [Continued on Next Page]     Use Gross Floor Area Loading Spaces  Required  SERVICE USES   Automotive Uses 0 – 29,999 sq. ft. 1  30,000 – 69,999 sq. ft. 2  70,000 – 120,000 sq. ft. 3  Each additional 50,000 sq. ft. over  120,000 sq. ft.  1 additional space   Financial services   Personal services   Administrative office services  0 – 9,999 sq. ft. 0  10,000 – 99,999 sq. ft. 1  100,000 – 199,999 sq. ft. 2  200,000 sq. ft. or greater 3  RETAIL USES   Hotel/Motel/Inn 0 – 9,999 sq. ft. 0  10,000 – 99,999 sq. ft. 1  100,000 sq. ft. or greater‐199,999 sq.  ft.  2  200,000 sq. ft. or greater 3   Retail Services   Eating and Drinking Services  0 – 4,999 sq. ft. 10  5,000 – 29,999 sq. ft. 1  30,000 – 69,999 sq. ft. 2  70,000 – 120,000 sq. ft. 3  For each additional 50,000 sq. ft. over  120,000 sq. ft.  1 additional space  OFFICE USES   Medical offices   Professional offices   General business offices  0 – 9,999 sq. ft. 0  10,000 – 99,999 sq. ft. 1  100,000 – 199,999 sq. ft. 2  200,000 sq. ft. or greater 3  NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 6 February 13, 2017      SECTION 7.   Section 18.52.050 (Adjustments by the Director) of Chapter 18.52 (Parking and  Loading Requirements) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended to read as follows:    18.52.050   Adjustments by the Director      Automobile parking requirements prescribed by this chapter may be adjusted by the director in  the following instances and in accord with the prescribed limitations in Table 4, when in his/her opinion  such adjustment will be consistent with the purposes of this chapter, will not create undue impact on  existing or potential uses adjoining the site or in the general vicinity, and will be commensurate with the  reduced parking demand created by the development, including for visitors and accessory facilities  where appropriate. No reductions may be granted that would result in provision of less than ten (10)  spaces on a site. The following are adjustments that apply to developments not located within a parking  assessment district.  Adjustments within the parking assessment districts are contained in  Section 18.52.080.  The decision of the regarding parking adjustments may be appealed as set forth  in Chapter 18.78 (Appeals).  Table 4  Allowable Parking Adjustments  Purpose of  Adjustment Amount of Adjustment Maximum  Reduction 2a  On‐Site Employee  Amenities  Square footage of commercial or industrial uses to be used for an on‐site  cafeteria, recreational facility, and/or day care facility, to be provided to  employees or their children and not open to the general public, may be  exempted from the parking requirements  100% of  requirement for on‐ site employee  amenities  Joint Use (Shared)  Parking Facilities  For any site or sites with multiple uses where the application of this chapter  requires a total of or more than ten (10) spaces, the total number of spaces  otherwise required by application of Table 1 may be reduced when the joint  facility will serve all existing, proposed, and potential uses as effectively and  20% of total spaces  required for the site  Use Gross Floor Area Loading Spaces  Required  MANUFACTURING AND P ROCESSING USES  Warehousing and distribution   Manufacturing  0 – 4,999 sq. ft. 10  5,000 – 29,999 sq. ft. 1  30,000 – 69,999 sq. ft. 2  70,000 – 120,000 sq. ft. 3  For each additional 50,000 sq. ft. over  120,000 sq. ft.  1 additional space   Research and development 0 – 9,999 sq. ft. 0  10,000 – 99,999 sq. ft. 1  100,000 – 199,999 sq. ft. 2  200,000 sq. ft. or greater 3  OTHER USES  All uses not specifically listed To be determined by the director  NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 7 February 13, 2017  conveniently as would separate parking facilities for each use or site. In  making such a determination, the director shall consider a parking analysis  using criteria developed by the Urban Land Institute (ULI) or similar  methodology to estimate the shared parking characteristics of the proposed  land uses. The analysis shall employ the city's parking ratios as the basis for the  calculation of the base parking requirement and for the determination of  parking requirements for individual land uses. The director may also require  submittal and approval of a TDM program 1to further assure parking  reductions are achieved.  Housing for Seniors  The total number of spaces required may be reduced for housing facilities for  seniors, commensurate with the reduced parking demand created by the  housing facility, including for visitors and accessory facilities, and subject to  submittal and approval of a parking analysis justifying the reduction proposed.  50% of the total  spaces required for  the site  Affordable Housing  Units and Single  Room Occupancy  (SRO) Units  The total number of spaces required may be reduced for affordable housing  and single room occupancy (SRO) units, commensurate with the reduced  parking demand created by the housing facility, including for visitors and  accessory facilities. The reduction shall consider proximity to transit and  support services and the director may require traffic demand management  measures 1 in conjunction with any approval.  a.   40% for  Extremely Low  Income and SRO  Units  b.   30% for Very  Low Income Units  c.   20% for Low  Income Units  Housing Near Transit  Facilities  The total number of spaces required may be reduced for housing located  within a designated Pedestrian/Transit Oriented area or elsewhere in  immediate proximity to public transportation facilities serving a significant  portion of residents, employees, or customers, when such reduction will be  commensurate with the reduced parking demand created by the housing  facility, including for visitors and accessory facilities, and subject to submittal  and approval of a TDM program.1  20% of the total  spaces required for  the site.  Transportation and  Parking Alternatives  Where effective alternatives to automobile access are provided, other than  those listed above, parking requirements may be reduced to an extent  commensurate with the permanence, effectiveness, and the demonstrated  reduction of off‐street parking demand effectuated by such alternative  programs. Examples of such programs may include, but are not limited to,  transportation demand management (TDM) programs or innovative parking  pricing or design solutions.1 (note: landscape reserve requirement is deleted).  20% of the total  spaces required for  the site  Combined Parking  Adjustments  Parking reductions may be granted for any combination of the above  circumstances as prescribed by this chapter, subject to limitations on the  combined total reduction allowed.  a.   30% reduction of  the total parking  demand otherwise  required   b.   40% reduction  for affordable  housing projects  c.   50% reduction  for senior housing  projects  NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 8 February 13, 2017  Modification to Off‐ Street Loading  Requirements        The director may modify the quantity or dimensions of off‐street loading  requirements for non‐residential development based on existing or proposed  site conditions; availability of alternative means to address loading and  unloading activity; and, upon a finding that: 1) the off‐street loading  requirement may conflict  with Comprehensive Plan goals and policies related  to site design planning, circulation and access, or urban design principles; and  2) the use of shared on‐street loading would not conflict with Comprehensive  Plan goals and policies related to site design planning, circulation and access or  urban design principles; maximum reduction in one loading space.    One loading space  may be waived        . . . 2.   No parking reductions may be granted that would result in provision of less than ten (10) parking  spaces on a site.    SECTION 8. Section 18.52.080(e) (Modification to Off‐Street Loading Requirement) of  Chapter 18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements) of Title 18 (Zoning) is added to read as follows:  . . .  (e)   Modifications to Off‐Street Loading Requirements    The director may modify the quantity or dimensions of off‐street loading requirements for  non‐residential development based on existing or proposed site conditions; availability of alternative  means to address loading and unloading activity; and, upon a finding that: 1) the off‐street loading  requirement may conflict  with Comprehensive Plan goals and policies related to site design  planning, circulation and access, or urban design principles; maximum reduction is one loading space;  and 2) and the use of shared on‐street loading would not conflict with Comprehensive Plan goals and  policies related to site design planning, circulation and access or urban design principles; maximum  reduction in one loading space.     SECTION 9. Section 18.54.020(b)(4) (Vehicle Parking Facilities) of Chapter 18.54 (Parking  Facility Design Standards) of Title 18 (Zoning) is added to read as follows:    18.54.020(b) Off‐Street Parking Stalls   . . .  (4)   Mechanical lifts may be used to satisfy off‐street parking requirements, subject to  approval by the director or city council, as applicable, and in accordance with the   following provisions:    A. The regulations in this section apply to mechanical lifts, elevators and turn‐around devices  specified for vehicle use, and other mechanical devices that facilitate vehicle parking;  B. Mechanical vehicle lifts may be used for multi‐family residential, office, hotel, automotive,  industrial or institutional uses. Other uses may use mechanical vehicle lifts subject to  approval from the Director of Planning and Community Development and may be required  to provide dedicated on‐site valet assistance for no fee to the user.   NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 9 February 13, 2017  C. The location of mechanical lifts shall be located within an enclosed parking facility. All lifts  and associated equipment shall be screened from public views and the screening shall be  architecturally compatible with the site conditions;  D. Applicant shall submit an analysis and report, prepared by a qualified professional, for  review and approval by the Director of Planning and Community Environment that  demonstrates the effectiveness of the proposed parking lift system; operational details;  schematic or technical drawings; regular and emergency maintenance schedule, procedures  and backup systems; vehicle queuing, access and retrieval efficiency; and potential impacts,  delays, or inconveniences to all of the following:  i. site residents, workers, and visitors  ii. pedestrian and bicycle movement and safety on and nearby the site  iii. vehicular movement and safety on and nearby the site  E. Mechanical car lifts shall not be used for accessible parking spaces or loading spaces;   F. Mechanical car lifts shall accommodate fullmid‐size sport utility vehicles and full‐size cars.   G. For all non‐residential uses, a minimum of two spaces or 10% of the total number of parking  spaces provided, whichever is greater, shall be provided as standard non‐mechanical  parking spaces. The required accessible spaces shall not be counted as one of the standard  spaces for this requirement;  H. Additional information, reports and analysis may be required and conditions may be  imposed to ensure the use, operation and function of the lift system is not detrimental to  the public welfare, property, land uses and users of the property, other properties, or the  public right of way, in the general vicinity.  I.  The Director shall have authority to adopt regulations to implement this provision.     SECTION 10. Chapter 10.70 (Trip Reduction and Travel Demand) is hereby repealed in its  entirety.     SECTION 11.  Section 18.52.030 (i) (Transportation Management Plan) of Chapter 18.52  (Parking and Loading Requirements) of Title 18 (Zoning) is added to read as follows:    (i) Transportation Demand Management Plan  (a) Requirement for TDM Plan: A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to  reduce and manage the number of single‐occupant motor vehicle trips generated by the  project shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant in the following circumstances:    1. For all projects that generate 100 or more net new weekday (AM or PM peak  hour) or weekend peak hour trips;  2. For all projects claiming a reduction in net new trips due to proximity to public  transit or the implementation of a TDM plan; and  NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 10 February 13, 2017  3. For all projects requesting a parking reduction.    (b) The Director shall have the authority to adopt guidelines for preparing TDM plans and  when applicable shall coordinate such guidelines with the Transportation Management  Authority.    SECTION 12.   Section 18.52.050 (d)(1) of Chapter  18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements) of  Title 18 (Zoning) is amended to read as follows:                   . . .    (d) Transportation Demand Management (TDM)                (1)  A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program may be (a) proposed by an  applicant, or may be (b) required by the director for any project requesting a reduction in parking  or generating 10050 or more net new weekday (AM or PM peak hour) or weekend peak hour  trips; or (c) may be required as CEQA mitigation for identified potential significant parking  impacts.                    (2)   Where a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program is proposed or  required, the TDM program shall outline parking and/or traffic demand measures to be implemented to  reduce parking need and trip generation. The Director shall have the authority to adopt guidelines for  preparing TDM plans.  Required mMeasures may include, but are not limited to: participation in the  Transportation Management Authority or similar organization, limiting "assigned" parking to one space  per residential unit, providing for transit passes, parking cash‐out, enhanced shuttle service (or  contributions to extend or enhance existing shuttle service or to create new shared or public shuttle  service), car‐sharing, traffic‐reducing housing, providing priority parking spaces for carpools/vanpools or  "green" vehicles (zero emission vehicles, inherently low emission vehicles, or plug‐in hybrids, etc.),  vehicle charging stations, additional bicycle parking facilities, or other measures to encourage transit use  or to reduce parking needs. The program shall be proposed to the satisfaction of the director, shall  include proposed performance targets for parking and/or trip reduction and indicate the basis for such  estimates, and shall designate a single entity (property owner, homeowners association, etc.) to  implement the proposed measures.                (3)   Monitoring reports shall be submitted to the director two years after building  occupancy and again every three years year thereafter five years after building occupancy,  noting the effectiveness of the proposed measures as compared to the initial performance  targets, and implementing suggestions for modifications if necessary to enhance parking and/or  trip reductions.  (4)   Where the monitoring reports indicate that performance measures are not met, the  director may require further program modifications and may impose administrative penalties if  identified deficiencies are not addressed within six months.      .  .  .     SECTION 13. Any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent   NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 11 February 13, 2017  with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby  repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.               SECTION 14.     If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any  reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such  decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby  declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence,  clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the  ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.               SECTION 15.    The Council finds that the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the  provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guideline sections 15061(b)  and 15301, 15302 and 15305 because it simply provides a comprehensive permitting scheme.     SECTION 16.    This ordinance shall not apply to any planning or land use applications deemed  complete as of the effective date of this ordinance.     SECTION 17.    This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty‐first date after the date of its  adoption.          INTRODUCED:                 PASSED:                          AYES:      NOES:    ABSENT:    ABSTENTIONS:    ATTEST:                                                                              ____________________________                            ____________________________  City Clerk                                                                      Mayor    APPROVED AS TO FORM:                                            APPROVED:    ____________________________                             ____________________________  Senior Assistant City Attorney                                           City Manager                                                                                                 ____________________________  Director of Planning & Community     Environment  NOT YET APPROVED  161129 jb 0131563 12 February 13, 2017       City of Palo Alto (ID # 7643) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 1470 Monte Bello: Steven's Creek Nature Trail Bridge Project Title: 1470 Monte Bello Road [16PLN-00180]: Approval of a Site and Design Review to Allow the Replacement of an Existing 24-foot Long Wooden Bridge Across an Unnamed Tributary to Steven's Creek With a new 45 to 50-foot Long Steel Bridge and to Construct a new 45 to 50-foot Long Steel Bridge Across Steven's Creek. Environmental Assessment: The Lead Agency, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Which was Adopted by the District on March 9, 2016. Open Space (OS) Zoning District From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP), which was previously adopted by the lead agency, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (Attachment F), and approve the record of Land Use Action for Site and Design based on the findings and subject to conditions of approval set forth in Attachment B. Executive Summary The project applicant, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD), filed an application on March 24, 2016 for Site and Design review for bridge construction activities at two creek crossings along the Steven’s Creek Nature Trail. The site is located in the Open Space (OS) zoning district, the purpose of which is to “protect and preserve open space land as a limited and valuable resource and to permit the reasonable use of open space land, while at the same time preserving and protecting its inherent open space characteristics.” A map of the proposed site is included as Attachment A. As outlined in Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.28.070 (b), the proposed project City of Palo Alto Page 2 qualifies as a Major Site and Design Review because it is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act and because there is more than ten cubic yards (cy) of excavation proposed. The proposed project also meets the criteria outlined in PAMC Section 18.28.070(b)(2), which describes when projects that are subject to Site and Design review requirements in the Open Space District may be forwarded directly from staff to the Council Consent Agenda. The applicant’s project description and plans are included in Attachments D and E respectively. Attachment B provides four objectives included in Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.30(G).060 for Site and Design Review approval for Council to review and apply toward the project. In addition to these Site and Design review objectives, PAMC Section 18.28.070(p) codifies twelve Open Space Development Review Criteria that are applicable to the project. These criteria are also included in Attachment B. Background The Steven’s Creek Nature Trail in Monte Bello Open Space Preserve connects the main trailhead off of Page Mill Road with Canyon Trail and Skid Road Trail. The Montebello Open Space District has identified two creek crossing locations along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail alignment in need of retrofitting. Site #1 is the location of an existing 24-foot-long wooden beam bridge over an unnamed tributary to Steven’s Creek. The trail in this area is multi-use but is sometimes closed to cyclists and equestrians in the winter. Channel incision and bank erosion underneath the bridge threaten its integrity, making it vulnerable to damage and/or failure during large storm events. The proposed project would replace the existing bridge with a longer, higher bridge that is farther upstream from the actively eroding creek banks. The proposed bridge at Site #1 would be 46 feet long, eight feet wide, and have 54 inch handrails for safety. The bridge would be constructed of corten steel beams with a redwood decking surface, similar to the existing bridge at this site, which would be removed. The existing bridge spans 24 feet and is approximately six feet wide. Site #2 is an existing at-grade ford across the main-stem of Steven’s Creek, upstream of the general vicinity of Site #1. Stevens Creek Nature Trail in this location is currently open only to pedestrians. The District proposes to construct a new bridge in this location to improve safety and avoid sensitive creek and riparian habitats. The proposed bridge at Site #2 will be 50 feet long, eight feet wide, and have 54 inch handrails for safety. The bridge will be constructed with the same material as the bridge at Site #1. Minor grading will be needed to toe the bridges into the trail on each end. Cuts are expected to be between 1 and 4 feet high with fill less than 3 feet deep. In addition minor grading will be required to realign the trail at each site with the new bridges and to allow access for City of Palo Alto Page 3 equipment. Small equipment, such as ATVS, motorized wheelbarrows, and similarly sized equipment capable of navigating the narrow trail will be used. MROSD conservatively estimates that less than 96 cy of grading would be required. Construction at each bridge is anticipated to take 20 to 30 days. The proposed project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD), acting as the lead agency, circulated an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration on January 27, 2016 and subsequently adopted the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan on March 9, 2016. A link to these documents is provided in Attachment F. Discussion The property is located in the Open Space district and is therefore subject to the Site Design and Review combining district regulations, as modified in PAMC Section 18.28.070. As outlined in PAMC Section 18.28.070 (b)(2), projects may be forward directly to council if they meet all of the following criteria: 1. The project is not a second dwelling unit 2. The project would comprise less than 1,000 square feet of floor area, less than 1,000 square feet of impervious cover, and less than 100 cubic yards of excavation and/or grading 3. The proposed floor area or impervious cover would not exceed 50% of the allowable for the site 4. The project and any prior projects within the prior five years would not cumulatively exceed these thresholds. The proposed project includes replacement of a bridge at Site #1 and construction of a new bridge at Site #2 along Steven’s Creek Nature Trail to improve safety and to reduce impacts to sensitive creek and riparian habitat. There is no second dwelling unit proposed, no floor area is being added, and the project does not include new impervious surface area. As described in the applicant’s project description, 96 cubic yards or less of excavation and/or grading would be required for construction of the proposed improvements. Therefore, the project is not required to obtain a recommendation from the Planning and Transportation Commission and the project was forwarded directly to council for decision. Summary of Key Issues Views, Neighborhood Setting, and Character The bridges are proposed at the base of hillsides and not on any hilltops. The proposed bridges would not be visible from any roadways or adjacent properties. The material proposed for the bridges is consistent with other bridges in the open space area, including the existing bridge that would be removed. The proposed project allows for the continued enjoyment of this open City of Palo Alto Page 4 space for various recreational uses, including hiking and biking. The project reduces impacts to sensitive habitat by keeping pedestrians out of the creek and also improves safety for trail users. Tree Protection One Pacific madrone (arbutus menziesii) would be removed to accommodate the new bridge at Site #1. This is not a protected species. Replanting of the madrone is required as a CEQA mitigation measure. Other than the removal of this tree, removal of vegetation would be minimized during construction and all temporarily disturbed areas would be revegetated following construction. Zoning Compliance A detailed review of the proposed project’s consistency with applicable zoning standards has been performed. A summary table is provided in Attachment C. As proposed, the project complies will all applicable codes. The proposed project is located approximately .5 miles from the nearest property line and does not increase the FAR, lot coverage, or impervious surface area. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Site and Design Findings, and Open Space The Comprehensive Plan contains Goals, Policies, and Programs for the Open Space areas of the City. Comprehensive Plan policies and goals that are consistent with the proposed project include the following policies from the Natural Element of the Comprehensive Plan:  Policy N-1: Manage existing public open space areas and encourage the management of private open space areas in a manner that meets habitat protection goals, public safety concerns, and low impact recreation needs.  Policy N-3: protect sensitive plant species resources from the impacts of development  Policy N-6: Through implementation of the Site and Design process and the Open Space zone district regulations, minimize impacts of any new development on views of hillsides, on the open space character, and on the natural ecology of the hillsides.  Goal N-2: Conservation of Creeks and riparian areas as open space amenities, Natural Habitat Areas, and Elements of Community Design.  Policy N-11: preserve the integrity of riparian corridors.  Policy N-12: preserve the habitat value of creek corridors through the preservation of native plants and the replacement of invasive, non-native plants with native plants. The proposed project would reduce impacts to riparian habitat by routing the Stevens Creek Nature Trail over the creek instead of through the creek at Site #2 and would improve safety by replacing the bridge at Site #1. No development would occur in areas visible from adjacent properties. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with all of these policies that City of Palo Alto Page 5 encourage habitat protection, support public safety, and encourage minimizing impacts of new development on views of hillsides. Environmental Review The proposed project is subject to environmental review under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to the CEQA, a Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. The circulation period began on January 27, 2016 and ended on February 27, 2016. It was adopted by the lead agency, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, on March 9, 2016. A link to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring Program is included in Attachment F. Attachments: Attachment A: Location Map (PDF) Attachment B: Record of Land Use Action, Findings, and Conditions of Approval (DOCX) Attachment C: Zoning Compliance (DOCX) Attachment D: Project Request Letter (PDF) Attachment E: Project Plans (DOCX) Attachment F: Environmental Analysis Link (DOCX) 351-05-055 351-04-023 351-25-012 351-06-013 351-25-015 351-12-043 351-06-017 351-12-056 351-06-025 351-25-011 351-25-005 46.2' 99.7' 60.1' 84.1' 35.1' 149.3' 63.9' 226.5' 466.6'446.7' 77.3'18.1' 793.9' 49.5' 73.7' 139.8' 53.1' 112.7' 70.0' 126.7' 69.9' 69.3' 117.6' 31.3' 64.8' 44.4' 170.2' 35.8'11.2'47.7' 112.4' 54.1' 50.1' 130.1'150.3'104.1' 57.0' 61.4'33.9' 123.4' 42.3' 24.6' 103.4' 61.3' 28.7' 53.4' 77.9' 85.2' 130.7' 60.1' 54.8' 99.5' 56.1' 81.9' 43.4' 710.8' 1120.5' 152.3' 245.4' 447.7' 338.1' 144.3'120.2' 121.1' 96.9'147.2' 94.5' 120.9' 341.5' 124.2' 161.8' 285.7'17.8' 160.3' 672.5' 406.6' 401.5' 187.8' 651.5' 44.6'77.2' 191.8'138.8' 1331.1' 2304.6' 2383.8' 1230.3' 473.1' 105.8' 193.7' 90.8' 58.6'26.5'50.3'123.7' 41.8' 91.7' 45.4' 73.7' 141.7' 2.8' 90.9' 171.0' 140.0' 266.5' 834.9'459.9' 96.7' 186.9' 233.9' 278.4' 19.8'3.2' 171.7' 103.5' 179.3' 50.9' 103.7' 76.5' 34.6' 75.0' 123.6' 128.5'63.4'26.3'69.2' 96.5' 18.1'77.3' 446.7' 466.6' 226.5' 63.9'30.8'205.9'198.9'77.2'44.6' 430.6' 165.6'67.2' 401.5' 406.6' 672.5' 160.3' 739.4' 638.2' 316.8' 160.4' 108.9' 80.5' 188.1' 75.9' 83.8' 184.8' 283.8' 250.8' 79.2' 85.1' 152.5' 79.2' 113.5' 132.0' 128.0' 92.4' 151.8' 75.9' 79.2' 118.8' 125.4' 118.8' 114.2' 158.4' 189.4' 81.2' 59.4' 153.6' 115.2' 422.0' 781.2' 194.0' 428.7' 1566.4' 158.4' 37.6' 80.4'97.8' 305.4' 375.0' 1347.8' 319.8' 1118.0' 2323.1' 1318.3'2658.5'1359.9' 447.8' 10.9' 187.6' 155.1' 50.3'137.4'43.4' 116.7' 63.6'20.2' 91.4' 226.4' 172.3' 193.8' 286.4' 395.0'178.7'7.8' 302.6' 32.4' 106.0'84.7' 250.3' 163.4' 117.3' 227.7'39.9' 183.0' 2.3' 220.4' 33.6' 230.4' 43.4'81.9'56.1'99.5'54.8'60.1' 130.7' 85.2' 77.9' 53.4' 28.7'61.3' 103.4' 24.6' 42.3' 123.4' 33.9'61.4'57.0'104.1'150.3'130.1' 50.1'54.1' 112.4' 47.7'11.2'35.8' 170.2' 44.4' 64.8' 31.3' 117.6' 69.3' 69.9' 126.7' 70.0' 112.7' 53.1' 139.8' 73.7' 49.5' 793.9' 96.5' 69.2'26.3'63.4'128.5' 123.6' 75.0' 34.6' 76.5' 103.7' 50.9' 179.3' 103.5' 171.7' 3.2'74.3' 198.7' 86.1'1.0' 96.8' 52.2' 63.3' 84.5'28.2' 651.5' 430.6' 165.6'67.2' 187.8' 191.8' 198.9'205.9'30.8' 151.1' 138.8' 165.6' 37.1' 171.6' 17.4' 183.0' 39.9' 227.7' 117.3' 163.4' 113.8' 154.1' 106.0'84.7' 250.3' 113.8' 154.1' 32.4' 302.6' 157.8' 179.1'171.6' 37.1' 481.1' 420.9'170.0'87.7' 210.1' 187.5' 319.8' 1347.8' 375.0' 305.4' 97.8'80.4' 37.6' 158.4' 1566.4' 428.7' 516.8'481.1' 6.4' 1321.5' 41.5' 92.2' 240.8' 139.3' 175.6' 341.9' .2'5.2' 10.9' 187.6' 155.1' 50.3'137.4' 258.1' 278.4' 233.9' 186.9' 96.7' 459.9' 510.0' 881.1' 58.6' 90.8' 193.7' 105.8' 976.7'19.0' 28.2'84.5' 63.3' 52.2' 96.8' 1.0'86.1' 219.1' 138.5' 198.7' 447.8' 13.5' 116.7' 43.4' 932.7' 1269.0' 947.0'20.6' 1321.5' 74.3'19.8' 178.1' 219.1' .5'19.0' 138.5' 834.9'362.3'2.8' 141.7' 73.7' 45.4' 91.7' 41.8' 123.7'50.3'26.5' 881.1' 510.0' 947.0' 976.7' 3818.4' 1318.3' 2323.1' 225.7' 454.4' 109.3' 997.9' 300.5' 1241.1' 568.7' 410.4' 1084.6' 109.3' 366.2' 571.5' 362.3' 90.9' 171.0' 140.0' 473.1' 42.4' 1230.3' 217.0' 10.8' 312.1' 842.5' 575.8' 845.4' 145.4' 1359.6'2658.5' 845.4' 575.8' 842.5' 318.8' OS PC-3134 OS This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Special Setback Near Creek (SCVWD) Tree (TR) Zone Districts abc Zone District Notes Curb Edge abc Dimensions (AP) Water Feature Railroad abc Zone District Labels 0' 1302' 1470 Monte Bello Road CITY O F PALO A L TO I N C O R P O R ATE D C ALIFOR N IA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f A P RIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors ©1989 to 2016 City of Palo Alto chodgki, 2017-02-14 14:10:02 (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\chodgki.mdb) 1 ACTION NO. 2017-XX DRAFT RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION FOR 1470 MONTE BELLO DRIVE: SITE AND DESIGN REVIEW 16PLN-00180 At its meeting on March 20, 2017, the City Council of the City of Palo Alto approved the Site and Design Review application for replacement of an existing bridge and construction of a new bridge within the Monte Bello Open Space Nature Preserve in the Open Space Zoning District, making the following findings, determinations and declarations: SECTION 1. Background. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City Council”) finds, determines, and declares as follows: A. On May 24, 2016, Midpeninsula Open Space District applied for Site and Design review to allow for bridge construction activities at two creek crossings along the Steven’s Creek Nature Trail (“The Project”). B. The project site is comprised of one lot (APN No. 351-06-025) of approximately 827 acres. The site is located within the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve and is designated as SOS (Streamside Open Space). The project includes construction of two new multi-use trail bridges at watercourse crossings along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail. The Stevens Creek Bridge would upgrade a wet-crossing while the Tributary Bridge would replace an existing undersized bridge. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Preserve, acting as the lead agency for the Project, has determined that the project is subject to environmental review under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Guideline section 15070, Decision to Prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration. An environmental analysis was prepared for the project and it has been determined that Although the project, as proposed, could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect on the environment in this case because mitigation measures have been added to the project. The Negative Declaration was made available for public review beginning January 27, 2016 through February 27, 2016. A link to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is contained in Attachment F. SECTION 3. Site and Design Review Findings. 1. The use will be constructed and operated in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites. The project is located within the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, which is an approximately 3,426-acre open space preserve that benefits wildlife and is used for recreation. The preserve is dominated by open grasslands, woodlands, and creek corridors and includes several miles of trails for hiking, biking, and equestrian use. The two bridge sites (Sites #1 and #2) are located along the Steven’s Creek Nature Trail, which includes scenic views of the Stevens Creek riparian 2 corridor. Along its length the trail offers users views of mixed hardwood-conifer forest and Stevens Creek, with occasional views of forested hillslopes and grassy ridgetops. Trail users would be temporarily diverted around construction activities such that construction activities would not be visible to trail users. Following construction, temporarily impacted areas would be restored to pre-project conditions and trail users would be able to access the trails in a similar manner to current conditions. The existing Site #1 bridge is a wooden beam bridge, about 24 feet long. Currently there is no bridge at Site #2. Although the bridge at site #2 introduces a new manmade visual element, construction of this bridge would reduce impacts to sensitive creek and riparian habitats. The new bridges would be constructed of corten steel beams with redwood decking, similar to other existing bridges within the area and would be in keeping with the open space, undeveloped, park character and use of the area. It would allow for the continued safe use of this trail. 2. The project is consistent with the goal of ensuring the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities, or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent areas. As described for compliance with Objective 1 above, the project is located within the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve and is not located adjacent to any investment areas, research facilities, businesses, or educational facilities. The bridge sites are surrounded by undeveloped areas that are preserved for wildlife and recreational use. The bridge sites are surrounded by undeveloped areas that are preserved for wildlife and recreational use. Therefore, the project would not interfere with the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities or other authorized occupations in the same or adjacent areas. 3. Sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance are observed in the project. As described above the proposed new bridges would be constructed of Corten steel beams with redwood wooden decking similar to other bridges within the area, including the existing bridge at site #1. The new bridges have been designed to be in line with the undeveloped character of the surrounding open space. All temporarily disturbed areas would be restored, grading and excavation has been minimized and cut and fill would be balanced on site. Therefore, construction of the bridges observes the ecological balance between the project and the environment. 4. The use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The project proposal complies with the policies of the Land Use and Community Design, and the Natural Environment elements of the Comprehensive Plan, including:  Policy N-1: Manage existing public open space areas and encourage the management of private open space areas in a manner that meets habitat protection goals, public safety concerns, and low impact recreation needs. 3  Policy N-3: protect sensitive plant species resources from the impacts of development  Policy N-6: Through implementation of the Site and Design process and the Open Space zone district regulations, minimize impacts of any new development on views of hillsides, on the open space character, and on the natural ecology of the hillsides.  Goal N-2: Conservation of Creeks and riparian areas as open space amenities, Natural Habitat Areas, and Elements of Community Design.  Policy N-11: preserve the integrity of riparian corridors.  Policy N-12: preserve the habitat value of creek corridors through the preservation of native plants and the replacement of invasive, non-native plants with native plants. The proposed project would improve site conditions for sensitive riparian resources, while maintaining public safety. The replacement bridge at Site #1 would be placed higher up the bank than the existing bridge, so it would be located further away from the creek and reduce the bridge’s susceptibility to damage from bank erosion. Installation of the bridge at site #2 would keep pedestrians outside of the creek, which would minimize disturbance to sensitive creek resources. Therefore, the project is consistent with these policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan SECTION 4. Open Space Review Criteria The project proposal meets the following Open Space Review Criteria and the intent of the Comprehensive Plan regarding development in designated open space areas. 1. The development should not be visually intrusive from public roadways and public parklands. As much as possible, development should be sited so it is hidden from view. The proposed bridges would not be visible from public roadways and would allow for the continued use of the trail. 2. Development should be located away from hilltops and designed to not extend above the nearest ridgeline. The project is not located on a hilltop and does not extend above a ridgeline. 3. Site and structure design should take into consideration impacts on privacy and views of neighboring properties. The proposed project is located approximately .5 miles from the trailhead along Page Mill Road on an 827 acre site and would not be visible from neighboring properties. 4. Development should be clustered, or closely grouped, in relation to the area surrounding it to make it less conspicuous, minimize access roads, and reduce fragmentation of natural habitats. The project includes the construction of two small isolated trail bridges with small footprints and does not include any large scale development. The bridges are located deep within the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve and would only be visible to trail users along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail. The bridges would not fragment any natural habitats. 4 5. Built forms and landscape forms should mimic the natural topography. Building lines should follow the lines of the terrain, and trees and bushes should appear natural from a distance. The proposed new bridges would be compatible with existing uses of the open space and would look similar to the existing bridge at Site #1. The bridges would conform to the existing site topography and generally follow existing topographical lines. Any replacement vegetation would be similar to the existing native vegetation on-site. 6. Existing trees with a circumference of 37.5 inches, measured 4.5 feet above the ground level, should be preserved and integrated into the site design. Existing vegetation should be retained as much as possible. One tree with a circumference of 37.5 inches, measured 4.5 feet above the ground level would be removed as part of the proposed project. An approximately 15 inch diameter at breast height Pacific madrone would be removed to accommodate the new bridge at site 1. No other alignment of the bridge is feasible given the location of the channel. Replanting of the madrone is part of the mitigation. Vegetation disturbance would be minimized during construction and temporarily disturbed areas would either be passively or actively revegetated following construction. 7. Cut is encouraged when it is necessary for geotechnical stability and to enable the development to blend into the natural topography. Fill is generally discouraged and should never be distributed within the driplines of existing trees. Locate development to minimize the need for grading. The project would require less than 30 cubic yards of cut to install the bridge abutments, which would provide the stability of the bridge. All cut would be used on- site to re-route segments of the existing trail near the bridges and to connect the new bridges with the trail. No additional fill would be imported to the site. 8. To reduce the need for cut and fill and to reduce potential runoff, large, flat expanses of impervious surfaces should be avoided. The project does not include construction of any impervious surfaces. The project would comply with this criterion. 9. Buildings should use natural materials and earthtone or subdued colors. No buildings are proposed. The bridges would be constructed with Cortin steel and redwood, similar to the material used for the existing bridge at Site #1 and other bridges within the area. These materials are generally brown, beige, or other similar subdued color. 10. Landscaping should be native species that require little or no irrigation. Immediately adjacent to structures, fire retardant plants should be used as a fire prevention technique. The project would minimize the areas impacted during construction. Following construction all areas proposed for temporary disturbance would restored to previous conditions with plants that require little to no irrigation. No other landscaping is proposed. 11. Exterior lighting should be low-intensity and shielded from view so it is not directly visible from of-site. No lighting is proposed. 5 12. Access roads should be of a rural rather than urban character. (Standard curb, gutter, and concrete sidewalk are usually inconsistent with the foothills environment). No access roads are proposed. Construction crews would access the site via existing maintained trails 13. For development in unincorporated areas, ground coverage should be in general conformance with Palo Alto's Open Space District regulations. The project is within the City limits and, as proposed and conditioned, meets the O-S (Open Space) District zoning regulations. SECTION 5. Site and Design Approvals Granted. Site and Design Approval is granted by the City Council under Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.82.070 for application 16PLN-00180, subject to the conditions of approval in Section 6 of the Record. SECTION 6. Conditions of Approval. Planning Division 1. The plans submitted for a Building Permit shall be in substantial conformance with plans last revised on July 25, 2016 and the materials board on file with the Planning Department, except as modified to incorporate the following conditions of approval and any additional conditions placed on the project by the Planning Commission or City Council. 2. BUILDING PERMIT. Apply for a building permit and meet any and all conditions of the Planning, Fire, Public Works, and Building Departments. 3. BUILDING PERMIT PLAN SET. The following conditions of approval shall be printed on the second sheet of the plan set submitted with the Building Permit application. Building Division 1. The bridge shall include barriers to limit vehicular traffic or be designed for those loads. 2. Design shall include any flood potential per CPA and FEMA requirements. 3. Safety rails shall be designed for minimum loads per the CBC. 4. The bridge and both approaches shall meet accessibility standards. 5. The review and approval of this project does not include any other items of construction other than those written in the ARB project review application included with the project plans and documents under this review. If the plans include items or elements of construction that are not included in the written description, it or they may not have been known to have 6 been a part of the intended review and have not, unless otherwise specifically called out in the approval, been reviewed. Public Works Urban Foresty 1. BUILDING OR GRADING PERMIT COVER LETTER. The following conditions shall be reflected in the building or grading permit package, accompanied by a cover letter/checklist of each. Indicate the sheet number and/or detail where the correction has been made and provide: 1) corresponding revision number and 2) bubble or highlight for easy reference. Responses such as “see plans” or “plans comply” are not acceptable. 2. OPEN SPACE DISTRIC CRITERIA. The following site specific criteria shall be incorporated into the plans and supersede or augment the Project Application and mitigation monitoring program. 3. Specifically, 2.0 (E)(6, 7 & 10) shall resolve statements that ‘replanting of the removed madrone is part of the mitigation’ but that the project ‘does not include any landscaping’, and revegetation that is absent in plans. 4. Mitigation monitoring program, the Bio sections that cover nesting and animal protection shall also recognize the City’s tree and vegetation protection for any vegetation over 4” diameter. Bio-2, Section 4.b.3-4, etc. requiring seeding shall reflect use of the modified Los Trancos Creek Hydroseed Mix. 5. For the purpose of revegetation or planting Plans shall show and designate all land areas to be graded, cut, filled, ripped, loosened, manipulated or compacted and should include the trail sections to be abandoned, created, staging area, etc. 6. SUDDEN OAK DEATH (Best Management Practices). County quarantine applies (Santa Clara, San Mateo). Implement BMP’s daily and in any project area, including staging, parking or logistic area. To deter the potential spread of sudden oak death disease in Palo Alto, the City requires that all contractor activities and delivery vehicles perform the work according to the county quarantine restrictions in the attached Sudden Oak Death Best Management Practices. Any bark injury to any native tree over 4# diameter shall be treated within 24 hours. Report of treatment shall be emailed to curt.dunn@cityofpaloalto.org. Violation is subject to penalty and/or prosecution. http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/environment/default.asp 7. TREE REMOVAL & REVEGETATION. No tree replacement is proposed by the applicant due to inability to water at these locations. As an in-lieu commitment to offset the removal 7 of approximately eight trees, including a large pacific madrone (15” diameter, 37.5 circumference), the plans shall specify that all exposed soil areas will be treated with at least one application of approved Hydroseed mix to jump start native plant propagation and suppress invasive weeds. 8. Formalize the revegetation specifications as a commitment to reseed or replant all graded areas denoted as a plan note to include that any added areas that are graded or scarred during work until final inspection. 9. Revegetation specifications shall include seed mix makeup, application technique, acceptable seed cover protection, quality control, and inspection timing (3years per MND) and reporting (to whom at stakeholder agencies). 10. Unless modified, specific seed mix shall utilize the Los Trancos Creek Hydroseed Mix for this drainage (in use for a decade)—whether flat meadow seed or slope graded mix will be implemented. Specify on the building plans how material will be spread (i.e. truck, hose, or by hand) 11. Specifications shall include requirement to document compacted trail soil loosening technique to 6” depth with which tools. PLAN DETAILS. 12. Provide a tree & shrub disposition sheet showing all those to be removed. 13. Plans shall show and designate all land areas to be graded, cut, filled, ripped, loosened, or manipulated to verify graded soil volume. Any exposed soil area shall be revegetated. 14. PLAN CHANGES. Revisions and/or changes to plans before or during construction shall be reviewed and responded to by the (a) project site arborist, (name of certified arborist of record and phone #), or (b) Midpeninsula ROSD engineer with written letter of acceptance before submitting the revision to the Building Department for review by Planning, PW or Urban Forestry. 15. CONDITIONS. All Planning Department conditions of approval for the project shall be printed on the plans submitted for building permit. 16. TREE PROTECTION. Tree protection fencing is not required for this minor project. However, the owner and any contractor shall, as needed, protect and preserve all trees to remain on 8 the site, subject to code compliance action pursuant to PAMC 8.10.080 and Construction Requirements of the City Tree Technical Manual, Section 2.00. 17. TREE DAMAGE. Tree Damage, Injury Mitigation and Inspections apply to Contractor. Reporting, injury mitigation measures and arborist inspection schedule (1-5) apply pursuant to TTM, Section 2.20-2.30. Contractor shall be responsible for the repair or replacement of any publicly owned or protected trees that are damaged during the course of construction, pursuant to Title 8 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and city Tree Technical Manual, Section 2.25. 18. GENERAL. The following general tree preservation measures apply to all trees to be retained: No storage of material, topsoil, vehicles or equipment shall be permitted within the tree enclosure area. The ground under and around the tree canopy area shall not be altered. Trees to be retained shall be irrigated, aerated and maintained as necessary to ensure survival. PRIOR TO TRAIL USE OR FINAL INSPECTION 19. PLANNING INSPECTION. Prior to final sign off, contractor or owner shall contact the city planner (650-329-2441) to inspect and verify Special Conditions relating to the conditions for structures, fixtures, colors and site plan accessories. SECTION 8. Term of Approval. Site and Design Approval. In the event actual construction of the project is not commenced within two years of the date of council approval, the approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect, pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.30(G).080. PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________ ____________________________ 9 City Clerk Director of Planning and Community Environment APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED: Those plans prepared by Timothy C. Best, CEG titled “Stevens Creek Nature Trail Upgrade Project Monte Bello OSP”, consisting of 23 pages, dated July 5, 2016. ATTACHMENT B ZONING COMPARISON TABLE 1470 Monte Bello Road 16PLN-00180 Table 1a: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.28 (OS DISTRICT) OS Residential Development Standards Regulation Required Existing Proposed Minimum Site Area, Width and Depth Area: 10 acres Width: No standard Depth: No standard Area: 827 acres No change to existing Front Yard 200 feet (special setback on Page Mill) No change to existing Street Side Yard 200 feet (Special setback on Skyline Blvd.) No change to existing Rear Yard 30 feet No change to existing Interior Side Yard 30 feet N/A No change to existing Max. Building Height 50 feet N/A No building proposed; proposed bridges are approximately 6 feet above grade. Maximum Impervious Coverage 3.5%(1,261,357 sq. feet) for a 827 acre site N/A Max. Total Floor Area Ratio 3.5% (1,261,357 sq. feet) for a 827 acre site N/A N/A Native Vegetation Retained or Restored (for FAR bonus) ≥ 90% of site area 91.4% of site area memorandum date February 23, 2017 to Claire Hodgkins, City of Palo Alto from Matt Brunnings, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District subject Revised Letter of Application for the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects This Revised Letter of Application is provided in support of the City of Palo Alto’s Site & Design Review Submittal Requirements for the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects (Project). This Letter includes a complete project description and a description of how the project complies with the following objectives: A. To ensure construction and operation of the use in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites. B. To ensure the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent areas. C. To ensure that sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance shall be observed. D. To ensure that the use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. E. If the project is located in the Open Space (OS) zone district your letter should also address the 10 Open Space Development Criteria, adopted by the City Council on October 20, 1986. A copy of the development criteria can be obtained at the Planning Division counter. 1.0 Project Description 1.1 Project Background and Need The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) preserves nearly 62,000 acres of open space within 550 square miles of San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz Counties. This open space forms a regional greenbelt that traverses the spine of the San Francisco peninsula south from Half Moon Bay to the Santa Cruz Mountains east of Silicon Valley. The District operates 26 open space preserves, 24 of which are open to the public. Monte Bello Open Space Preserve (Monte Bello OSP or “the Preserve”) is one of the District’s larger holdings, and protects 3,346 acres of rolling grasslands and riparian forests at the head of the Stevens Creek watershed above Palo Alto (Figure 1). 2 The Stevens Creek Nature Trail in Monte Bello OSP is a popular trail that connects the main parking area/trailhead off of Page Mill Road with Canyon Trail and Skid Road Trail (Figure 2). The trail closely follows the riparian canyon of upper Stevens Creek, and features interpretive signage for visitors. The portion of the trail between Canyon and Skid Road Trails is open to pedestrians, cyclists, and equestrians, while the portion between the trailhead and Skid Road Trail is only open to pedestrians. The District has identified two creek crossing locations along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail alignment in need of retrofitting. Site #1 is the location of an existing 24-foot-long wooden beam bridge over an unnamed tributary (for purposes of this document, “Tributary Creek”) to Stevens Creek, slightly upstream of its confluence with the mainstem of Stevens Creek. The trail in this area is multi-use, but can be closed to cyclists and equestrians in the winter during muddy conditions. Channel incision and bank erosion underneath the bridge threaten its integrity, making it vulnerable to damage and/or failure during large storm events. The District therefore plans to replace the existing bridge with a longer, higher bridge that is farther upstream from the actively eroding creek banks. Site #2 is an existing at-grade wet ford across the mainstem of Stevens Creek, upstream of the general vicinity of Site #1. Stevens Creek Nature Trail in this location is currently open only to pedestrians. The crossing is immediately downstream of where the creek makes a roughly 270-degree horseshoe turn, near an apparent bedrock constriction. The District plans to construct a new bridge in this location to improve safety and avoid sensitive creek and riparian habitats. The sensitive nature of local riparian habitats and the difficult nature of site accessibility require that the bridge design and construction at both sites balance minimal environmental disturbance with the practical persistence of the element being designed. 1.2 Proposed Project Site #1 Site Setting The existing bridge at Site #1 is a 24-foot-long wooden beam bridge constructed in the 1980s prior to the Loma Prieta earthquake. The bridge abutments appear to be sited on older debris flow deposits from the Tributary Creek canyon. The creek underneath the bridge is deeply incised more than 10 ft through these deposits resulting in steep, near vertical and unstable channel banks. Active stream bank erosion is undermining the existing bridge abutments. There is a small, 2-foot high retaining wall below the left channel bank, presumably installed to minimize stream bank erosion below the bridge abutment. This wall is degraded and only marginally effective. Stevens Creek Nature Trail in this location is open to pedestrians, cyclists, and equestrians. The east approach (“near side” from Canyon Trail) descends at a steep (20%) gradient into the crossing making a sharp turn around a large tree before reaching the bridge. A portion of the trail at this location is supported on 3 ft of fill retained by a 3 foot high retaining wall. The tight turn likely acts to constrain access onto the bridge, particularly for equestrians. To the west of the bridge (the “far side” approach), the trail descends at a steep 15% to 20% grade into a low spot on a fluvial terrace along Stevens Creek. 3 Proposed Project The proposed project at Site #1 would replace the existing 24-foot-long wooden beam bridge with a 45 to 50-foot- long, over five ft wide bridge built of Corten steel beams (Figure 3). The bridge surface would be constructed of redwood decking similar to other District trail bridges, with 54 inch high handrails for safety. Bridge abutments would be poured-in-place spread footings or piers. A roughly 120 foot long segment of existing trail would be rerouted upslope to reduce trail grade. Existing bridge, footings and low retaining walls will be removed offsite. Disturbed soils will be stabilized as judged necessary at time of construction. Construction Staging & Access During construction at Site #1, Stevens Creek Nature Trail would be closed between Canyon Trail and the junction with Skid Road Trail. Construction materials for Site #1 would be staged at the junction of Canyon Trail and Stevens Creek Nature Trail, slightly less than a mile from the District gate at the head of Canyon Trail off Page Mill Road (Figure 2). Only flat areas to the east of Canyon Trail at the intersection would be used for materials staging, avoiding grassland habitats to the north and south of Stevens Creek Nature Trail. Vehicles would access this staging area from Page Mill Road via Canyon Trail. Construction personnel and materials such as bridge components, lumber, bags of concrete, tools, and water barrels would be transported from the staging area to Site #1 along Stevens Creek Nature Trail using ATVs, small Bobcat-sized tractors, motorized wheelbarrows, and similarly-sized equipment capable of navigating the narrow trail bench. In order for equipment to safely access Site #1, a small portion (approximately 60 ft) of Stevens Creek Nature Trail east of Site #1 would be widened by approximately 2-3 ft to gain a maximum 5-foot wide trail width. The bench cut would be widened through excavation upslope into the hillside; excavated soils would be re-used and stabilized locally. Work will require two truck trips per day from the field office to the staging areas and two ATV trips per day to the site (approximately 20 to 30 days). Additionally, two truckloads of concrete, two truckloads of beams, and two truckloads of decking and railing will be required for Site #1. The bridge would be assembled adjacent to the existing trail on the west side of the existing bridge, upslope of Stevens Creek. The bridge assembly area would be approximately 1,970 sq ft and is shown on the inset diagram Figure 3. No vegetation removal is anticipated in this area. Coir mat, or other similar material, will be placed temporarily on the ground in the assembly area and the bridge components will be assembled on top of this material. Construction Phasing Replacement of the bridge at Site #1 is anticipated to take 20 to 30 days to complete with three workers at the site each day. Construction equipment that will be used on-site includes a small excavator, generators, concrete mixers, chainsaws, and impact drivers. All work will be conducted using a small excavator and hand crews. The proposed project would be constructed in the following phases: 1. Biological surveys, education, and monitoring. Pre-construction surveys for rare plants, reptiles & amphibians, nesting birds, and special-status species would be implemented, and construction workers would be educated on proper procedures to protect sensitive habitats and wildlife. 2. Signage of temporary trail closures. Stevens Creek Nature Trail in between Canyon Trail and Skid Road Trail would be closed to all users for the duration of construction and signed appropriately. Signage 4 describing the closures would also be placed at the Monte Bello OSP parking lot off of Page Mill Road, and other major local trailheads. 3. Project site mobilization: Equipment and materials would be transported to the site via the methods described under “Construction Staging & Access”, above. 4. Widening of Stevens Creek Nature Trail to accommodate equipment. Approximately 60 ft of failing sections of Stevens Creek Nature Trail east of Site #1 would be widened to meet District trail standards and safely accommodate equipment such as ATVs, motorized wheelbarrows, SWECOs, and similar small construction vehicles. This would result in the excavation of approximately 9 cubic yd of soil. This soil would be stabilized on site and/or re-used where appropriate to re-route Stevens Creek Nature Trail near Site #1. Additionally, minor trail widening would occur along the Stevens Creek Natural Trail between Site #1 and Site #2. 5. Site preparation: Site preparation would include removal of vegetative debris and clearing of the bridge abutment areas and alignment. This would include removal of one 15 inch diameter at breast height (dbh) tree within the proposed bridge alignment. Invasive species in seed have the potential to spread due to construction and would be treated in compliance with the District’s Integrated Pest Management plan (IPM) and IPM Environmental Impact Report 6. Bridge removal and fill excavation. The existing wooden footbridge would be disassembled in pieces and removed from the site. Where feasible, bridge materials in acceptable condition could be re-used to improve other areas of Stevens Creek Nature Trail, or as construction materials for the trail re-route west of the bridge. Removal of the existing bridge may occur after construction of the new bridge, to facilitate access during construction. 7. Bridge foundation construction. The bridge foundations would be excavated by hand or using a small excavator. Concrete would be mixed on site. Forming materials would be removed following construction. 8. Assemble and install bridge. The new bridge would be installed per the manufacturer’s guidelines. Temporary scaffolding may be required to support bridge elements during construction. District crew may also “highline” bridge pieces into place using rope rigging temporarily attached to nearby trees. 9. Construct trail reroutes. Approximately 120 ft of Stevens Creek Nature Trail on the far (west) side of the bridge would be rerouted upslope to match grade with the new bridge. As part of this work, the former trail bed immediately west and downslope of the bridge would be decommissioned through the placement of fill obtained from excavation of the bridge footings and the construction of the upslope trail. Dead branches, logs, and other local forest materials would be placed on the old alignment to prevent access while the site is restored. 10. Install erosion control and native plants. All areas of disturbed soil would be stabilized with erosion control measures approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). See “Site Restoration” below for more details. 11. Site cleanup and demobilization. Equipment and materials would be removed from the site via Stevens Creek Nature Trail to the staging area near the intersection with Canyon Trail, and subsequently transported off the Monte Bello OSP property via Canyon Trail through the gate at Page Mill Road. 12. Trail re-opening. Stevens Creek Nature Trail between Canyon Trail and Skid Road Trail would be re- opened to multi-use trail uses. 5 Site #2 Site Setting Site #2 is an existing wet ford crossing with limited infrastructure (old steps and portions of retaining walls along the creek banks) associated with Stevens Creek Nature Trail. None of the existing features are proposed to be removed from the site; rather, construction activities would focus on the installation of a new bridge. Proposed Project The proposed project at Site #2 would replace the existing wet ford crossing with a 45- to 50-foot-long, over five- foot-wide bridge built of Corten steel beams (Figure 4). The bridge surface would be constructed of redwood decking similar to other District trail bridges, with 48-inch-high handrails for safety. Bridge abutments would be poured in place spread footings. Approximately 20 ft of existing trail on the east side of the bridge and 60 ft of existing trail on the west side of the bridge would be slightly re-routed to match the grade of the new bridge. Construction Staging & Access During construction at Site #2, Stevens Creek Nature Trail would be closed between its northern fork near the Monte Bello OSP parking lot and Skid Road Trail (Figure 5). Construction materials for Site #2 would be staged along the Skid Road Trail near the trail’s intersection with Skyline Blvd. Additionally, a small parking and staging area will be located near the intersection of the Stevens Creek Nature Trail and the Skid Road Trail. Some deep ruts along the Skid Road Trail between the staging area near Skyline Blvd. and the trail’s intersection with the Stevens Creek Nature Trail will be graded for vehicle access. Construction personnel and materials such as bridge components, bags of concrete, tools, and water barrels would be transported to Site #2 along the Skid Road Trail and Stevens Creek Natural Trail from the staging area near Skyline Blvd. using trucks, ATVs, small Bobcat- sized tractors, motorized wheelbarrows, and similarly-sized equipment capable of navigating the narrow trail bench. Signage would be placed at the Skid Road Trail trailhead to warn users of the potential to encounter construction equipment and materials along the portion of the trail in between Skyline Blvd. and Stevens Creek Nature Trail. The bridge would be assembled adjacent to the existing trail on the east side of the proposed bridge, south of the trail. The bridge assembly area would be approximately 630 sq ft and is shown in Figure 4. No vegetation removal is anticipated in this area. Coir mat, or other similar material, will be placed temporarily on the ground in the assembly area and the bridge components will be assembled on top of this material. Work will require two truck trips per day from the field office to the staging areas and two ATV trips per day to the site (approximately 20 to 30 days). Additionally, two truckloads of concrete, two truckloads of beams, and two truckloads of decking and railing will be required for Site #2. Construction Phasing Construction of the bridge at Site #2 is expected to take 20 to 30 days to complete with three workers at the site each day. Construction equipment that will be used on-site includes a small excavator, generators, concrete mixers, chainsaws, and impact drivers. All work will be conducted using a small excavator and hand crews. 6 The proposed project would be constructed in the following phases: 1. Biological surveys, education, and monitoring. Pre-construction surveys for rare plants, invasive species, reptiles & amphibians, nesting birds, and special-status species would be implemented, and construction workers would be educated on proper procedures to protect sensitive habitats and wildlife. 2. Signage of temporary trail closures. Stevens Creek Nature Trail in between the northern fork near the Monte Bello OSP parking lot and Skid Road Trail would be closed to all users for the duration of construction and signed appropriately. Signage describing the closures would also be placed at the Monte Bello OSP parking lot off of Page Mill Road, and other major local trailheads. 3. Project site mobilization: Equipment and materials would be transported to the site via the methods described under “Construction Staging & Access”, above. 4. Site preparation: Site preparation would include removal of vegetative debris and clearing of the bridge abutment areas and alignment. This would include removal of seven trees (one tree is six inches diameter at breast height [dbh], while the remaining six trees are less than six inches dbh) within the proposed bridge alignment. Invasive species in seed have the potential to spread due to construction and would be treated in compliance with the District’s IPM and IPM Environmental Impact Report. 5. Bridge foundation construction. The bridge foundations would be excavated by hand or using a small excavator. Concrete would be mixed on site. Forming materials would be removed following construction. 6. Assemble and install bridge. The new bridge would be installed per the manufacturer’s guidelines. Temporary scaffolding may be required to support bridge elements during construction. District crew may also “highline” bridge pieces into place using rope rigging temporarily attached to nearby trees. 7. Construct trail reroutes. Approximately 30 ft of the Stevens Nature Trail on both the west and east sides of the new bridge would be slightly re-routed to match grade with the new bridge. As part of this work, the former trail bed on both sides of the wet ford crossing would be passively decommissioned through the placement of dead branches, logs, and other local forest materials, as well as signage encouraging visitors to utilize the new trail alignment. 8. Install erosion control and native plants. All areas of disturbed soil would be stabilized with erosion control measures approved by CDFW and the RWQCB. See “Site Restoration” below for more details. 9. Site cleanup and demobilization. Equipment and materials would be removed from the site via Stevens Creek Nature Trail and Skid Road Trail to the staging area near the intersection of Skid Road Trail and Skyline Blvd. All equipment will be inspected for invasive species and cleaned when leaving the site. 10. Trail re-opening. Stevens Creek Nature Trail between the northern fork near the parking lot and Skid Road Trail would be re-opened to pedestrian traffic. 1.3 Site Restoration The volume of grading included in this proposed project (both sites) is estimated at 94 cubic yards. Grading and other earth-disturbing activities associated with the proposed project would be limited to the dry season (generally between April 15 and October 15). Assembly and installation of the bridges may occur after October 15. Construction would be supervised by experienced District staff and engineering consultants, and would incorporate erosion control techniques from the District’s Details and Specifications Guidelines. Best Management Practices (BMPs) approved by CDFW and RWQCB (and currently in use by the District) for the proper design and use of silt fencing would be implemented during project construction to minimize erosion at the project sites as necessary. Approaches that integrate completely biodegradable products such as fiber blankets, bio-blocks, and coir products would be used to stabilize disturbed soils as necessary, but most erosion control 7 work will use native materials available at the site, such as slash from site preparation. The biodegradable products would provide temporary erosion protection during the 3 to 5 years it would take for passively recruited vegetative cover to establish. The District may elect to supplement active recruitment of vegetation with direct seeding of native plants, particularly if volunteer assistance is available. 1.4 Public Access Both bridge sites are currently accessible to the public. Both Site #1 and Site #2 are located along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail. Hiking, biking and equestrian use are allowed along the section of the Stevens Creek Natural Trail at Site #1, while only hiking is allowed along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail at Site #2. The public can access Site #1 starting at the public parking lot at Page Mill Road, then traveling southeast along the Canyon Trail, then traveling southwest along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail to the site. From Site #1, the public can continue traveling west along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail to access Site #2. During construction at Site #1 the Stevens Creek Nature Trail would be closed between Canyon Trail and the junction with Skid Road Trail. During construction at Site #2, Stevens Creek Nature Trail would be closed between its northern fork near the parking lot off of Page Mill Road and Skid Road Trail. Signage describing the closures would be placed at the parking lot off of Page Mill Road, and other major local trailheads. The public would be able to use other trails in the vicinity during construction. Following construction the trails would be opened up again to public access. 2.0 Compliance with City Objectives The proposed project would comply with the following City of Palo Alto objectives as described under each objective: A. To ensure construction and operation of the use in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites. The proposed project is located within the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, which is an approximately 3,426- acre open space preserve that benefits wildlife and is used for recreation. The preserve is dominated by open grasslands, woodlands, and creek corridors and includes several miles of trails for hiking, biking, and equestrian use. The two bridge sites (Sites #1 and #2) are located along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail, a popular trail that includes scenic views of the Stevens Creek riparian corridor. Along its length the trail offers users views of mixed hardwood-conifer forest and Stevens Creek, with occasional views of forested hillslopes and grassy ridgetops. Trail users would be temporarily diverted around the project sites during construction (approximately 20 to 30 days at each site). The public would not be able to view construction activities because the trail would be closed during construction. Therefore, construction activities should not interfere with the public’s use of other trails or scenic views within the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve. Following construction, trail users would be able to access the trails in a similar manner to current conditions. Any temporarily impacted areas would either be passively or actively restored, so vegetation would be restored similar to pre-project conditions. The existing Site #1 bridge is a wooden beam bridge, about 24 feet long. Currently there is no bridge at Site #2. The new bridges would be constructed of Corten steel beams with redwood wooden decking. 8 An example of an installation of a similar bridge, of the same type and from the same manufacturer as the proposed new bridges, is shown in Figure 6. While the new bridges would introduce a new, man-made visual element to Site #2, and an altered visual character to Site #1, the new bridges would be in keeping with the open space, undeveloped, park character and use of the area. Therefore, while the new bridges would alter the visual character of the project sites, they would be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites. B. To ensure the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent areas. As described for compliance with City Objective A above, the project is located within the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve and is not located adjacent to any investment areas, research facilities, businesses, or educational facilities. The bridge sites are surrounded by undeveloped areas that are preserved for wildlife and recreational use. Therefore, the project would not interfere with the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities or other authorized occupations in the same or adjacent areas. C. To ensure that sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance shall be observed. As described for compliance with City Objective A above, the proposed new bridges would be constructed of Corten steel beams with redwood wooden decking. An example of the bridge in a similar setting is shown in Figure 6. The new bridges would look similar to the wooden bridge that currently exists at Site #1. The new bridges have been designed to be in line with the undeveloped character of the surrounding open space. They would be balanced with the existing natural setting at the site. D. To ensure that the use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The proposed bridges would be used by pedestrians, bicyclists, and equestrians for recreational purposes along a designated trail within the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve. Goals, policies, and programs for open space areas are described in Chapter 5, Natural Environment, of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (2007); several of these are listed below:  Policy N-1: Manage existing public open space areas and encourage the management of private open space areas in a manner that meets habitat protection goals, public safety concerns, and low impact recreation needs.  Policy N-3: Protect sensitive plant species resources from the impacts of development.  Policy N-6: Through implementation of the Site and Design process and the Open Space zone district regulations, minimize impacts of any new development on views of the hillsides, on the open space character, and the natural ecology of the hillsides.  Goal N-2: Conservation of Creeks and Riparian Areas as Open Space Amenities, Natural Habitat Areas, and Elements of Community Design.  Policy N-11: Preserve the integrity of riparian corridors.  Policy N-12: Preserve the habitat value of creek corridors through the preservation of native plants and the replacement of invasive, non-native plants with native plants. The proposed project would be in accord with the goals, policies, and programs described in the Palo Alto Comprehensive. The proposed project would improve site conditions for sensitive riparian resources, while maintaining public safety. The replacement bridge at Site #1 would be placed higher up the bank than the existing 9 bridge, so it would be located farther away from the creek and reduce the bridge’s susceptibility to damage from bank erosion. Installation of the bridge at Site #2 would keep pedestrians outside of the creek, which would minimize disturbance to sensitive creek resources. Vegetation within work areas would be temporarily disturbed during construction, but temporarily impacted areas would be either passively or actively revegetated with native vegetation following construction (see the response to question 41 in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for additional information). An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared for the proposed project (ESA, 2016). The IS/MND includes several mitigation measures, that MROSD would implement, to minimize project impacts on sensitive plant and wildlife species and riparian areas, as well as air quality, water quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, and geology, soils, and seismicity. E. If the project is located in the Open Space (OS) zone district your letter should also address the 10 Open Space Development Criteria, adopted by the City Council on October 20, 1986. A copy of the development criteria can be obtained at the Planning Division counter. The project would comply with the following 12 open space criteria included in City Municipal Code 18.28.070 as described under each criterion: (1) The development should not be visually intrusive from public roadways and public parklands. As much as possible, development should be sited so it is hidden from view. As described for compliance with City Objective A above, the new bridges would be compatible with the surrounding open space. The bridges would only be observed from trail users along on the Stevens Creek Nature Trail and would not be visible from any other areas in the open space or on public roadways. (2) Development should be located away from hilltops and designed to not extend above the nearest ridge line. The proposed bridges are located at the base of hillsides and are not located on hilltops. The project would comply with this criterion. (3) Site and structure design should take into consideration impacts on privacy and views of neighboring property. The proposed bridges sites are located within the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve and are not within view of any neighboring property. Therefore the new bridges would not impact the privacy or views of any neighboring property. (4) Development should be clustered, or closely grouped, in relation to the area surrounding it to make it less conspicuous, minimize access roads, and reduce fragmentation of natural habitats. The project includes the construction of two small isolated trail bridges with small footprints and does not include any large scale development. The bridges are located deep within the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve and would only be visible to trail users along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail. The bridges would not fragment any natural habitats. 10 (5) Built forms and landscape forms should mimic the natural topography. Building lines should follow the lines of the terrain, and trees and bushes should appear natural from a distance. As described for compliance with City Objective A above, the proposed new bridges would be compatible with existing uses of the open space and would look similar to the existing bridge at Site #1. The bridges would conform to the existing site topography and generally follow existing topographical lines. Any replacement vegetation would be similar to the existing native vegetation on-site. (6) Existing trees with a circumference of 37.5 inches, measured 4.5 feet above the ground level, should be preserved and integrated into the site design. Existing vegetation should be retained as much as possible. One tree with a circumference of 37.5 inches, measured 4.5 feet above the ground level would be removed as part of the proposed project. An approximately 15 inch diameter at breast height Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii) would be removed to accommodate the new bridge at Site 1. No other alignment of the bridge is feasible given the location of the channel. Replanting of the madrone is part of the mitigation. Vegetation disturbance would be minimized during construction and temporarily disturbed areas would either be passively or actively revegetated following construction. See the response to question 41 in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for additional information on vegetation removal and restoration and tree replacement. (7) Cut is encouraged when it is necessary for geotechnical stability and to enable the development to blend into the natural topography. Fill is generally discouraged and should never be distributed within the driplines of existing trees. Locate development to minimize the need for grading. The project would require less than 30 cubic yards of cut to install the bridge abutments, which would provide the stability of the bridge. All cut would be used on-site to re-route segments of the existing trail near the bridges and to connect the new bridges with the trail. No additional fill would be imported to the site. (8) To reduce the need for cut and fill and to reduce potential runoff, large, flat expanses of impervious surfaces should be avoided. The proposed project would not include construction of any impervious surfaces. The project would comply with this criterion. (9) Buildings should use natural materials and earthtone or subdued colors. The bridges would be constructed of Corten steel beams with redwood decking. These materials are generally brown, beige, or other similar subdued color. (10) Landscaping should be native species that require little or no irrigation. Immediately adjacent to structures, fire retardant plants should be used as a fire prevention technique. The proposed project would not include any landscaping. Vegetation that is temporarily impact would either be passively or actively revegetated using native species that would require little to no irrigation. 11 (11) Exterior lighting should be low-intensity and shielded from view so it is not directly visible from off-site. The proposed bridges would not include any lighting. The project would comply with this criterion. (12) Access roads should be of a rural rather than urban character. (Standard curb, gutter, and concrete sidewalk are usually inconsistent with the foothills environment.) The proposed project would not construct any new access roads. Construction crews would access the site via existing maintained trails. The project would comply with this criterion. References Environmental Science Associates (ESA), 2016. Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Prepared for Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. January 2016. 12 ATTACHMENT A Figures SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle 0 0.3 0.6 Miles CupertinoMindego Hill Palo Alto Mountain View Santa ClaraCounty Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure 1Project Location Site #2: New Bridge Site #1:Replacement Bridge Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Note: Only portions ofMonte Bello OSP opento the public are shown. !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !!! !!! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !!! ! !! ! !!!!!!!!! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !!!! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!!!! !!!!!!! ! ! !!!! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! !!!!!! !!!!! ! !!!!! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!!! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle 0 0.15 0.3 Miles Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure 2Site #1 Staging and Access Site #1: Bridge Replacement Site #2: New Bridge Creeks Access Routes Temporary Trail Closure Other Public Trails Hiking & Biking Hiking & Equestrian ! ! ! ! !Hiking Only Hiking, Biking, Equestrian SkylineBlvd. Page Mill Rd. NOSTAGING NOSTAGING STA G I N G see staging inset CanyonTrail SC Nature Trail S k i d Road T r a i l SC N at u r e Trail Monte Bello OSPparking lot Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure 3 Site #1 Design Map SOURCE: Tim Best, CEG Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure 4 Site #2 Design Map SOURCE: Tim Best, CEG ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!!!! ! ! ! !!!!! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !!! ! !!! ! !!!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!! !!!! ! !!! !!!!!!!!! !!! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!!! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!!!!! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!! !!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!!!! !!!!!! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! !! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !! ! !!! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !!!!!!! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle 0 0.1 0.2 Miles Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure 5Site #2 Staging and Access Site #1: Bridge Replacement Site #2: New Bridge Creeks Access Routes Temporary Trail Closure Other Public Trails Hiking & Biking Hiking & Equestrian ! ! ! ! !Hiking Only Hiking, Biking, Equestrian Staging Area SkylineBlvd. Page Mill Rd. Ca nyonTrail SC Nature Trail S k id Road T r a i l SC N at u r e Trail Skyline Ridge OSPparking lot Monte Bello OSPparking lot Staging Area Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects. 130573 Figure 6 Example of Bridge to be Constructed SOURCE: MROSD Attachment E Project Plans Hardcopies of project plans are provided to City Council members and libraries only. These plans are available to the public by visiting the Planning and Community Environmental Department on the 5th floor of City Hall at 250 Hamilton Avenue. Directions to review Project plans online: 1. Go to: https://paloalto.buildingeye.com/planning 2. Search for “1470 Monte Bello” and open record by clicking on the green dot 3. Review the record details and open the “more details” option 4. Use the “Records Info” drop down menu and select “Attachments” 5. Open the attachment named “Final Plans 1470 Monte Bello” Attachment F Environmental Analysis Directions to review Environmental Analysis online: 1. Go to: https://paloalto.buildingeye.com/planning 2. Search for “1470 Monte Bello” and open record by clicking on the green dot 3. Review the record details and open the “more details” option 4. Use the “Records Info” drop down menu and select “Attachments” 5. Open the attachment named “Final IS-MND MROSD” for the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 6. Open the attachment named “Final MMP” for the Final Mitigation Monitoring Plan City of Palo Alto (ID # 7686) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Cubberley Community Center Auditorium Re-Roof Project Title: Approval of a Construction Contract With Alcal Specialty Contracting, Inc. in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $364,728 to Provide Construction Services to Replace the Existing Roof at the Cubberley Community Center Auditorium Wing From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1.Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a contract with Alcal Specialty Contracting, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $331,571 (Attachment A),for the Cubberley Community Center Auditorium Wing Roofing Replacement project, budgeted in the recurring Capital Improvement Project,Cubberley Roof Replacements (CB-16002); and 2.Authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or more changes to the contract with Alcal Specialty Contracting, Inc. for related additional but unforeseen work, which may develop during the project, the total value of which shall not exceed $33,157. Background The existing mineral cap sheet roof on Cubberley Community Center Auditorium Wing is beyond its useful life and no longer meets code or Title 24 requirements. Leaking has caused extensive water damage throughout the auditorium and back kitchen area, increasing maintenance needs both to the roof and the interior spaces affected. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Discussion This project will improve occupant health and safety and reduce maintenance costs. Under contract, Alcal Specialty Contracting, Inc. will remove the existing mineral cap sheet roofing system down to the plywood substrate,and the equipment from its current curb supports. Curbs will then be dismantled and rebuilt higher and the equipment reinstalled per the specifications (Attachment B). Alcal Specialty Contracting, Inc. will provide and install a modified bituminous membrane roofing system throughout with R-9 insulation, new traffic crickets and drainage swells to direct rainwater to existing gutters, and walkway traffic pads to access rooftop mechanical equipment. Bid Process An Invitation for Bid for the project was posted on Planet Bids on November 17, 2016. The bid period was 28 calendar days. Seven bids were received on December 14, 2016 (Attachment C). Summary of Solicitation Process Invitation For Bid (IFB) Published 11/17/2016 Mandatory Pre-Bid Site Walk 11/23/2016 Number of Company Attendees at Pre-Proposal Meeting 10 Number of Bids Received 7 Bid Opening 12/14/2016 Bid Proposal $ Range $331,571 to $545,500 The bids ranged from a low of $331,571 to a high of $545,500 and are within range of the engineer’s estimate. Staff has reviewed all bids submitted and recommends the base bid and allowances totaling $331,571 submitted by Alcal Specialty Contracting,Inc. be accepted and Alcal Specialty Contracting,Inc. be declared the lowest responsible bidder. The change order amount of $33,157, which equals ten percent of the total contract, is requested for related additional, but unforeseen work, which may develop during the project. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Resource Impact Funding for this project was budgeted as part of the Fiscal Year 2017 Adopted Capital Budget in the recurring Capital Improvement Project,Cubberley Roof Replacements (CB-16002) in the Cubberley Property Infrastructure Fund. Environmental Review This project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15301c of the CEQA Guidelines as repair, maintenance and/or minor alteration of the existing facilities and no further environmental review is necessary. Attachments: ·Attachment A -C17166667 Cubberley Auditorium Re Roof ·Attachment B -Cubb Auditorium Specs and Drawings ·Attachment C -Bid Summary Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 1 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Contract No. C17166667 City of Palo Alto “Cubberley Community Center Auditorium Re-roof” Project Attachment A Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 2 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS…………………………………….…………..6 1.1 Recitals…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6 1.2 Definitions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6 SECTION 2 THE PROJECT………………………………………………………………………………………………………...6 SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS………………………………………………………………………………..7 3.1 List of Documents…………………………………………………………………………………………….........7 3.2 Order of Precedence……………………………………………………………………………………………......7 SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY…………………………………………………………………………………………..8 4.1 Contractor's Duties…………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM……………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 5.1 Contractor's Co-operation………………………………………………………………………………………..8 SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION…………………………………………………………………………………….......8 6.1 Time Is of Essence…………………………………………………………………………………………………….8 6.2 Commencement of Work…………………………………………………………………………………………8 6.3 Contract Time…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 6.4 Liquidated Damages…………………………………………………………………………………………………8 6.4.1 Other Remedies……………………………………………………………………………………………………..9 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time………………………………………………………………………………….9 SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR……………………………………………………………………….9 7.1 Contract Sum……………………………………………………………………………………………………………9 7.2 Full Compensation……………………………………………………………………………………………………9 SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE……………………………………………………………………………………………..9 8.1 Standard of Care…………………………………………………………………………………..…………………9 SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION…………………………………………………………………………………………..…10 9.1 Hold Harmless……………………………………………………………………………………………………….10 9.2 Survival…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10 SECTION 10 NON-DISCRIMINATION……..………………………………………………………………………………10 10.1 Municipal Code Requirement…………….………………………………..……………………………….10 SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS.…………………………………………………………………………………10 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 3 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 11.1 Evidence of Coverage…………………………………………………………………………………………..10 SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS…………………………………………………………….…11 12.1 Assignment………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 12.2 Assignment by Law.………………………………………………………………………………………………11 SECTION 13 NOTICES …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 13.1 Method of Notice …………………………………………………………………………………………………11 13.2 Notice Recipents ………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 13.3 Change of Address……………………………………………………………………………………………….12 SECTION 14 DEFAULT…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...12 14.1 Notice of Default………………………………………………………………………………………………….12 14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default…………………………………………………………………………………12 SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES…………………………………………………………………………..13 15.1 Remedies Upon Default……………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.1 Delete Certain Services…………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.2 Perform and Withhold……………………………………………………………………………………..13 15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract…………………………………………………………………13 15.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default………………………………………………13 15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.6 Additional Provisions……………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.2 Delays by Sureties……………………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.3 Damages to City…………………………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.3.1 For Contractor's Default…………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.3.2 Compensation for Losses…………………………………………………………………………………14 15.4 Suspension by City……………………………………………………………………………………………….14 15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience……………………………………………………………………………..14 15.4.2 Suspension for Cause………………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.5 Termination Without Cause…………………………………………………………………………………14 15.5.1 Compensation………………………………………………………………………………………………….15 15.5.2 Subcontractors………………………………………………………………………………………………..15 15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination………………………………………………………………...15 SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES……………………………………………………………16 16.1 Contractor’s Remedies……………………………………..………………………………..………………….16 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 4 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 16.1.1 For Work Stoppage……………………………………………………………………………………………16 16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment…………………………………………………………………………………….16 16.2 Damages to Contractor………………………………………………………………………………………..16 SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS………………………………………………………………………………….…16 17.1 Financial Management and City Access………………………………………………………………..16 17.2 Compliance with City Requests…………………………………………………………………………….17 SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES……………………………………………………………………………………..17 18.1 Status of Parties……………………………………………………………………………………………………17 SECTION 19 NUISANCE……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…17 19.1 Nuisance Prohibited……………………………………………………………………………………………..17 SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES…………………………………………………………………………………….17 20.1 Payment of Fees…………………………………………………………………………………………………..17 SECTION 21 WAIVER…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17 21.1 Waiver………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17 SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE; COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS……………………………….18 22.1 Governing Law…………………………………………………………………………………………………….18 22.2 Compliance with Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………18 22.2.1 Palo Alto Minimum Wage Ordinance…………….………………………………………………….18 SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT……………………………………………………………………………………18 23.1 Integration………………………………………………………………………………………………………….18 SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………..18 24.1 Survival of Provisions……………………………………………………………………………………………18 SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES………………………………………………………………………………………….18 SECTION 26 NON-APPROPRIATION……………………………………………………………………………………….19 26.1 Appropriation………………………………………………………………………………………………………19 SECTION 27 AUTHORITY……………………………………………………………………………………………………….19 27.1 Representation of Parties…………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS………………………………………………………………………………………………..19 28.1 Multiple Counterparts………………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY……………………………………………………………………………………………………19 29.1 Severability………………………………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES …………………………………………………..19 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 5 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 30.1 Amendments of Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………..19 SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION………………………………………………….….19 31.1 Workers Compensation…………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 32 DIR REGISTRATION AND OTHER SB 854 REQUIREMENTS………………………………..…20 32.1 General Notice to Contractor…………………………………………………………………………….20 32.2 Labor Code section 1771.1(a)…………………………………………………………………………….20 32.3 DIR Registration Required…………………………………………………………………………………20 32.4 Posting of Job Site Notices…………………………………………………………………………………20 32.5 Payroll Records…………………………………………………………………………………………………20 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 6 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on 20th day of February 2017 (“Execution Date”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and ALCAL SPECIALTY CONTRACTING INC. ("Contractor"), is made with reference to the following: R E C I T A L S: A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City. B. Contractor is a corporation duly organized and in good standing in the State of Nevada, Contractor’s License Number 815286 and Department of Industrial Relations Registration Number 1000000315. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State of California and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set forth in this Construction Contract. C. On November 17, 2016, City issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB) to contractors for the Cubberley Community Center Auditorium Re-roof” (“Project”). In response to the IFB, Contractor submitted a Bid. D. City and Contractor desire to enter into this Construction Contract for the Project, and other services as identified in the Contract Documents for the Project upon the following terms and conditions. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS. 1.1 Recitals. All of the recitals are incorporated herein by reference. 1.2 Definitions. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth in this Construction Contract and/or in the General Conditions. If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Construction Contract and in the General Conditions, the definitions in this Construction Contract shall prevail. SECTION 2 THE PROJECT. The Project is the Cubberley Community Center Auditorium Re-roof Project, located at 4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94306 ("Project"). Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 7 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 3.1 List of Documents. The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as “Agreement” or “Bid Documents”) consist of the following documents which are on file with the Purchasing Division and are hereby incorporated by reference. 1) Change Orders 2) Field Orders 3) Contract 4) Bidding Addenda 5) Special Provisions 6) General Conditions 7) Project Plans and Drawings 8) Technical Specifications 9) Instructions to Bidders 10) Invitation for Bids 11) Contractor's Bid/Non-Collusion Declaration 12) Reports listed in the Contract Documents 13) Public Works Department’s Standard Drawings and Specifications (most current version at time of Bid) 14) Utilities Department’s Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards (most current version at time of Bid) 15) City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements 16) City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations 17) Notice Inviting Pre-Qualification Statements, Pre-Qualification Statement, and Pre- Qualification Checklist (if applicable) 18) Performance and Payment Bonds 3.2 Order of Precedence. For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best interests of the City. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 8 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY. 4.1 Contractor’s Duties Contractor agrees to perform all of the Work required for the Project, as specified in the Contract Documents, all of which are fully incorporated herein. Contractor shall provide, furnish, and supply all things necessary and incidental for the timely performance and completion of the Work, including, but not limited to, provision of all necessary labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and utilities, unless otherwise specified in the Contract Documents. Contractor also agrees to use its best efforts to complete the Work in a professional and expeditious manner and to meet or exceed the performance standards required by the Contract Documents. SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM. 5.1 Contractor’s Co-operation. In addition to Contractor, City has retained, or may retain, consultants and contractors to provide professional and technical consultation for the design and construction of the Project. The Contract requires that Contractor operate efficiently, effectively and cooperatively with City as well as all other members of the Project Team and other contractors retained by City to construct other portions of the Project. SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION. 6.1 Time Is of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents. 6.2 Commencement of Work. Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. 6.3 Contract Time. Work hereunder shall begin on the date specified on the City’s Notice to Proceed and shall be completed within sixty (60) calendar days after the commencement date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. By executing this Construction Contract, Contractor expressly waives any claim for delayed early completion. 6.4 Liquidated Damages. Pursuant to Government Code Section 53069.85, if Contractor fails to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time, including any approved extensions thereto, City may assess liquidated damages on a daily basis for each day of Unexcused Delay in achieving Substantial Completion, based on the amount of five hundred dollars ($500) per day, or as otherwise specified in the Special Provisions. Liquidated damages may also be separately assessed for failure to meet milestones specified elsewhere in the Contract Documents, regardless of impact on the time for achieving Substantial Completion. The assessment of liquidated damages is not a penalty but considered to be a reasonable estimate of the amount of damages City will suffer by delay in completion of the Work. The City is entitled Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 9 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT to setoff the amount of liquidated damages assessed against any payments otherwise due to Contractor, including, but not limited to, setoff against release of retention. If the total amount of liquidated damages assessed exceeds the amount of unreleased retention, City is entitled to recover the balance from Contractor or its sureties. Occupancy or use of the Project in whole or in part prior to Substantial Completion, shall not operate as a waiver of City’s right to assess liquidated damages. 6.4.1 Other Remedies. City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where City’s Losses are caused by any reason other than Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time. The Contract Time may only be adjusted for time extensions approved by City and memorialized in a Change Order approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR. 7.1 Contract Sum. Contractor shall be compensated for satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the Contract Documents the Contract Sum of Three Hundred Thirty One Thousand Five Hundred Seventy One Dollars ($331,571.00). [This amount includes the Base Bid and Additive Alternates A2 and A3.] 7.2 Full Compensation. The Contract Sum shall be full compensation to Contractor for all Work provided by Contractor and, except as otherwise expressly permitted by the terms of the Contract Documents, shall cover all Losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the acts of the elements or any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until its Acceptance by City, all risks connected with the Work, and any and all expenses incurred due to suspension or discontinuance of the Work, except as expressly provided herein. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted for Change Orders approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE. 8.1 Standard of Care. Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, experienced and well-supervised personnel. All services performed in connection with this Construction Contract shall be performed in a manner consistent with the standard of care under California law applicable to those who specialize in providing such services for projects of the type, scope and complexity of the Project. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 10 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION. 9.1 Hold Harmless. To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers (hereinafter individually referred to as an “Indemnitee” and collectively referred to as "Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City, from and against any and liability, loss, damage, claims, expenses (including, without limitation, attorney fees, expert witness fees, paralegal fees, and fees and costs of litigation or arbitration) (collectively, “Liability”) of every nature arising out of or in connection with the acts or omissions of Contractor, its employees, Subcontractors, representatives, or agents, in performing the Work or its failure to comply with any of its obligations under the Contract, except such Liability caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of an Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs City incurs to enforce this provision. Except as provided in Section 9.2 below, nothing in the Contract Documents shall be construed to give rise to any implied right of indemnity in favor of Contractor against City or any other Indemnitee. Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 9201, City shall timely notify Contractor upon receipt of any third-party claim relating to the Contract. 9.2 Survival. The provisions of Section 9 shall survive the termination of this Construction Contract. SECTION 10 NON-DISCRIMINATION. 10.1 Municipal Code Requirement. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, Contractor certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. Contractor acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and will comply with all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS. 11.1 Evidence of coverage. Within ten (10) business days following issuance of the Notice of Award, Contractor shall provide City with evidence that it has obtained insurance and shall submit Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 11 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS. 12.1 Assignment. City is entering into this Construction Contract in reliance upon the stated experience and qualifications of the Contractor and its Subcontractors set forth in Contractor’s Bid. Accordingly, Contractor shall not assign, hypothecate or transfer this Construction Contract or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any assignment, hypothecation or transfer without said consent shall be null and void, and shall be deemed a substantial breach of contract and grounds for default in addition to any other legal or equitable remedy available to the City. 12.2 Assignment by Law. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if the Contractor is a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy shall result in changing the control of Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract. Control means more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity. SECTION 13 NOTICES. 13.1 Method of Notice. All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Construction Contract shall be given in writing and shall be deemed served on the earlier of the following: (i) On the date delivered if delivered personally; (ii) On the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as hereinafter provided; (iii) On the date sent if sent by facsimile transmission; (iv) On the date sent if delivered by electronic mail; or (v) On the date it is accepted or rejected if sent by certified mail. 13.2 Notice to Recipients. All notices, demands or requests (including, without limitation, Change Order Requests and Claims) from Contractor to City shall include the Project name and the number of this Construction Contract and shall be addressed to City at: To City: City of Palo Alto City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Copy to: City of Palo Alto Public Works Administration 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: Cecil Lectura Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 12 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT City of Palo Alto Utilities Engineering 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this Construction Contract shall be provided to the following: Palo Alto City Attorney’s Office 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, California 94303 All Claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to: Alcal Specialty Contracting Inc. 42950 Osgood Road Fremont, CA 94538 13.3 Change of Address. In advance of any change of address, Contractor shall notify City of the change of address in writing. Each party may, by written notice only, add, delete or replace any individuals to whom and addresses to which notice shall be provided. SECTION 14 DEFAULT. 14.1 Notice of Default. In the event that City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any provision of the Contract Documents, City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract, with a copy to Contractor’s performance bond surety. 14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under the Contract Documents within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) after receipt of written notice. However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) Days after receipt of such written notice. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 13 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 15.1 Remedies Upon Default. If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth above in Section 14, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including, without limitation, the following: 15.1.1 Delete Certain Services. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, delete certain portions of the Work, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 15.1.2 Perform and Withhold. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, engage others to perform the Work or portion of the Work that has not been adequately performed by Contractor and withhold the cost thereof to City from future payments to Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor for damages if City directs Contractor to resume Work. 15.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default. City shall have the right to terminate this Construction Contract, in whole or in part, upon the failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default as required by Section 14. City’s election to terminate the Construction Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract. Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately, unless otherwise provided therein. 15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond. City may, with or without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond. 15.1.6 Additional Provisions. All of City’s rights and remedies under this Construction Contract are cumulative, and shall be in addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity. Designation in the Contract Documents of certain breaches as material shall not waive the City’s authority to designate other breaches as material nor limit City’s right to terminate the Construction Contract, or prevent the City from terminating the Agreement for breaches that are not material. City’s determination of whether there has been noncompliance with the Construction Contract so as to warrant exercise by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Construction Contract, shall be binding on all parties. No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and Losses suffered by City. 15.2 Delays by Sureties. Time being of the essence in the performance of the Work, if Contractor’s surety fails to arrange for completion of the Work in accordance with the Performance Bond, within seven (7) calendar days from the date of the notice of termination, Contractor’s surety shall be deemed to have waived its right to complete the Work under the Contract, and City may immediately make arrangements for the completion of the Work through use of its own forces, by hiring a replacement contractor, or by any other means that City determines advisable under the circumstances. Contractor and its surety shall be jointly and severally Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 14 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT liable for any additional cost incurred by City to complete the Work following termination. In addition, City shall have the right to use any materials, supplies, and equipment belonging to Contractor and located at the Worksite for the purposes of completing the remaining Work. 15.3 Damages to City. 15.3.1 For Contractor's Default. City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents. 15.3.2 Compensation for Losses. In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City shall be entitled to deduct the cost of such Losses from monies otherwise payable to Contractor. If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount payable, Contractor shall be liable to City for the difference and shall promptly remit same to City. 15.4 Suspension by City 15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience. City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing, to suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time. The order shall be specifically identified as a Suspension Order by City. Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the order and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the Work covered by the Suspension Order. During the Suspension or extension of the Suspension, if any, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or, by Change Order, delete the Work covered by the Suspension Order. If a Suspension Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume and continue with the Work. A Change Order will be issued to cover any adjustments of the Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension. A Suspension Order shall not be the exclusive method for City to stop the Work. 15.4.2 Suspension for Cause. In addition to all other remedies available to City, if Contractor fails to perform or correct work in accordance with the Contract Documents, City may immediately order the Work, or any portion thereof, suspended until the cause for the suspension has been eliminated to City’s satisfaction. Contractor shall not be entitled to an increase in Contract Time or Contract Price for a suspension occasioned by Contractor’s failure to comply with the Contract Documents. City’s right to suspend the Work shall not give rise to a duty to suspend the Work, and City’s failure to suspend the Work shall not constitute a defense to Contractor’s failure to comply with the requirements of the Contract Documents. 15.5 Termination Without Cause. City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or in whole upon written notice to Contractor. Upon receipt of such notice, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the notice and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs to close out and demobilize. The compensation allowed under this Paragraph 15.5 shall be the Contractor’s sole and exclusive compensation for such termination and Contractor waives any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind resulting from termination without cause. Termination pursuant to this provision does not relieve Contractor or its sureties from any of their obligations for Losses arising from or related to the Work performed by Contractor. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 15 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 15.5.1 Compensation. Following such termination and within forty-five (45) Days after receipt of a billing from Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Paragraph 15.5.1, City shall pay the following to Contractor as Contractor’s sole compensation for performance of the Work : .1 For Work Performed. The amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion of the Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination, less sums previously paid to Contractor. .2 For Close-out Costs. Reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors: (i) Demobilizing and (ii) Administering the close-out of its participation in the Project (including, without limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including attorney or expert fees) for a period of no longer than thirty (30) Days after receipt of the notice of termination. .3 For Fabricated Items. Previously unpaid cost of any items delivered to the Project Site which were fabricated for subsequent incorporation in the Work. .4 Profit Allowance. An allowance for profit calculated as four percent (4%) of the sum of the above items, provided Contractor can prove a likelihood that it would have made a profit if the Construction Contract had not been terminated. 15.5.2 Subcontractors. Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this Construction Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are afforded to Contractor against City under this Section. 15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the notice directs otherwise, do the following: (i) Immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice; (ii) Place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities, except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work that is not discontinued; (iii) Provide to City a description in writing, no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes, payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine necessary in order to decide whether to accept assignment of or request Contractor to terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract; (iv) Promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and (v) Thereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in transit thereto. Upon termination, whether for cause or for convenience, the provisions of the Contract Documents remain in effect as to any Claim, indemnity obligation, warranties, guarantees, Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 16 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT submittals of as-built drawings, instructions, or manuals, or other such rights and obligations arising prior to the termination date. SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 16.1 Contractor’s Remedies. Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the following: 16.1.1 For Work Stoppage. The Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive Days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any Subcontractor, or any employee or agent of Contractor or any Subcontractor, due to issuance of an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable. This provision shall not apply to any work stoppage resulting from the City’s issuance of a suspension notice issued either for cause or for convenience. 16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment. If City does not make pay Contractor undisputed sums within ninety (90) Days after receipt of notice from Contractor, Contractor may terminate the Construction Contract (30) days following a second notice to City of Contractor’s intention to terminate the Construction Contract. 16.2 Damages to Contractor. In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided for in Paragraph 15.5.1 above. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind. SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS. 17.1 Financial Management and City Access. Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Construction Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices. City and City's accountants during normal business hours, may inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take-offs, cost reports, ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this Project. Contractor shall retain these documents for a period of three (3) years after the later of (i) Final Payment or (ii) final resolution of all Contract Disputes and other disputes, or (iii) for such longer period as may be required by law. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 17 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 17.2 Compliance with City Requests. Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 17 shall be a condition precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents. City many enforce Contractor’s obligation to provide access to City of its business and other records referred to in Section 17.1 for inspection or copying by issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such court, without the necessity of oral testimony. SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES. 18.1 Status of parties. Each party is acting in its independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint ventures’ of the other party. City, its officers or employees shall have no control over the conduct of Contractor or its respective agents, employees, subconsultants, or subcontractors, except as herein set forth. SECTION 19 NUISANCE. 19.1 Nuisance Prohibited. Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection in the performance of services under this Construction Contract. SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES. 20.1 Payment of Fees. Except as otherwise provided in the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications, The Contractor shall provide, procure and pay for all licenses, permits, and fees, required by the City or other government jurisdictions or agencies necessary to carry out and complete the Work. Payment of all costs and expenses for such licenses, permits, and fees shall be included in one or more Bid items. No other compensation shall be paid to the Contractor for these items or for delays caused by non-City inspectors or conditions set forth in the licenses or permits issued by other agencies. SECTION 21 WAIVER. 21.1 Waiver. A waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 18 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE; COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. 22.1 Governing Law. This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California, and venue shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Santa Clara, and no other place. 22.2 Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal and California laws and city laws, including, without limitation, ordinances and resolutions, in the performance of work under this Construction Contract. 22.2.1 Palo Alto Minimum Wage Ordinance. Contractor shall comply with all requirements of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 4.62 (Citywide Minimum Wage), as it may be amended from time to time. In particular, for any employee otherwise entitled to the State minimum wage, who performs at least two (2) hours of work in a calendar week within the geographic boundaries of the City, Contractor shall pay such employees no less than the minimum wage set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 4.62.030 for each hour worked within the geographic boundaries of the City of Palo Alto. In addition, Contractor shall post notices regarding the Palo Alto Minimum Wage Ordinance in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code section 4.62.060. SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. 23.1 Integration. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT. 24.1 Survival of Provisions. The provisions of the Construction Contract which by their nature survive termination of the Construction Contract or Final Completion, including, without limitation, all warranties, indemnities, payment obligations, and City’s right to audit Contractor’s books and records, shall remain in full force and effect after Final Completion or any termination of the Construction Contract. SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES. This Project is not subject to prevailing wages. Contractor is not required to pay prevailing wages in the performance and implementation of the Project in accordance with SB 7, if the public works contract does not include a project of $25,000 or less, when the project is for construction work, or the contract does not include a project of $15,000 or less, when the project is for alteration, demolition, repair, or maintenance (collectively, ‘improvement’) work. Or Contractor is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and Section 16000 et seq. and Section 1773.1 of the California Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 19 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the contract for this Project from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). Copies of these rates may be obtained at the Purchasing Division’s office of the City of Palo Alto. Contractor shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to any staff or subcontractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of all sections, including, but not limited to, Sections 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1782, 1810, and 1813, of the Labor Code pertaining to prevailing wages. SECTION 26 NON-APPROPRIATION. 26.1 Appropriations. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that the City does not appropriate funds for the following fiscal year for this event, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Construction Contract are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 27 AUTHORITY. 27.1 Representation of Parties. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS 28.1 Multiple Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement. SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY. 29.1 Severability. In case a provision of this Construction Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected. SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES. 30.1 Amendments to Laws. With respect to any amendments to any statutes or regulations referenced in these Contract Documents, the reference is deemed to be the version in effect on the date that the Contract was awarded by City, unless otherwise required by law. SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION. 31.1 Workers Compensation. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1861, by signing this Contract, Contractor certifies as follows: Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 20 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT “I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work on this Contract.” SECTION 32 DIR REGISTRATION AND OTHER SB 854 REQUIREMENTS. 32.1 General Notice to Contractor. City requires Contractor and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of SB 854. 32.2 Labor Code section 1771.1(a) City provides notice to Contractor of the requirements of California Labor Code section 1771.1(a), which reads: “A contractor or subcontractor shall not be qualified to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, subject to the requirements of Section 4104 of the Public Contract Code, or engage in the performance of any contract for public work, as defined in this chapter, unless currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5. It is not a violation of this section for an unregistered contractor to submit a bid that is authorized by Section 7029.1 of the Business and Professions Code or Section 10164 or 20103.5 of the Public Contract Code, provided the contactor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 at the time the contract is awarded.” 32.3 DIR Registration Required. City will not accept a bid proposal from or enter into this Construction Contract with Contractor without proof that Contractor and its listed subcontractors are registered with the California Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) to perform public work, subject to limited exceptions. 32.4 Posting of Job Site Notices. City gives notice to Contractor and its listed subcontractors that Contractor is required to post all job site notices prescribed by law or regulation and Contractor is subject to SB 854-compliance monitoring and enforcement by DIR. 32.5 Payroll Records. City requires Contractor and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of Labor Code section 1776, including: (i) Keep accurate payroll records, showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by, respectively, Contractor and its listed subcontractors, in connection with the Project. (ii) The payroll records shall be verified as true and correct and shall be certified and made available for inspection at all reasonable hours at the principal office of Contractor and its listed subcontractors, respectively. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 21 Rev. April 27, 2016 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (iii) At the request of City, acting by its project manager, Contractor and its listed subcontractors shall make the certified payroll records available for inspection or furnished upon request to the project manager within ten (10) days of receipt of City’s request. City requests Contractor and its listed subcontractors to submit the certified payroll records to the project manager at the end of each week during the Project. (iv) If the certified payroll records are not produced to the project manager within the 10-day period, then Contractor and its listed subcontractors shall be subject to a penalty of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker, and City shall withhold the sum total of penalties from the progress payment(s) then due and payable to Contractor. This provision supplements the provisions of Section 15 hereof. (v) Inform the project manager of the location of contractor’s and its listed subcontractors’ payroll records (street address, city and county) at the commencement of the Project, and also provide notice to the project manager within five (5) business days of any change of location of those payroll records. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contract to be executed the date and year first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO ____________________________ City Manager or designee APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ City Attorney or designee APPROVED: ____________________________ Public Works Director ALCAL SPECIALTY CONTRACTING, INC. By:___________________________ Name:________________________ Title:__________________________ Date: _________________________ TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR CUBBERLEY AUDITORIUM BUILDING RE-ROOF AT 4000 MIDDLEFIELD ROAD PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA October 27, 2016 Issued by: City of Palo Alto Public Works Department Public Services Division Facilities Capital Improvement Projects Prepared by: ________________________________ Cecil R. Lectura Project Engineer Approved by: ________________________________ Jimmy Y. Chen Project Manager Attachment B Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 01 11 00 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS SECTION 01 74 00 TEMPORARY CONDITIONS SECTION 01 77 00 CONTRACT CLOSEOUT SECTION 02 41 00 DEMOLITION SECTION 06 10 00 ROUGH CARPENTRY SECTION 07 01 50 THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION SECTION 07 51 12 MODIFIED BITUMINOUS MEMBRANE ROOFING SECTION 07 60 00 FLASHING AND SHEET METAL SECTION 07 92 00 JOINT SEALANTS SECTION 09 91 13 EXTERIOR PAINTING AND FINISHING APPENDIX - PROJECT DRAWINGS - COLD-APPLIED MODIFIED BITUMEN ROOFING INSTALLATION GUIDE S:\PWD\FAC-MSC\REHAB & CIP\Rehab&CIPProjects - ACTIVE\Cubberley\Cubb Roofs\Cubb Bldg O_Re- Roof_MultiPurpose-Auditorium\1-Jimmy to Review\Cubb-O_ReRoof_Specs.doc Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 01 11 00 Page 1 SECTION 01 11 00 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 SCOPE OF WORK The contractor shall be responsible for all labor, material, tools, equipment, and services necessary for removing existing mineral cap roof, as well as installing a new 2-ply roof system, on approximately 21,925 SF, at the Auditorium Building of the Cubberley Community Center, located at 4000 Middlefield Road, in Palo Alto, California. Contractors bidding the project shall, at their discretion, measure and verify the roof areas during the mandatory bid walk. The project includes but is not limited to the following: A. Remove existing mineral cap roofing system down to the plywood substrate at three roof areas. Patch/repair substrate as necessary before installing modified bituminous membrane roofing over fiberboard over min. R-19 tapered, rigid insulation throughout roof (where noted on drawings) and around pipe and exhaust ductwork penetrations. Apply acrylic Title-24, CRRC-approved white or light-colored reflective coating over all roofing material areas as final step, after all other roof work completed. B. Remove existing base assemblies of all roof-mounted HVAC equipment (where noted on drawings.) All equipment shall be re-installed onto new higher roof curbs per the drawings. Install crickets/drainage swales to direct rainwater away from units per the construction drawings. C. Remove existing corroded exhaust vents and replace with galvanized metal vents of same size, type, etc. at same locations where noted on construction drawings. D. Remove and replace all existing counter-flashing on perimeter walls adjacent to roof areas with new flashing. Caulk top of wall joints of counter-flashing as necessary, per requirements described in these specifications. E. Remove and replace all existing galvanized edge metal perimeter flashing throughout roofs with new. F. Remove all existing galvanized metal gutters and replace with appropriately sized similar gutters in same locations. Apply rust inhibitor to the inside of the gutters to prevent further oxidation. Reconnect all existing downspouts at same locations. Seal/prime/paint exterior sides/faces of all gutters to match existing conditions. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 01 11 00 Page 2 G. Remove and replace all conduit-topped and gas piping-topped wood sleepers and metal clamps with new rubber Durablok sleepers or approved equal (over rubber plates) with galv. metal clamps, at all three (3) roofs. H. Strip existing peeling paint at existing fascia boards down to raw wood. Seal, prime, & paint entire fascias to match existing conditions. Temporarily remove existing security light fixtures on fascia boards and re-attach after roof work completed. I. Install standard-size walkway traffic pads over new roof system, per the suggested plan configuration on the construction drawings. Install per manufacturer-recommended minimal distances between pads. J. Install new galvanized wire mesh screen covers securely over pipe jacks, to prevent both vandalism and pest encroachment. K. Install new plastic gutter screens at tree drip-line areas to match other existing onsite tree line gutter screens. Provide submittals for review/ approval prior to installation. L. Verify and clear all roof drainage pipes servicing as downspouts. There shall be no clogged drains prior to Final Inspection. 1.2 RELATED WORK Reference the drawings and specifications for this project. 1.3 PRE-BID CONFERENCE A. The bidding Contractor shall attend a mandatory pre-bid meeting and job site visit, and be prepared to raise any questions he/she may have about the renovation area, methods, procedures, required inspections, plans, specifications, and the contract documents. B. For substitution approval, bidding Contractor must first submit an RFI and get an approval prior to bid opening. An addendum will then be issued to all prospective bidders prior to bid opening. C. Contractor requirements: Contractor State Licensing Board: Roofing (C-39). Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 01 11 00 Page 3 1.4 PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING, SCHEDULE The City shall schedule a pre-construction meeting to review the project with the Contractor. At the time of the meeting, the Contractor shall furnish to the Project Manager for review and approval, a Microsoft Project bar-graph schedule covering various phases of the operations, and all required submittals. The approved progress schedule shall be followed throughout the contract. The Contractor shall also provide emergency contact numbers for after-hours calls. Copies of all product data must be submitted and approved by the City of Palo Alto’s Project Manager, prior to their installation. 1.5 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Contractor shall begin work within seven (7) calendar days after receiving the Notice to Proceed, and shall complete all work covered by this contract within 30 calendar days from the Notice to Proceed date. If bad weather or unforeseeable site conditions occur, the Contractor may be granted extra days to complete the job only after a letter requesting for the time extension is submitted and approved by the Project Manager. Contractor shall adjust his schedule for any special events occurring at the site. No additional overhead will be paid. The Contractor shall notify the City of Palo Alto’s Project Manager at least five (5) working days prior to commencing work, when weather conditions allow for an uninterrupted, 45-day appropriated rain-free or temperature-conflicting period of time. All noise-producing demolition work shall be done during non-business hours. Building will be in use throughout construction. All utilities to areas outside the work area must be maintained. Maintain both ingress and egress to/from building at all times and clear walkways for public use (as applicable.) 1.6 PROTECTION OF EXISTING BUILDING A. Contractor shall use proper and diligent care to protect any and all property belonging to the City of Palo Alto, or others, including existing buildings, doors, floors, walks, pavements, pipe systems, ceiling structures, etc. Contractor shall take all reasonable steps to minimize any dirt, noise, dust, traffic, or other problems, i.e. damage to surrounding property or buildings attributable to any action by the Contractor. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 01 11 00 Page 4 B. Contractor shall not overload any part of the premises or the building with any excess material or equipment. If so, he shall do so at his own risk and he shall be solely responsible for any and all loss, damage, and/or injury arising or resulting from the overloading. Protect interior floors and concrete sidewalks not only with heavy plywood sheets to evenly distri- bute trucks loads, but also when carting materials and debris over them. 1.7 SAFETY A. Contractor is solely responsible for safety on the job site and shall follow all OSHA safety requirements, and all state safety regulations and orders. 1. Strictly observe safety precautions, and erect temporary barricades, warning lines, signs, and protective railings to protect persons in, around, and under the work areas. Dropping or throwing of objects from above is prohibited. 2. Follow NRCA and OSHA fire protection and prevention provisions including, but not limited to, those listed in OSHA 1962; Chapter 150, 151, 152, 153, and OSHA Chapter 110, 1191 – 110 as they apply to torch application. Comply with all federal, state, and local regulations. 1.8 DRAWINGS A. The location and design of the required construction are shown on the drawings accompanying these Specifications. The following listed drawings are hereby made a part of these Specifications and this contract. Sheet No. Title Date A-1 Auditorium Bldg Roof Plan, Project Data October 27, 2016 A-2 Roof Details October 27, 2016 B. Any part of the work that is mentioned in either the specifications or on the drawings shall be understood by the Contractor to be part of the full scope of work to be done. 1.9 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AT THE JOB SITE The Contractor shall keep one copy of all the contract documents at the job site Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 01 11 00 Page 5 in complete and good order. These shall be available to City representatives and public agencies having jurisdiction, and shall include all approved drawings, shop drawings, specifications, addenda, and change orders. 1.10 INCLUSION OF GENERAL CONDITIONS AND DIVISION ONE Sections of Division 1 are a part of each and every section of these specifications and apply to each and every section as fully as if repeated in each case therein. 1.11 SITE INVESTIGATION Contractor shall visit the site, verify the general and location conditions, and note all other matters that will affect the proposed work. Failure to do so will not relieve the Contractor from his responsibility of underestimating the difficulty or the cost of the work. 1.12 SITE CONDITIONS AND SURVEYS Before beginning the work, the Contractor shall compare actual site conditions with the requirements of the drawings, and shall verify all existing conditions and dimensions. Any discrepancies should be reported immediately to the Project Manager before proceeding with any of the work. Data and information shown and indicated on the drawings should be field-verified. 1.13 CONTRACTOR SUPERVISION Contractor’s Project Superintendent shall have full authority to make minor changes and shall be responsible for the supervision and direction of the construction area. Questions regarding ANY revisions shall be addressed to City's Project Manager via a written Request For Information (RFI). Project Superintendent shall be present on site daily. 1.14 COORDINATION OF WORK Contractor shall coordinate all work with the City's Project Manager. 1.15 DESIGNATED CITY REPRESENTATIVE A. All communications and interface, including written correspondence by the Contractor, shall be with the City of Palo Alto Facilities Rehabilitation Division, P.O. Box 10250, Palo Alto, CA 94303, phone (650) 496-6900, Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 01 11 00 Page 6 ATTN: Cecil R. Lectura. B. The Project Engineer is Cecil R. Lectura at (650) 496-6921. 1.16 WARRANTY A. Contractor shall submit a warranty certificate, covering the roofing product for a period of twenty (20) years, from the date of final project acceptance. The certificate shall be included in the base bid proposal at no additional cost to the City. B. Contractor shall also submit a contractor warranty certificate, covering work performed under this contract for a period of two (2) years from the date of final project acceptance. The certificate shall be included in the base bid proposal at no additional cost to the City. 1.17 PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS A. Contractor is required to have the Project Superintendent or lead onsite daily to manage the work during construction. B. Proper protective gear is required at all time during construction. These include hard hats, safety goggles, sound and respiratory protection, safety gloves, safety shoes, and full-length clothing. C. All Contractor’s employees shall wear either badges or have clothing identified with the company’s name. D. Contractor is responsible for his/her employees and subcontractor’s proper conduct, appearances, behavior and language used while on the job site. E. Copies of all current SDS for all components must be kept on site. Provide all crewmembers with appropriate safety data and training as is related to the specific chemical compound he or she may be expected to come in contact with. Each crewmember shall be fully aware of first-aid measures to be used in case of accidents. 1.18 DELIVERY OF MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT Contractor is responsible for the storage of all equipment and materials. Contractor assumes all risk for storage of his/her materials. END OF SECTION CCOB TOP DECK, TOWER ROOF REPLACEMENT & 8TH FLOOR ROOF COATING Specification F016-11 Division 06100 Page 7 Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 01 74 00 Page 1 SECTION 01 74 00 - TEMPORARY CONDITIONS PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 WATER, LIGHT AND POWER All utilities shall be available to the Contractor for construction purposes at no charge. The Contractor is responsible for any temporary connections, extensions and distributions, including all wiring, piping, fittings, fixtures, devices, etc. Utilities must remain operational to all areas of the building at all times. Coordinate any required utilities shut down with Project Manager at least 48 hours in advance. 1.2 TEMPORARY SANITARY FACILITIES Contractor shall provide and install, without extra cost to the City, one or more portable and lockable chemical toilet(s) located where permitted by the City and kept continually in sanitary odor-free condition during project. Remove portable toilet(s) on project completion. Place portable toilet(s) in conformance with applicable laws, codes, and regulations. 1.3 DELIVERY AND STORAGE OF MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT A. There will be a designated area for storage outside of the building and all the space in the work area is also available as storage space during construction. Material shall be neatly stored in the construction area. B. The Contractor shall assume full responsibility for protection and safe keeping of any materials, tools, and equipment stored on City's property. C. Store materials and equipment only in areas designated by the City for this purpose. D. It is anticipated that Contractor's materials will be placed in the job area. The Contractor shall coordinate delivery requirements with the City Project Manager. E. The Contractor shall be held fully responsible for safe mounting, use, storage and disassembly of the equipment; repair or restoration of the existing structure, its surfaces and finishes, landscaped areas and walkways, or other damage caused by the equipment. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 01 74 00 Page 2 1.4 DEBRIS AND CLEANING A. Waste All debris from demolition, framing removal, and other construction-related activities shall be carefully handled and discarded in a manner to minimize the generation of dirt and dust. Keep construction areas clean of waste material daily. All work areas shall be left broom-clean daily. B. All debris shall be removed by Contractor or Contractor’s employees. If debris boxes are used, they must be owned by Contractor or rented from Green Waste only. If rental debris boxes are used, they must be rented from the Palo Alto Sanitation Company (Green Waste), 2000 Geng Road, Palo Alto, CA (650) 493-4894. C. Contractor shall recycle all possible construction debris, including packaging of new materials. Contractor shall comply with City’s Green Building Ordinance. Contractor shall register itself and the project on the City of Palo Alto’s waste management website: greenhalosystems.com. Follow the instructions on the website to create and submit a plan, as well as to track the project’s recycling efforts. Provide documentation & receipts of all recycled materials prior to final request for payment and for final inspection. END OF SECTION Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 01 77 00 Page 1 SECTION 01 77 00 - CONTRACT CLOSEOUT PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 CLOSEOUT PROCEDURES A. When contractor considers work has reached final completion, including all change orders and punch list, submit written certification that: 1) contract documents have been reviewed, 2) work has been inspected, 3) work is complete and in accordance with contract documents, and 4) project is ready for Project Manager’s inspection. B. In addition to submittal required by the general conditions of the contract, submit a final statement of accounting, giving total adjusted contract sum. Project will not be considered complete until all project documents are submitted. C. Return all keys and access badges to owner. 1.2 FINAL CLEANING A. Execute prior to final inspection. B. Clean all surfaces. Remove temporary labels, stains and foreign substances. C. Remove waste and surplus materials, rubbish, and temporary facilities from the project site. D. Re-do final cleaning if not cleaned to owner’s standards. 1.3 WARRANTIES Contractor shall assemble documents provided by subcontractors, suppliers, and manufacturers and file in a three ring binder with durable plastic cover. Provide a table of contents and warranty certificates covering 1) all roofing materials for 20 years, and 2) labor for two (2) years from the date of final project acceptance. Provide two (2) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy of all warranty documents for project closeout. END OF SECTION Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 02 41 00 Page 1 SECTION 02 41 00 - DEMOLITION PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 RELATED DOCUMENTS Drawings and general requirements of the Contract, including General Requirements, Special Provisions and Division 1 Specification Sections, apply to this Section. 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK Refer to constructions drawings for roof area designations: A. Temporary removal of rooftop equipment (HVAC, exhaust vents) as required to re-install onto new, higher wood-framed bases. B. Removal of corroded exhaust vents and vent assemblies. C. Removal of all existing wood sleepers under both gas and electric pipes. Temporary shoring of piping to remove portions to raise height of horizontally- laid pipe runs. D. Removal of all existing counter-flashing on perimeter walls adjacent to roof areas. E. Removal of all existing roofing system: mineral cap roofing, asphalt underlayment, down to the plywood substrate. F. Removal and disposal of all visible dry rot, after removing existing roofing system. Dry rot must be confirmed with the City’s Project Engineer or Project Manager prior to removal and disposal. G. Removal of all drip edge & gravel stop flashings and gutters where both rust is prevalent and where noted on construction drawings. H. Removal of dry rot-damaged fascia boards as required for replacement. 1.3 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS A. Conform to applicable codes for removal of materials from site. Comply with all regulations and requirements for dust control and disposal. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 02 41 00 Page 2 1.4 PROJECT CONDITIONS A. Owner’s occupants will occupy portions of building immediately within affected areas. Conduct improvements so occupants’ operations, as well as adjacent building’s occupants, will not be disrupted. All noise and odors- producing demolition and installation work shall be done during non- business hours. B. Maintain access to all walkways, corridors, and other adjacently occupied or used areas in and around the facility. C. Provide, place, and maintain temporary barriers and security devices for safety of the occupants during the duration of the project. D. Do not allow roof debris and construction materials to fall onto any walking area surfaces during the entire project. These include the interior floors, outdoor walkways, adjacent building’s childcare play areas, and parking areas. E. Ensure protection and use care with all roof-located antenna, cabling, and/or mechanical equipment. Contractor shall be responsible for any and all damage that occurs to this equipment. F. Prevent debris from entering or blocking roof drains or plumbing vents. 1.5 WEATHER LIMITATIONS A. Proceed with demolition only when existing and forecasted weather conditions permit Work to proceed without water entering into existing roofing system or building. B. Contractor shall be responsible for any and all temporary weather proofing if required. PART 2 - PRODUCTS 2.1 TEMPORARY ROOFING MATERIALS Selection of materials and design of temporary roofing is responsibility of Contractor. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 02 41 00 Page 3 PART 3 - EXECUTION 3.1 DEMOLITION OF ROOFING MATERIAL For removing roofing material and/or substrate, the contractor shall ensure that the following work practices are followed: 1. Worker sign-in and on-site safety talk. 2. Roofing material shall be removed in the most intact state as possible. 3. Wet methods shall be used to remove roofing materials that are not intact, or that will be rendered not intact during removal, unless such wet methods are not feasible or will create safety hazards. 4. Cutting machines shall be continuously misted during use, unless competent person determines that misting substantially decreases worker safety. 5. Upon being lowered, unwrapped material shall be transferred to a closed receptacle in such a manner to avoid the dispersion of dust. 6. Roof level heating and ventilation air intake sources shall be isolated or the ventilation system shall he shut down. 3.2 DISPOSAL A. Collect and place demolished materials in containers. Promptly dispose of demolished materials. Do not allow demolished materials to accumulate on-site. B. Contractor shall comply with Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 5.24 Requirements to Divert Construction and Demolition Waste from Landfill and under heading 1.4, Section 01 74 00, “Temporary Conditions”, located herein these Technical Specifications. END OF SECTION Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 06 10 00 Page 1 SECTION 06 10 00 - ROUGH CARPENTRY PART 1 - GENERAL 1.0 SCOPE OF WORK Contractor shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, and equipment to remove and replace all worn and/or damaged framing supports and pipe sleepers. Replace all the existing electrical conduits sleepers with 2” x 4” or 4” x 4” D.F. pressure- treated wood sleepers and re-install pipe and conduits, as necessary. Replace wood fascias with like kind and length, upon discovery of either dry-rot or other damage. 1.1 RELATED SECTIONS A. Section 02 41 00 - Demolition. B. Section 07 51 13 - Cold-Applied Modified Bitumen Roofing C. Section 07 60 00 - Flashing and Sheet Metal. General requirements for fabrication of sheet metal flashings and trim. D. Section 07 92 00 - Joint Sealants: Sealing of all roof joints. 1.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE A. Grading rules of the following associations apply to lumber furnished under this Section: 1. West Coast Lumber Inspection Bureau (WCLIB). 2. Western Wood Products Association (WWPA). 3. Redwood Inspection Service (RIS). B. Plywood shall conform to Product Standard PS 1-74. 1.3 PRODUCT DELIVERY, STORAGE AND HANDLING A. Immediately upon delivery to job site, place materials in area protected from weather. B. Store materials & cover with protective waterproof covering, providing for adequate air circulation & ventilation. Polyethylene cover is unacceptable. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 06 10 00 Page 2 C. Do not allow materials to be exposed to any moisture during transportation, storage, handling and installation. 1.3 COORDINATION Coordinate carpentry work with the work of other trades, ensuring timely performance of carpentry work as required to meet the construction schedule. PART 2 - PRODUCTS 2.0 MATERIALS A. Blocking, edgings, curbs attached to substrate framing and T&G decking boards: S4S, Douglas fir, Douglas Fir-larch, or Hem-Fir, No. 2 grade or better. 2.1 NAILS FOR STRUCTURE A. Nails shall be as per NRCA and UBC, and JM roof manufacturer. PART 3 - EXECUTION 3.0 DESCRIPTION A. All workmanship shall be in accordance with the best practice, shall be accurate, with exact measurements and layout and shall be performed in a neat and careful fashion. B. Where necessary to avoid splitting, nail holes shall be sub-bored. Split pieces shall be removed and replaced. C. Cleaning up - Upon completion of his work, the Contractor shall remove all staging and other apparatus used in the work. Contractor shall also clean up and remove all scrap material and debris and leave the job and surrounding areas in a clean and workmanlike manner. END OF DIVISION Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 01 50 Page 1 SECTION 07 01 50 - THERMAL AND MOSTURE PROTECTION PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 SECTION INCLUDES A. Anchor sheet/roof deck protection. 1.02 RELATED SECTIONS 1. Section 06 10 00 - Rough Carpentry: Framing and wood decking. 2. Section 07 60 00 - Flashing and Sheet Metal: Sheet metal flashing; gutters and downspouts. 1.3 REFERENCES American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) - Annual Book of ASTM Standards: A. ASTM D1970 - Standard Specification for Self-Adhering Polymer Modified Bituminous Sheet Materials Used as Steep Roofing Underlayment for Ice Dam Protection. B. Underwriters Laboratories (UL) - Roofing Systems and Materials Guide (TGFU R1306). C. Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors National Association, Inc. (SMACNA) - Architectural Sheet Metal Manual. D. Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Association (ARMA) E. National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA) F. U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) G. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) H. Miami Dade County Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 01 50 Page 2 1.4 DEFINITIONS Roofing Terminology: Refer to ASTM D1079 and the glossary of the National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA) Roofing and Waterproofing Manual for definitions of roofing terms related to this section. 1.5 LEED CERTIFICATION Roofing Terminology: Refer to ASTM D1079 and the glossary of the National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA) Roofing and Waterproofing Manual for definitions of roofing terms related to this section. A. Provide a roofing system that will achieve or aid in the qualification of points satisfying 1. Materials & Resource credit 4 - Recycled Content. 2. Materials & Resource credit 5 - Local and Regional Materials. 1.6 SUBMITTALS A. Product Data: Provide product data sheets for each type of product indicated in this section. B. Shop Drawings: Provide manufacturers standard details and approved shop drawings for the tile roof underlayment specified. C. Submit copies of GAFMC product data sheets, detail drawings and samples for each type of roofing product. D. Certificates: Installer shall provide written documentation from the manufacturer of their authorization to install the roof system, and eligibility to obtain the warranty specified in this section. E. L.E.E.D. submittal: Coordinate with Section 01115 - Green Building Requirements, for LEED certification submittal forms and certification templates. 1.7 QUALITY ASSURANCE A. Manufacturer Qualifications: GAFMC shall provide all primary roofing underlayment products, leak barrier, and ventilation, by a single manufacturer. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 01 50 Page 3 B. Installer Qualifications: Installer must be approved for installation of all roofing products to be installed under this section. 1.8 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS A. Exterior Fire Test Exposure: Provide a roofing system that will achieve an Underwriters Laboratories rating for roof slopes indicated. 1. UL Class A B. Install all roofing products in accordance with all federal, state and local building codes. C. All work shall be performed in a manner consistent with current OSHA guidelines. 1.9 PRE-INSTALLATION MEETING A. General: For all projects in excess of 250 squares of roofing, a pre- installation meeting is strongly recommended. B. Timing: The meeting shall take place at the start of the roofing installation, no more than 2 weeks into the roofing project. C. Attendees: Meeting to be called for by manufacturer’s certified contractor. Meeting’s mandatory attendees shall include the certified contractor and the manufacturer’s representative. Non-mandatory attendees shall include the owner’s representative, architect or engineer’s representative, and the general contractor’s representative. D. Topics: Certified contractor and manufacturer’s representative shall review all pertinent requirements for the project, including but not limited to, scheduling, weather considerations, project duration, and requirements for the specified warranty. 1.10 DELIVERY, STORAGE, AND HANDLING A. Deliver all roofing materials to the site in original containers, with factory seals intact. All products are to carry either a GAFMC or BMCA® label. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 01 50 Page 4 B. Remove manufacturer supplied plastic covers from materials provided with such. Use “breathable” type covers such as canvas tarpaulins to allow venting and protection from weather and moisture. Cover and protect materials at the end of each work day. Do not remove any protective tarpaulins until immediately before the material is to be installed. C. Store products in a covered, ventilated area, at temperature not more than 55 degrees F (12.6 degrees C). D. Do not expose materials to moisture in any form before, during, or after delivery to the site. Reject delivery of materials that show evidence of contact with moisture. E. Store bundles on a flat surface. Maximum stacking height shall not exceed GAFMC’s recommendations. Store all rolls on end. 1.11 WEATHER CONDITIONS A. Proceed with work only when existing and forecasted weather conditions will permit work to be performed in accordance with GAFMC’s recommendations. 1.12 WARRANTY A. Provide GAFMC® Blue Diamond Guarantee where the manufacturer agrees to repair or replace the portion of the roofing materials, which have resulted in a leak due to a manufacturing defect or defects caused by ordinary wear and tear. 1. Duration: Twenty (20) years from the date of completion. PART 2 - PRODUCTS 2.1 MANUFACTURERS A. Acceptable Manufacturer: GAFMC, 1361 Alps Rd. Wayne NJ 07470. Tel: 1-973-628-3000. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 01 50 Page 5 2.2 FIRE BARRIER SHEET A. Non-woven fiberglass mat underlayment coated on both sides suing a highly filled polymer. Provides a fire barrier and water resistant. Approved by Dade Country, Florida Building Code, and ICC approval. Each roll contains approximately 3.5 squares (350 gross sq. ft.) of material and is 42" x 100' (1.07m x 30.5 ft). VersaShield Underlayment® by GAFMC. 2.3 ANCHOR SHEET A. Premium, water repellant, breather type non-asphaltic underlayment. UV stabilized polypropylene construction. Meets or exceeds ASTM D226 and D4869. Approved by Dade Country, Florida Building Code, and ICC. Each roll contains approximately 10 squares (1003 sq. ft.) of material and is 54” x 223’. Deck-Armor™ Premium Breathable Roof Deck Protection, by GAFMC. 2.4 ROOFING CEMENT & PRIMER A. SBS Cement: ASTM D4586, Matrix•• 201 Premium SBS Flashing Cement, by GAFMC®. B. Asphalt Primer: ASTM D41, Matrix• 307 Premium Asphalt Primer, by GAFMC®. C. Asphalt Plastic Roofing Cement meeting the requirements of ASTM D 4586, Type I or II. 2.5 NAILS A. Standard round wire, zinc-coated steel or aluminum; 10 to 12 gauge, smooth, barbed or deformed shank, with heads 3/8 inch (9mm) to 7/16 inch (11mm) in diameter. Length must be sufficient to penetrate into solid wood at least 3/4 inch (19mm) or through plywood or oriented strand board by at least 1/8 inch (3.18mm). B. Plastic cap nails by others. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 01 50 Page 6 2.6 PLATES & SCREWS A. Standard duty alloy steel insulation fastener with CR-10 coating with a .215” diameter thread. Factory Mutual Standard 4470 Approved, #3 Phillips head for use on steel and wood decks, Drill•Tec•• Standard Screws by GAFMC. B. Galvalume coated steel 3" diameter plates. Miami Dade and Factory Mutual Standard 4470 Approved and suitable for use with Drill•Tec• Philips head fasteners and Drill•Tec• extra heavy duty fasteners. Made for east use with Drill•Tec• AccuTrac stand up tool, Drill•Tec• Accuseam Plates by GAFMC. 2.7 METAL FLASHING A. 24 gauge hot-dip galvanized steel sheet, complying with ASTM A 653/A 653M, G90/Z275. PART 3 - EXECUTION 3.01 EXAMINATION A. Verify that the surfaces and site conditions are ready to receive work. B. Verify that the deck is supported and secured. C. Verify that the deck is clean, dry and smooth, free of ice or snow, depressions, waves, or projections, and properly sloped to drains, valleys, eaves, scuppers or gutters. D. Verify that all roof openings or penetrations through the roof are solidly set, and that all flashings are tapered. E. If roof deck preparation is the responsibility of another installer, notify the architect or building owner of unsatisfactory preparation before proceeding. 3.02 GENERAL PREPARATION A. Verify that the surfaces and site conditions are ready to receive work. B. Verify that the deck is supported and secured. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 01 50 Page 7 C. Verify that the deck is clean, dry and smooth, free of ice or snow, depressions, waves, or projections, and properly sloped to drains, valleys, eaves, scuppers or gutters. D. Verify that all roof openings or penetrations through the roof are solidly set, and that all flashings are tapered. E. If roof deck preparation is the responsibility of another installer, notify the architect or building owner of unsatisfactory preparation before proceeding. 3.3 SUBSTRATE PREPARATION A. Wood Deck (Plank / Heavy Timber) 1. Wood boards must be at least 1” nominal thickness and have a nominal width of 4’-6”. Tongue and groove or shiplap lumber is preferred to square edge material since subsequent shrinkage or warping of square edge planks may cause ridging of the roof system above adjacent boards. 2. Preservatives or fire retardants used to treat the decking must be compatible with roofing materials. 3. The deck must be installed over joists that are spaced 24” (61 cm) o.c. or less. 4. The deck must be installed so that all four sides of each panel bear on and are secured to joist and cross blocking. “H” clips are not acceptable. 5. Panels must be installed with a 1/8” to 1/4” (3mm – 6mm) gap between panels and must match vertically at joints to within 1/8” (3mm). 6. Decking should be kept dry and roofed promptly after installation. END OF SECTION Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 1 SECTION 07 51 12 - MODIFIED BITUMINOUS MEMBRANE ROOFING PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 SECTION INCLUDES A. The attached are components of this section: 1. Preparation of substrate to receive roofing materials. 2. Roof insulation application to prepared substrate. 3. Roof membrane application. 4. Roof flashing application. 5. Incorporation of sheet metal flashing components and roofing accessories into the roof system. 1.2 PRODUCTS INSTALLED BUT NOT FURNISHED UNDER THIS SECTION A. Sheet metal flashing and trim. B. Sheet metal roofing specialties. 1.3 RELATED SECTIONS A. Section 06 10 00 - Rough Carpentry. B. Section 07 60 00 - Flashing and Sheet Metal. 1.4 REFERENCE STANDARDS A. References in these specifications to standards, test methods and codes, are implied to mean the latest edition of each such standard adopted. The following is an abbreviated list of associations, institutions, and societies which may be used as references throughout this specification section. ASTM - American Society for Testing and Materials; Philadelphia, PA. FM - Factory Mutual Engineering and Research; Norwood, MA. NRCA - National Roofing Contractors Association; Rosemont, IL. OSHA - Occupational Safety and Health Administration; Washington, DC. SMACNA - Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors National Association; Chantilly, VA. UL - Underwriters Laboratories; Northbrook, IL. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 2 1.5 DESCRIPTION OF WORK A. The basic work description required in this specification includes the following: 1. Project Type: Tear-off. 2. Deck: Plywood. Existing slope is 1/4 inch per foot. 3. Insulation - bottom layer: Polyisocyanurate, tapered, having a thickness up to 2 inches, mechanically attached simultaneously with the top layer of insulation. 4. Insulation - top layer: High density fiberboard, having a thickness of 1/2 inch, mechanically attached. 5. Roof System: SBS Modified Bituminous Membrane system as described in Part 2 of these Specifications. 6. Flashing System: Metal-Clad Modified Bitumen Flashing Sheet as described in Part 2 of these Specifications. 1.6 SUBMITTALS A. All submittals which do not conform to the following requirements will be rejected. B. Submittal with Bid: Submit a price per square foot to provide and apply additional layers of Paradiene 20 in VOC compliant adhesive as necessary to treat low-lying areas where ponding water my accumulate. The areas shall be identified by the Owner’s representative. C. Submittal of Equals: Submit primary roof systems to be considered as equals to the specified roof system in accordance with Section 01630. Primary roof systems which have been reviewed and accepted as equals to the specified roof system will be listed in an addendum prior to bid date; only then will equals be accepted at bidding. Submittals shall include the following: 1. Two 3 inch x 5 inch samples of the primary roofing and flashing sheets. 2. Latest edition of the roofing system manufacturer's specifications and installation instructions. 3. Evidence that the manufacturer of the proposed roofing system utilizes a quality management system that is ISO 9001 certified. Documentation of ISO 9001 certification of foreign subsidiaries without domestic certification will not be accepted. 4. Evidence and description of manufacturer's quality control/quality Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 3 assurance program for the primary roofing products supplied. The quality assurance program description shall include all methods of testing for physical and mechanical property values. Provide confirmation of manufacturer's certificate of analysis for reporting the tested values of the actual material being supplied for the project prior to issuance of the specified guarantee. 5. Descriptive list of the materials proposed for use. 6. Evidence of Underwriters' Laboratories Class A acceptance of the proposed roofing system (including mopping asphalt or cold adhesive) without additional requirements for gravel or coatings. No other testing agency approvals will be accepted. 7. Letter from the proposed primary roofing manufacturer confirming that a phased roof application, with only the modified bitumen base ply in place for a period of up to 10 weeks, is acceptable and approved for this project. 8. List of 3 of the proposed primary roofing manufacturer's projects, located in the United States, of equal size and degree of difficulty which have been performing successfully for a period of at least 10 years. 9. Letter from the proposed primary roofing manufacturer confirming that the filler content in the elastomeric blend of the proposed roof membrane and flashing components does not exceed 35% in weight. 10. Complete list of material physical and mechanical properties for each sheet including: weights and thicknesses; low temperature flexibility; peak load; ultimate elongation; dimensional stability; compound stability; high temperature stability; granule embedment and resistance to thermal shock for foil faced products. 11. Evidence that the roof system shall pass 500 cycles of ASTM D 5849 Resistance to Cyclic Joint Displacement (fatigue) at 14qF (-10qC). Passing results shall show no signs of membrane cracking or interply delamination after 500 cycles. The roof system shall pass 200 cycles of ASTM D 5849 after heat conditioning performed in accordance with ASTM D 5147. 12. Sample copy of the proposed guarantee. D. Submittals Prior to Contract Award: 1. Letter from the proposed primary roofing manufacturer confirming that the bidder is an acceptable Contractor authorized to install the proposed system. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 4 2. Letter from the primary roofing manufacturer stating that the proposed application will comply with the manufacturer's requirements in order to qualify the project for the specified guarantee. E. Submittals Prior to Project Close-out: 1. Certificate Of Analysis from the testing laboratory of the primary roofing materials manufacturer, confirming the physical and mechanical properties of the roofing membrane components. Testing shall be in accordance with the parameters published in ASTM D 5147 and ASTM D 7051 and indicate Quality Assurance/Quality Control data as required to meet the specified properties. A separate Certificate Of Analysis for each production run of material shall indicate the following information: a. Material type b. Lot number c. Production date d. Dimensions and Mass (indicate the lowest values recorded during the production run): - Roll length - Roll width - Selvage width - Total thickness - Thickness at selvage (coating thickness) - Weight e. Physical and Mechanical Properties: - Low temperature flexibility - Peak load - Ultimate Elongation - Dimensional stability - Compound Stability - Granule embedment - Resistance to thermal shock (foil faced products) 2. Manufacturer's printed recommendations for proper maintenance of the specified roof system including inspection frequencies, penetration addition policies, temporary repairs, and leak call procedures. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 5 1.7 QUALITY ASSURANCE A. Acceptable Products: Primary roofing products, including each type of sheet, all manufactured in the United States, shall be supplied by a single manufacturer which has been successfully producing the specified types of primary products for not less than 10 years. The primary roofing products shall have maintained a consistent composition for a minimum of five years. B. Product Quality Assurance Program: Primary roofing materials shall be manufactured under a quality management system that is monitored regularly by a third party auditor under the ISO 9001 audit process. A certificate of analysis for reporting/confirming the tested values of the actual material being supplied for the project will be required prior to project close-out. C. Agency Approvals: The proposed roof system shall conform to the following requirements. No other testing agency approvals will be accepted. 1. Underwriters Laboratories Class A acceptance of the proposed roofing system (including mopping asphalt or cold adhesive) without additional requirements for gravel or coatings. 2. The roof membrane system shall be eligible to achieve 1 credit point according to the SS Credit 7.2: Heat Island Effect: Roof as recorded in LEED – NC Version 2.2. 3. The roof membrane system shall meet the requirements for initial solar reflectance of the U.S. EPA Energy Star program. D. Acceptable Contractor: Contractor shall have a minimum of 2 years experience in successfully installing the same or similar roofing materials and be certified in writing by the roofing materials manufacturer to install the primary roofing products. E. Scope of Work: The work to be performed under this specification shall include but is not limited to the following: Attend necessary job meetings and furnish competent and full time supervision, experienced roof mechanics, all materials, tools, and equipment necessary to complete, in an acceptable manner, the roof installation in accordance with this specification. Comply with the latest written application instructions of the manufacturer of the primary roofing products. In addition, application practice shall comply with requirements and recommendations contained in the latest edition of the Handbook of Accepted Roofing Knowledge (HARK) as published by the National Roofing Contractor's Association, amended to include the acceptance of a phased roof system installation. F. Local Regulations: Conform to regulations of public agencies, including any specific requirements of the city and/or state of jurisdiction. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 6 G. Manufacturer Requirements: Ensure that the primary roofing materials manufacturer provides direct trained company personnel to attend necessary job meetings, perform periodic inspections as necessary, and conducts a final inspection upon successful completion of the project. 1.8 PRODUCT DELIVERY STORAGE AND HANDLING A. Delivery: Deliver materials in the manufacturer's original sealed and labeled containers and in quantities required to allow continuity of application. B. Storage: Store materials out of direct exposure to the elements on pallets placed over clean, flat and dry surfaces. Storage of pallets over dirt, grass- covered ground or newly placed concrete may result in upward moisture transpiration and contamination of product. Store rolls of roofing on end. For roof-top storage, avoid overloading of deck and building structure. Factory packaging is not intended for job site protection. Slit factory packaging immediately upon arrival at the job site to prevent build-up of condensation and cover materials using a breathable cover such as a canvas. Polyethylene or other non-breathable plastic coverings shall not be used. Store flammable or temperature sensitive materials away from open flame, ignition sources or excessive heat. C. Handling: Handle all materials in such a manner as to preclude damage and contamination with moisture or foreign matter. Handle rolled goods to prevent damage to edges or ends. D. Damaged Material: Any materials that are found to be damaged or stored in any manner other than stated above will be automatically rejected, removed and replaced at the Contractor's expense. 1.9 PROJECT/SITE CONDITIONS A. Requirements Prior to Job Start 1. Notification: Give a minimum of 5 days notice to the Owner and manufacturer prior to commencing any work and notify both parties on a daily basis of any change in work schedule. 2. Permits: Obtain all permits required by local agencies and pay all fees which may be required for the performance of the work. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 7 3. Safety: Familiarize every member of the application crew with all fire and safety regulations recommended by OSHA, NRCA and other industry or local governmental groups. B. Environmental Requirements 1. Precipitation: Do not apply roofing materials during precipitation or in the event there is a probability of precipitation during application. Take adequate precautions to ensure that materials, applied roofing, and building interiors are protected from possible moisture damage or contamination. 2. Temperature Restrictions - asphalt: At ambient temperatures of 40qF (4qC) and below, special precautions must be taken to ensure that the specified Type IV asphalt maintains a minimum acceptable 400qF (204qC) at the point of sheet application. The asphalt must not be overheated to compensate for cold conditions. The use of insulated handling equipment is strongly recommended. Hot luggers, mop carts, and kettle-to-roof supply lines should be insulated. Hand mops should be constructed with a smaller yarn head to facilitate short moppings. Luggers and mop carts should never be more than half filled at all times. 3. Temperature Restrictions - cold adhesive: At low temperatures, the specified cold adhesive becomes more viscous, making even distribution more difficult. The optimal temperature of the adhesive at point of application is 70° - 100°F (21° - 38°C). To facilitate application when ambient temperatures are below 50qF (10qC), store the adhesive and roll goods in a warm place immediately prior to use. Bulk warmers, inline heaters, or other pre-heating equipment should be used to maintain the proper viscosity of the adhesive when using mechanical application equipment. Consider "flying in” the pre-cut roofing sheets in by placing them into the adhesive rather than rolling them into position. Roll or broom the sheets to ensure contact with the underlying adhesive. Suspend application in situations where the adhesive cannot be kept at temperatures allowing for even distribution. 4. Temperature Restrictions - self-adhered: The minimum required substrate temperature at point of application is 40qF (4qC). Maintain a minimum roof membrane material temperature above 60° F (16° C). In low temperature conditions, materials should be kept warm prior to application. In temperatures below 60° F (16° C) the specified tacky primer, required for vertical applications, should be considered to facilitate proper bonding of self-adhered membrane for horizontal applications. The minimum ambient temperature range at the time of tacky primer application is 45°F to 105°F (7°C - 40°C). Suspend Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 8 application in situations where the self-adhered base ply cannot be kept at temperatures allowing for proper adhesion. C. Protection Requirements 1. Membrane Protection: Provide protection against staining and mechanical damage for newly applied roofing and adjacent surfaces throughout this project. 2. Torch Safety: Crew members handling torches shall be trained by an Authorized Certified Roofing Torch Applicator (CERTA) Trainer, be certified according to CERTA torch safety guidelines as published by the National Roofing Contractor's Association (NRCA), and follow torch safety practices as required by the contractor's insurance carrier. Designate one person on each crew to perform a daily fire watch. The designated crew member shall watch for fires or smoldering materials on all areas during roof construction activity, and for the minimum period required by CERTA guidelines after roofing material application has been suspended for the day. 3. Limited Access: Prevent access by the public to materials, tools and equipment during the course of the project. 4. Debris Removal: Remove all debris daily from the project site and take to a legal dumping area authorized to receive such materials. 5. Site Condition: Complete, to the owner's satisfaction, all job site clean- up including building interior, exterior and landscaping where affected by the construction. 1.10 GUARANTEE/WARRANTY A. Roof Membrane Guarantee: Upon successful completion of the project, and after all post installation procedures have been completed, furnish the Owner with the Manufacturer's 20 year labor and materials membrane guarantee. The guarantee shall be a term type, without deductibles or limitations on coverage amount. PART 2 PRODUCTS 2.1 RIGID ROOF INSULATION A. Roof insulation shall be UL and FM approved for a minimum R-19 rating. Insulation shall be approved in writing by the insulation manufacturer for intended use and for use with the specified roof assembly. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 9 1. Polyisocyanurate Board Insulation: A closed cell, rigid polyisocyanurate foam core material, integrally laminated between glass fiber facers, in full compliance with ASTM C 1289, Type II, Class 1, Grade 2. Panels shall be tapered and have a nominal thickness up to 2 inches with a minimum R value of 12. Acceptable types are as follows: a. Paratherm by Siplast; Irving, TX b. ACFoam II by Atlas Roofing Corporation; Atlanta, GA c. ENRGY 3 by Johns Manville, Inc.; Denver, CO d. H-Shield by Hunter Panels, LLC, Portland, ME e. Multi-Max FA by RMAX, Inc.; Dallas, TX 2. Fiberboard: A high density panel composed of interlocking wood fibers and waterproofing binders, having a top surface that is fire-rated. Panels shall have a nominal thickness of 1/4 inch. Acceptable types are as follows: a. Dens Deck Prime 2.2 DESCRIPTION OF ROOFING SYSTEM A. Roofing Membrane Assembly: A roof membrane assembly consisting of two plies of a prefabricated, reinforced, homogeneous Styrene-Butadiene-Styrene (SBS) block copolymer modified asphalt membrane, applied over a prepared substrate. Reinforcement mats shall be impregnated/saturated and coated each side with SBS modified bitumen blend. The cross sectional area of the sheet material shall contain no oxidized or non-SBS modified bitumen. The roof system shall pass 500 cycles of ASTM D 5849 Resistance to Cyclic Joint Displacement (fatigue) at 14qF (-10qC). Passing results shall show no signs of membrane cracking or interply delamination after 500 cycles. The roof system shall pass 200 cycles of ASTM D 5849 after heat conditioning performed in accordance with ASTM D 5147. The assembly shall possess waterproofing capability, such that a phased roof application, with only the modified bitumen base ply in place, can be achieved for prolonged periods of time without detriment to the watertight integrity of the entire roof system. 1. The Basis Of Design System is Siplast Paradiene 20/30 CR FR roof system, consisting of the following: a. Base Ply – Paradiene 20. b. Reinforcing Ply – Paradiene 20. c. Finish Ply – Paradiene 30 CRFR. d. Flashing Sheet – Veral Aluminum. e. Adhesive – PA-311M. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 10 2. Products manufactured by Johns Manville and Derbigum are approved for bidding as follows: a. Base Ply – Johns Manville DynaPly T1, Derbigum Derbicolor XPS-FR. b. Reinforcing Ply – Johns Manville DynaPly T1, Derbigum Derbicolor XPS-FR. c. Finish Ply – Johns Manville DynaKap CR FR, Derbigum Derbibrite. d. Flashing Sheet – Johns Manville Dyna Clad FR, Derbigum Derbibrite. e. Adhesive – Johns Manville MBR Cold Application Adhesive, Derbigum Permastic. 3. Modified Bitumen Base, Stripping, and Flashing Reinforcing Ply (Basis Of Design is Siplast Paradiene 20): a. Thickness (avg): 91 mils (2.3 mm) (ASTM D 5147) b. Thickness (min): 87 mils (2.2 mm) (ASTM D 5147) c. Weight (min per 100 ft² of coverage): 62 lb (3.0 kg/m²) d. Maximum filler content in elastomeric blend - 35% by weight e. Low temperature flexibility @ -15ºF (-26ºC): PASS (ASTM D 5147) f. Peak Load (avg) @ 73ºF (23ºC): 30 lbf/inch (5.3 kN/m) (ASTM D 5147) g. Peak Load (avg) @ 0ºF (-18ºC): 70 lbf/inch (12.3 kN/m) (ASTM D 5147) h. Ultimate Elongation (avg.) @ 73ºF (23ºC): 50% (ASTM D 5147) i. Dimensional Stability (max): 0.1% (ASTM D 5147) j. Compound Stability (min): 250ºF (121ºC) (ASTM D 5147) k. Approvals: UL Class listed, FM Approved (products shall bear seals of approval) l. Reinforcement: fiberglass mat or other meeting the performance and dimensional stability criteria 4. Modified Bitumen Finish Ply (Basis Of Design is Siplast Paradiene 30 CR FR): Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 11 a. Thickness (avg): 110 mils (2.8 mm) (ASTM D 5147) b. Thickness at selvage (coating thickness) (avg): 98 mils (2.5 mm) (ASTM D 5147) c. Thickness at selvage (coating thickness) (min): 94 mils (2.4 mm) (ASTM D 5147) d. Weight (min per 100 ft² of coverage): 75 lb (3.6 kg/m²) e. Maximum filler content in elastomeric blend: 35% by weight f. Low temperature flexibility @ -15º F (-26º C): PASS (ASTM D 5147) g. Peak Load (avg) @ 73ºF (23ºC): 30 lbf/inch (5.3 kN/m) (ASTM D 5147) h. Peak Load (avg) @ 0ºF (-18ºC): 75 lbf/inch (13.2 kN/m) (ASTM D 5147) i. Ultimate Elongation (avg.) @ 73ºF (23ºC): 55% (ASTM D 5147) j. Dimensional Stability (max): 0.1% (ASTM D 5147) k. Compound Stability (min): 250ºF (121º C) (ASTM D 5147) l. Solar Reflectance: ≥ 0.70% (ASTM D 1549) m. Thermal Emittance: ≥ 0.80% (ASTM D 1371) n. Approvals: UL Class listed (product shall bear seals of approval) o. Reinforcement: fiberglass mat or other meeting the performance and dimensional stability criteria p. Surfacing: white synthetic chips B. Flashing Membrane Assembly (Basis Of Design is Siplast Veral flashing system, aluminum finish): A flashing membrane assembly consisting of a prefabricated, reinforced, Styrene-Butadiene-Styrene (SBS) block copolymer modified asphalt membrane with a continuous, channel-embossed metal-foil surfacing. The finish ply shall conform to ASTM D 6298 and the following physical and mechanical property requirements. 1. Cant Backing Sheet and Flashing Reinforcing Ply (Basis Of Design is Siplast Paradiene 20 SA): a. Thickness (avg): 102 mils (2.6 mm) (ASTM D 5147) b. Thickness (min): 98 mils (2.5 mm) (ASTM D 5147) c. Weight (min per 100 ft² of coverage): 72 lb (3.5 kg/m²) d. Maximum filler content in elastomeric blend: 35% by weight Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 12 e. Low temperature flexibility @ -15º F (-26º C) - PASS (ASTM D 5147) f. Peak Load (avg) @ 73ºF (23ºC): 30 lbf/inch (5.3 kN/m) (ASTM D 5147) g. Peak Load (avg) @ 0ºF (-18ºC): 75 lbf/inch (13.2 kN/m) (ASTM D 5147) h. Ultimate Elongation (avg.) @ 73ºF (23ºC): 50% (ASTM D 5147) i. Dimensional Stability (max): 0.1% (ASTM D 5147) j. Compound Stability (min - sheet): 250ºF (121ºC) (ASTM D 5147) k. Compound Stability (min – adhesive coating): 212ºF (100ºC) (ASTM D 5147) l. Approvals: UL Class listed, FM Approved (products shall bear seals of approval) m. Reinforcement: fiberglass mat or other meeting the performance and dimensional stability criteria n. Back Surfacing: polyolefin film 2. Metal-Clad Modified Bitumen Flashing Sheet (Basis Of Design is Siplast Veral Aluminum): a. Thickness (avg): 142 mils (3.6 mm) (ASTM D 5147) b. Thickness (min): 138 mils (3.5 mm) (ASTM D 5147) c. Weight (min per 100 ft² of coverage): 92 lb (4.5 kg/m²) d. Coating Thickness – back surface (min): 40 mils (1 mm) (ASTM D 5147) e. Low temperature flexibility @ 0º F (-18º C): PASS (ASTM D 5147) f. Peak Load (avg) @ 73ºF (23ºC): 85 lbf/inch (15 kN/m) (ASTM D 5147) g. Peak Load (avg) @ 0ºF (-18ºC): 180 lbf/inch (31.7 kN/m) (ASTM D 5147) h. Ultimate Elongation (avg) @ 73ºF (23ºC): 45% (ASTM D 5147) i. Tear-Strength (avg): 120 lbf (0.54 kN) (ASTM D 5147) j. Dimensional Stability (max): 0.2% (ASTM D 5147)Stability Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 13 (min - sheet): 250ºF (121ºC) (ASTM D 5147) k. Compound Stability (min): 225ºF (107ºC) (ASTM D 5147)) l. Cyclic Thermal Shock Stability (maximum): 0.2% (ASTM D 7051) m. Approvals: UL Approved, FM Approved (products shall bear seals of approval) n. Reinforcement: fiberglass scrim mat or other meeting the performance and dimensional stability criteria o. Surfacing: aluminum metal foil q. Surfacing: white synthetic chips C. Catalyzed Acrylic Resin Flashing System (Basis Of Design is Siplast Parapro 123 Flashing System): A specialty flashing system consisting of a liquid- applied, fully reinforced, multi-component acrylic membrane installed over a prepared or primed substrate. The flashing system consists of a catalyzed acrylic resin primer, basecoat and topcoat, combined with a non- woven polyester fleece. The resin and catalyst are pre-mixed immediately prior to installation. The use of the specialty flashing system shall be specifically approved in advance by the membrane manufacturer for each application. * NOTE: Unistrut supports are not a suitable substrate for the Parapro 123 Flashing System. Any unistrut type penetration that is required to be incorporated into the roofing system should be replaced by a solid square or angle iron penetration with a fully welded plate. 2.3 ROOFING ACCESSORIES A. Roofing Adhesives 1. Membrane Cold Adhesive (Basis Of Design is Siplast PA-311 M Adhesive): An asphalt, solvent blend conforming to ASTM D 4479, Type II requirements. B. Bituminous Cutback Materials 1. Primer: An asphalt, solvent blend conforming to ASTM D 41 requirements. 2. Primer for Self-Adhesive Sheets: A quick drying, low-VOC, water-based, high-tack primer specifically designed to promote adhesion of roofing and waterproofing sheets to approved substrates. Primer shall meet South Coast Air Quality District and Ozone Transport Commission requirements. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 14 3. Mastics: An asphalt cutback mastic, reinforced with non-asbestos fibers, used as a base for setting metal flanges conforming to ASTM D 4586 Type II requirements. C. Sealant: A moisture-curing, non-slump elastomeric sealant designed for roofing applications. The sealant shall be approved by the roof membrane manufacturer for use in conjunction with the roof membrane materials. D. Synthetic Chips: Synthetic chips to match the factory applied reflective surfacing of the finish ply. E. Perlite Cant Strips: A cant strip composed of expanded volcanic minerals combined with waterproofing binders. The top surface shall be pre-treated with an asphalt based coating. The face of the cant shall have a nominal 4 inch dimension. F. Fasteners 1. Insulation Fasteners: Insulation fasteners and plates shall be FM Approved, and/or approved by the manufacturer of the primary roofing products. The insulation fasteners shall provide attachment required to meet the specified uplift performance and to restrain the insulation panels against the potential for ridging. The fastening pattern for each insulation panel to be used shall be as recommended by the insulation manufacturer and approved by the manufacturer of the primary roofing products. Acceptable insulation fastener manufacturers for specific deck types are listed below. a. Wood/Plywood Decks: Insulation mechanical fasteners for wood/plywood decks shall be factory coated for corrosion resistance. The fastener shall conform meet or exceed Factory Mutual Standard 4470 and when subjected to 30 Kesternich cycles, show less than 15% red rust. Acceptable insulation fastener types for wood/plywood decks are listed below. 1. A fluorocarbon coated screw type roofing fastener having a minimum 0.245 inch thread diameter. Plates used in conjunction with the fastener shall be a metal type having a minimum 3 inch diameter, as supplied by the fastener manufacturer. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 15 2. Flashing Reinforcing Sheet Fasteners for Wood/Plywood Substrates to Receive Flashing Coverage: Fasteners shall be approved by the manufacturer of the primary roofing products. Acceptable fasteners for specific substrate types are listed below. a. Wood/Plywood Substrates: 1. A 12 gauge, spiral or annular threaded shank, zinc coated steel roofing fastener having a minimum 1 inch head. G. Walktread: A prefabricated, puncture resistant polyester core reinforced, polymer modified bitumen sheet material topped with a ceramic-coated granule wearing surface. 1. Thickness: 0.217 in (5.5 mm) 2. Weight: 1.8 lb/ft² (8.8 kg/m²) 3. Width: 30 in (76.2 cm) PART 3 EXECUTION 3.1 PREPARATION A. General: Sweep or vacuum all surfaces, removing all loose aggregate and foreign substances prior to commencement of roofing. B. Remove All Existing: 1. Roof membrane 2. Insulation 3. Base flashings 4. Edge metal 5. Flanged metal flashings 6. Non functional penetrations/curbs 7. Drain assemblies 8. Metal trim, counterflashing 9. As further noted or described on Drawings 3.2 SUBSTRATE PREPARATION A. Insulation: Install insulation panels with end joints offset; edges of the panels shall be in moderate contact without forcing applied in strict accordance with the insulation manufacturer's requirements and the following instructions. Where insulation is installed in two or more layers, stagger joints between Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 16 layers. 1. Insulation - double layer: Mechanically attach both layers simultaneously to the substrate, using the specified fasteners, at a rate of 1 fastener per 2 square feet of panel area (16 per 4' x 8' panel). Increase the fastening frequency by 50% at the perimeter of the roof and 100% in the corners. Stagger the panel joints between insulation layers. 3.3 ROOF MEMBRANE INSTALLATION A. Membrane Application: Apply roofing in accordance with roofing system manufacturer's instructions and the following requirements. Application of roofing membrane components shall immediately follow application of base sheet and/or insulation as a continuous operation. B. Aesthetic Considerations: An aesthetically pleasing overall appearance of the finished roof application is a standard requirement for this project. Make necessary preparations, utilize recommended application techniques, apply the specified materials including synthetic chips and exercise care in ensuring that the finished application is acceptable to the Owner. C. Priming with tacky primer: Apply the specified tacky primer by roller or spray in an even film. Refer to the manufacturer’s literature for the approved rate of application over various substrate types. Allow the primer to dry until it leaves a slightly sticky surface without transfer when touched. D. Priming with asphaltic primer: Prime metal and concrete and masonry surfaces with a uniform coating of the specified asphalt primer. E. Membrane Adhesive Application: Membrane adhesive can be applied by roller, squeegee or spray unit. Apply cold adhesive in a smooth, even, continuous layer without breaks or voids. Utilize an application rate of 2 to 2 1/2 gal/sq (0.6 to 1.0 l/m²) over irregular or porous substrates. Utilize an application rate of 1 1/2 to 2 gal/sq (0.6 to 0.8 kg/m²) for interply applications. Double the adhesive application rate at the end laps of granule surfaced sheets. In the areas surrounding details that are to receive the catalyzed acrylic resin primer and flashing system, follow the manufacturer’s alternative interply flashing detail. F. Bitumen Consistency: Cutting or alterations of bitumen, primer, and sealants will not be permitted. G. Roofing Application: Apply all layers of roofing free of wrinkles, creases or fishmouths. Exert sufficient pressure on the roll during application to ensure prevention of air pockets. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 17 1. Apply all layers of roofing perpendicular to the slope of the deck. 2. Fully bond the base ply to the prepared substrate, utilizing minimum 3 inch side and end laps. Apply each sheet directly behind the *[asphalt/torch/cold adhesive] applicator. Cut a dog ear angle at the end laps on overlapping selvage edges. Using a clean trowel, apply top pressure to top seal T-laps immediately following sheet application. Stagger end laps a minimum of 3 feet. 3. Fully bond the finish ply to the base ply, utilizing minimum 3 inch side and end laps. Apply each sheet directly behind the *[asphalt/torch/cold adhesive] applicator. Stagger end laps of the finish ply a minimum 3 feet. Cut a dog ear angle at the end laps on overlapping selvage edges. Using a clean trowel, apply top pressure to top seal T-laps immediately following sheet application. Stagger side laps of the finish ply a minimum 12 inches from side laps in the underlying base ply. Stagger end laps of the finish ply a minimum 3 feet from end laps in the underlying base ply. a. Maximum sheet lengths and special fastening of the specified roof membrane system may be required at various slope increments where the roof deck slope exceeds 1/2 inch per foot. The manufacturer shall provide acceptable sheet lengths and the required fastening schedule for all roofing sheet applications to applicable roof slopes. H. Synthetic Chip Embedment: Broadcast synthetic chips over bitumen/adhesive overruns on the finish ply surface. I. Flashing Application: Cut the cant backing sheet into 12 inch widths and peel the release film from the back of the sheet. Set the sheet into place over the primed substrate extending 6 inches onto the field of the roof area and 6 inches up the vertical surface utilizing minimum 3 inch laps. Set the non-combustible cant into place dry prior to installation of the roof membrane base ply. Flash walls and curbs using the reinforcing sheet and the metal foil flashing membrane. After the base ply has been applied to the top of the cant, prime the base ply surfaces to receive the reinforcing sheet. Fully adhere the reinforcing sheet, utilizing minimum 3 inch side laps onto the primed base ply surface and up the primed wall or curb to the desired flashing height. After the final roofing ply has been applied to the top of the cant, prepare the surface area that is to receive flashing coverage by torch heating granular surfaces or by application of asphalt primer; allowing primer to dry thoroughly. Torch apply the metal foil-faced flashing into place using three foot widths (cut off the end of roll) always lapping the factory selvage edge. Stagger the laps of the metal foil flashing layer from lap seams in the reinforcing layer. Extend the flashing sheet a minimum of 4 inches beyond the toe of the cant onto the prepared surface of the finished roof and up the wall or curb to the desired flashing height. Exert pressure on the flashing Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 18 sheet during application to ensure complete contact with the vertical/horizontal surfaces, preventing air pockets; this can be accomplished by using a damp sponge or shop rag. Check and seal all loose laps and edges. Nail the top edge of the flashing on 9 inch centers. (See manufacturer's schematic for visual interpretation). J. Catalyzed Acrylic Resin Flashing System: Install the liquid-applied primer and flashing system in accordance with the membrane system manufacturer’s printed installer’s guidelines and other applicable written recommendations as provided by the manufacturer. K. Water Cut-Off: At end of day's work, or when precipitation is imminent, construct a water cut-off at all open edges. Cut-offs can be built using asphalt or plastic cement and roofing felts, constructed to withstand protracted periods of service. Cut-offs must be completely removed prior to the resumption of roofing. L. Loose Chip Removal: Broom the surface of the finish ply in both machine and cross-machine direction using a stiff nylon bristle broom. Remove excess chips from the roof area. 3.4 ROOF SYSTEM INTERFACE WITH RELATED COMPONENTS A. Walktread: Cut the walktread into maximum 5 foot lengths and allow to relax until flat. Adhere the sheet using the specified plastic cement. Apply the specified cement in a 3/8 inch thickness to the back of the product in 5 inch by 5 inch spots in accordance with the pattern as supplied by the walktread manufacturer. Walk-in each sheet after application to ensure proper adhesion. Use a minimum spacing of 2 inches between sheets to allow for proper drainage. B. Sealant: Apply a smooth continuous bead of the specified sealant at the exposed finish ply edge transition to metal flashings incorporated into the roof system. 3.5 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL AND INSPECTIONS A. Site Condition: Leave all areas around job site free of debris, roofing materials, equipment and related items after completion of job. B. Notification Of Completion: Notify the manufacturer by means of manufacturer's printed Notification of Completion form of job completion in order to schedule a final inspection date. C. Final Inspection Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 51 12 Page 19 1. Post-Installation Meeting: Hold a meeting at the completion of the project, attended by all parties that were present at the pre-job conference. A punch list of items required for completion shall be compiled by the Contractor and the manufacturer's representative Complete, sign, and mail the punch list form to the manufacturer's headquarters. D. Issuance Of The Guarantee: Complete all post installation procedures and meet the manufacturer's final endorsement for issuance of the specified guarantee. END OF SECTION Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 60 00 Page 1 SECTION 07 60 00 - FLASHING AND SHEET METAL PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 RELATED DOCUMENTS A. Drawings and general requirements of the Contract, including General Conditions, Special Provisions and Division 1 Specification Sections, apply to this Section. 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK A. Install both new continuous drip edge and gravel stop flashing. B. Install new galvanized sheet metal gutters where noted and attach to existing downspouts on-site. C. Replace corroded exhaust vents and vent assemblies with new galvanized sheet metal. D. Miscellaneous sheet metal accessories. Install new galv. wire mesh screen covers securely over pipe jacks. 1.3 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS A. General: Install sheet metal flashing and trim to withstand wind loads, structural movement, thermally induced movement, and exposure to weather without failing, rattling, leaking, and fastener disengagement. B. Fabricate and install flashings and copings capable of resisting forces for the appropriate wind zone, per Factory Mutual's Loss Prevention Data Sheet 1-49. C. Temperature Range: 120 deg F ambient; 180 deg F, material surface. D. Thermal Movements: Provide sheet metal flashing and trim that allow for thermal movements resulting from the maximum range of ambient and surface temperatures provided above by preventing buckling, opening of joints, hole elongation, overstressing of components, failure of sealant joints, failure of connections, and other detrimental effects. Provide clips that resist rotation and avoid shear stress as a result of sheet metal and trim thermal movements. Base engineering calculations on surface temperatures of materials due to both solar heat gain and nighttime sky heat loss. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 60 00 Page 2 E. Water Infiltration: Provide sheet metal flashing and trim that do not allow water infiltration to the building interior. 1.4 SUBMITTALS A. Product Data: For each type of product indicated. Include construction details, material descriptions, dimensions of individual components and profiles, and finishes for each manufactured product and accessory. B. Shop Drawings: Describe material profiles, jointing pattern, jointing details, fastening methods, interface with other work and installation details. 1. Material. 2. Thickness of material. 3. Weight. 4. Finish. 5. Location of each item and details of expansion joint covers, including the direction of expansion and contraction. 1.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE A. Comply with "Architectural Sheet Metal Manual" by SMACNA, for each general category of work required. B. Applicator: Applicator who has complete sheet metal flashing and trim work similar in material, design, and extent to that indicated for this project and with a record of successful in-service performance and with 5 years minimum experience. C. Pre-installation Conference: Conduct conference at Project site to comply with requirements in Division 1 Section "Project Management and Coordination." 1. Meet with Owner, Architect, Owner's insurer if applicable, Installer, and installers whose work interfaces with or affects sheet metal flashing and trim including installers of roofing materials, roof accessories, unit skylights, and roof-mounted equipment. 2. Review methods and procedures related to sheet metal flashing and trim. 3. Examine substrate conditions for compliance with requirements, including flatness and attachment to structural members. 4. Document proceedings, including corrective measures and actions required, and furnish copy of record to each participant. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 60 00 Page 3 1.6 DELIVERY, STORAGE, AND HANDLING A. Deliver sheet metal flashing materials and fabrications undamaged. Protect sheet metal flashing and trim materials and fabrications during transportation and handling. B. Unload, store, and install sheet metal flashing materials and fabrications in a manner to prevent bending, warping, twisting, and surface damage. C. Stack materials on platforms or pallets, covered with a suitable weather-tight and ventilated covering. Do not store sheet metal flashing and trim materials in contact with other materials that might cause staining, denting, or other surface damage PART 2 - PRODUCTS 2.1 MATERIALS, GENERAL A. Recycled Content: Provide products made from steel sheet with average recycled content such that postconsumer recycled content plus one-half of pre-consumer recycled content is not less than the following: 1. Sheet Metal Flashings: Minimum 30 percent post-consumer recycled content. B. Local/Regional Materials: Give preference to manufacturer’s whose facilities are within a 500 mile radius of the project site. Also give preference to materials that are harvested, extracted, mined, quarried, etc. within a 500 mile radius of the project site. 2.2 MATERIALS A. Zinc-Coated (Galvanized) Steel Sheet: ASTM A653/A653M, G90 (Z275) coating designation; structural quality, mill-phosphatized where indicated for field painting. 1. Do not apply an acrylic passivator coating to galvanized sheet metal schedule to be painted, or remove this coating mechanically before delivery to the project site. B. Sealant: ASTM C920, polyurethane-based sealant; of type, grade, class, and use classifications required to seal joints in sheet metal flashing and trim and remain watertight. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 60 00 Page 4 1. SikaFlex-15LM or equal C. Flux: FS O-F-506. D. Epoxy Seam Sealer: Two-part, noncorrosive, aluminum seam-cementing compound, recommended by aluminum manufacturer for exterior nonmoving joints, including riveted joints. E. Butyl Sealant: ASTM C1311, single-component, solvent-release butyl rubber sealant; polyisobutylene plasticized; heavy bodied for hooked-type expansion joints with limited movement. F. Bituminous Coating: Cold-applied asphalt emulsion complying with ASTM D1187. G. Neoprene Flashing Components: 1. Manufacturer: Gaco Western, Inc. unless noted otherwise. H. Solder: 1. For Zinc-Coated (Galvanized) Steel Sheet: ASTM B32, Grade Sn50, 50 percent tin and 50 percent lead or Grade Sn60, 60 percent tin and 40 percent lead. I. Bedding Compound: Rubber-asphalt type. J. Plastic Cement: Asphaltic base cement. K. Sealing Tape: Pressure-sensitive, 100 percent solids, polyisobutylene compound sealing tape with release-paper backing. Provide elastic, non-sag, nontoxic, non- staining tape. 2.3 MANUFACTURED SHEET METAL FLASHING AND TRIM A. Reglets: Units of type, material, and profile indicated, formed to provide secure interlocking of separate reglet and counter-flashing pieces, and compatible with flashing indicated. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 60 00 Page 5 1. Available Manufacturers: Subject to compliance with requirements, manufacturers offering products that may be incorporated into the Work include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Fry Reglet. b. MM Systems. c. Heckmann Building Products, Inc. d. Substitutions: Under provisions of Section 01630. 2. Surface-Mounted Type: Provide with slotted holes for fastening to substrate, with neoprene or other suitable weatherproofing washers and with channel for sealant at top edge. 3. Stucco Type: Provide with upturned fastening flange and extension leg of length to match thickness of applied finish materials. 4. Flexible Flashing Retainer: Provide resilient plastic or rubber accessory to secure flexible flashing in reglet where clearance does not permit use of standard metal counter-flashing or where Drawings show reglet without metal counter-flashing. 5. Counter-flashing Wind-Restraint Clips: Provide clips to be installed before counter-flashing to prevent wind uplift of counter-flashing lower edge. B. EPDM Flashing: Sheet flashing product made from ethylene-propylene-diene terpolymer, complying with ASTM D4637, 0.040-inch (1.0 mm) thick. 1. Available Products: Heckmann Building Products Inc.; No. 81 EPDM Thru- Wall Flashing. 2.4 FABRICATION A. General: Custom fabricate sheet metal flashing and trim to comply with recommendations in SMACNA's "Architectural Sheet Metal Manual" that apply to design, dimensions, metal, and other characteristics of item indicated. Shop fabricate items where practicable. Obtain field measurements for accurate fit before shop fabrication. B. Fabricate sheet metal with flat-lock seams; solder with type solder and flux recommended by manufacturer, except seal aluminum seams with sealant and, where required for strength, rivet seams and joints. C. Fabricate sheet metal flashing and trim in thickness and weight needed to comply with performance requirements, but not less than that specified for each application of metal. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 60 00 Page 6 D. Fabricate corners, transitions, and terminations as a single unit; extend a minimum of 4-inches and a maximum of 8-inches in any direction. E. Fabricate cleats and attachment devices from the same material as the accessory being anchored or from a compatible, non-corrosive metal. The thickness of these cleats and attachment devices should be as recommended by SMACNA's 'Architectural Sheet Metal Manual' and Factory Mutual's Loss Prevention Data Sheet 1-49 for the given application, but not less than the thickness of the metal being secured. F. Sealed Joints: Form non-expansion but movable joints in metal to accommodate elastomeric sealant to comply with SMACNA recommendations. G. Coat backside of fabricated sheet metal with 15-mil sulfur-free bituminous coating, SSPC-Paint 12, where required to separate metals from corrosive substrates, including cementitious materials, wood or other absorbent materials; or provide other permanent separation. H. Provide for thermal expansion of running sheet metal work by overlaps of expansion joints in fabricated work. Where required for watertight construction, provide hooked flanges filled with polyisobutylene mastic for 1-inch embedment of flanges. I. Space expansion joints at intervals of not more than 50-feet. Conceal expansion provisions where possible. J. Roof-Penetration Flashing: Fabricate from the following material: 1. Galvanized Steel: 0.0276-inch (0.7 mm) thick. 2.5 MISCELLANEOUS SHEET METAL FABRICATIONS A. Equipment Support Flashing: Fabricate from galvanized steel 0.0276-inch (0.7 mm) thick. 2.6 FINISHES A. Comply with NAAMM's "Metal Finishes Manual for Architectural and Metal Products" for recommendations for applying and designating finishes. B. Finish: Standard (dull) mill finish; painted unless noted otherwise on Drawings. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 60 00 Page 7 PART 3 - EXECUTION 3.1 EXAMINATION A. Examine substrates and conditions under which sheet metal flashing and trim are to be installed and verify that work may properly commence. Do not proceed with installation until unsatisfactory conditions have been corrected. Beginning of installation means acceptance of existing conditions. 3.2 PREPARATION A. Allow wet substrates to dry thoroughly. B. Clean debris from all substrates. 3.3 INSTALLATION A. General: Anchor sheet metal flashing and trim and other components of the Work securely in place, with provisions for thermal and structural movement. Use fasteners, solder, welding rods, protective coatings, separators, sealants, and other miscellaneous items as required to complete sheet metal flashing and trim system. 1. Torch cutting of sheet metal flashing and trim is not permitted. B. Anchor work in place with non-corrosive fasteners, adhesives, setting compounds, tapes and other materials and devices as recommended by manufacturer of each material or system. C. Install self-adhesive flashing prior to or in conjunction with sheet metal items, as shown on Drawings. D. Provide for thermal expansion and building movements. Comply with recommendations of "Architectural Sheet Metal Manual" by SMACNA. E. Install exposed sheet metal flashing and trim without excessive oil canning, buckling, and tool marks. F. Install sheet metal flashing and trim to fit substrates and to result in watertight performance. Verify shapes and dimensions of surfaces to be covered before fabricating sheet metal. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 60 00 Page 8 G. Install sheet metal flashing and trim true to line and levels indicated. Provide uniform, neat seams with minimum exposure of solder, welds, and sealant. H. Metal Protection: Where dissimilar metals will contact each other or corrosive substrates, protect against galvanic action by painting contact surfaces with bituminous coating or by other permanent separation as recommended by fabricator or manufacturers of dissimilar metals. I. Composition Stripping: Cover flanges (edges) of work set on bituminous substrate with 5 courses of glass fiber fabric (ASTM D1668) set in and covered with asphaltic roofing cement. J. Fasteners: Use fasteners of sizes that will penetrate substrate not less than 1-1/4- inches (32 mm) for nails and not less than 3/4-inch (19 mm) for wood screws. 1. Galvanized or pre-painted, Metallic-Coated Steel: Use stainless-steel fasteners. 2. Use concealed fasteners wherever possible. Exposed fasteners should have bonded neoprene washers or should be sealed. K. Seal moving joints in metal work with butyl joint sealants, complying with requirements specified in Section 07920 as required for watertight construction. 1. Where sealant-filled joints are used, embed hooked flanges of joint members not less than 1-inch (25 mm) into sealant. Form joints to completely conceal sealant. When ambient temperature at time of installation is moderate, between 40 and 70 deg F (4 and 21 deg C), set joint members for 50 percent movement either way. Adjust setting proportionately for installation at higher ambient temperatures. Do not install sealant-type joints at temperatures below 40 deg F (4 deg C). L. Soldered Joints: Clean surfaces to be soldered, removing oils and foreign matter. Pre-tin edges of sheets to be soldered to a width of 1-1/2-inches (38 mm) except where pre-tinned surface would show in finished Work. 1. Do not use open-flame torches for soldering. Heat surfaces to receive solder and flow solder into joints. Fill joints completely. Completely remove flux and spatter from exposed surfaces. 2. Clean metal surfaces of soldering flux and other substances that could cause corrosion. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 60 00 Page 9 3.4 MISCELLANEOUS FLASHING INSTALLATION A. Equipment Support Flashing: Coordinate installation of equipment support flashing with installation of roofing and equipment. Weld or seal flashing with elastomeric sealant to equipment support member. 3.5 CLEANING AND PROTECTION A. Clean and neutralize flux materials. Clean off excess solder and sealants. B. Remove temporary protective coverings and strippable films as sheet metal flashing and trim are installed. On completion of installation, clean finished surfaces, including removing unused fasteners, metal filings, pop rivet stems, and pieces of flashing. Maintain in a clean condition during construction. C. Replace sheet metal flashing and trim that have been damaged or that have deteriorated beyond successful repair by finish touchup or similar minor repair procedures. D. Performance: Watertight and weatherproof performance of flashing and sheet metal work is required. END OF SECTION Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 92 00 Page 1 SECTION 07 92 00 - JOINT SEALANTS PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 RELATED DOCUMENTS A. Drawings and general requirements of the Contract, including General Conditions, Special Provisions and Division 1 Specification Sections, apply to this Section. 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK A. The Work of this Section consist of furnishing and installing the following: 1. Exterior sealants. 2. Joint sealant primers and accessories. 1.3 RELATED SECTIONS A. Section 076000 - Flashing and Sheet Metal: Sealant installation with flashings. 1.4 SUBMITTALS A. Product Data: Provide data and installation instructions for each type of joint sealant required. B. Certification by joint sealant manufacturer that sealants plus the primers and cleaners required for sealant installation comply with local regulations controlling use of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). C. Submit manufacturer’s letter of certification that products are appropriate for the uses intended. 1.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE A. Sealant applicator shall specialize in the installation of joint sealants with a minimum of 2 years experience. B. Elastomeric joint sealants shall be produced and installed to establish and to maintain watertight continuous seals without causing staining or deterioration of joint substrates. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 92 00 Page 2 C. Sealant manufacturer shall confirm in writing that all materials contacting the sealants, including joint backings, gaskets, spacers, and joint substrates, are compatible with the sealant to be installed. Schedule sufficient time to test these materials for compatibility with the sealant, as necessary. Compatibility tests shall be performed to the sealant manufacturer’s standards. D. Sealant manufacturer shall confirm in writing the appropriate joint preparation and priming techniques required to obtain rapid, acceptable adhesion of the joint sealants to the joint substrates. E. Perform field adhesion testing of joint sealants to all surface types. Field adhesion testing shall be completed and results shall be reviewed and approved by sealant manufacturer and installer before commencing sealant installation. F. Pre-installation meeting: Review joint application procedures, compatibility tests, adhesion tests, and warranty requirements in a meeting involving installer, manufacturer or manufacturer’s representative, building owner or manager, consultant, and contractor. G. Sealant manufacturer shall provide one announced and one unannounced quality control check/adhesion test with the sealant installer at the job site. 1.6 DELIVERY, STORAGE, AND HANDLING A. Deliver materials to Project site in original unopened containers or bundles with labels indicating manufacturer, product name and designation, color, expiration period for use, pot life, curing time, and mixing instructions for multi-component materials intact and legible. B. Store and handle materials in compliance with manufacturer's recommendations to prevent their deterioration or damage due to moisture, high or low temperatures, contaminants, or other causes. 1.7 PROJECT CONDITIONS A. Do not proceed with installation of joint sealants under the following conditions: 1. When ambient and substrate temperature conditions are outside the limits permitted by joint sealant manufacturer. 2. Below 40 deg F (4.4 deg C). 3. When joint substrates are wet or retaining moisture. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 92 00 Page 3 B. Joint Width Conditions: Do not proceed with installation of joint sealants where joint widths are less than allowed by joint sealant manufacturer for application indicated. C. Joint Substrate Conditions: Do not proceed with installation of joint sealants until contaminants capable of interfering with their adhesion are removed from joint substrates. PART 2 - PRODUCTS 2.1 MATERIALS A. Compatibility: Provide joint sealants, joint fillers, and other related materials that are compatible with one another and with joint substrates under conditions of service and application, as demonstrated by sealant manufacturer based on testing and field experience. B. Colors: Provide color of exposed joint sealants to match colors indicated by reference to manufacturer's standard designations. C. Provide selections made by Architect from manufacturer's full range of standard colors for products of type indicated. 2.2 JOINT SEALANTS A. Weatherproofing Sealant: Provide product complying ASTM C920, also with ASTM C1193 and tested under ASTM C719; Type S, Grade NS, Class 25; that accommodates joint movement of not more than 25 percent in both extension and compression for a total of 50 percent, use at conventional glazing and for weatherproofing. 1. Dow Corning Corporation; Dow Corning 790, 791, or 795. 2. Tremco; Spectrem II or Spectrem III. 3. Pecora Corporation; 895. B. Flashings Sealant: ASTM C920, Type S, Grade NS, Class 25; single component elastomeric accommodating joint movement of not more than 25 percent in both extension and compression for a total of 50 percent. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 92 00 Page 4 1. Dow Corning Corporation; Dow Corning 791, 795, or Contractors Weatherproofing Sealant. C. Reglets and Flashings Sealant: ASTM C920, Type S, Grade NS, Class 25; single component elastomeric accommodating joint movement of not more than 25 percent in both extension and compression for a total of 50 percent. 1. Dow Corning Corporation; Dow Corning 791, 795, or Contractors Weatherproofing Sealant. D. Self-Leveling Sealant: ASTM C920, Type S, Grade SL; single component, chemical curing, non-staining, non-bleeding, non-sagging type; color as selected; use in concrete expansion and control joints in parking garages, plaza and terrace decks, floor and sidewalk joints. 1. Dow Corning Corporation; Dow Corning 890SL. 2. Pecora Corporation; Urexpan NR-200 -. 3. Tremco; THC-900. 4. Sika Corporation, Inc.; Sikaflex 2C-FL. 2.3 JOINT SEALANT BACKING A. General: Provide sealant backings and accessory materials, including primers, of material and type that are non-staining; are compatible with joint substrates, sealants, and other joint fillers; and are approved for applications indicated by sealant manufacturer based on field experience and laboratory testing. B. Foam Joint Fillers: Non-gassing, preformed, compressible, resilient, non-staining, non-waxing, non-extruding strips of flexible plastic foam of material indicated below and of size, shape, and density to control sealant depth, prevent three-sided adhesion, provide a surface against which to tool, and otherwise contribute to producing optimum sealant performance: 1. Cylindrical Sealant Backings: ASTM C1330, Type C (closed-cell material with a surface skin) or Type B (bicellular material with a surface skin), and of size and density to control sealant depth and otherwise contribute to producing optimum sealant performance and as recommended by sealant manufacturer. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 92 00 Page 5 2. Elastomeric Tubing Sealant Backings: Neoprene, butyl, EPDM, or silicone tubing complying with ASTM D1056, nonabsorbent to water and gas, and capable of remaining resilient at temperatures down to minus 26 deg F (minus 32 deg C). Provide products with low compression set and of size and shape to provide a secondary seal, to control sealant depth, and to otherwise contribute to optimum sealant performance. 2.4 MISCELLANEOUS MATERIALS A. Primer: Material recommended by joint sealant manufacturer where required for adhesion of sealant to joint substrates indicated, as determined from pre- construction joint sealant-substrate tests and field tests. Certify that primer will not permanently stain adjacent joint surfaces. B. Cleaners for Nonporous Surfaces: Chemical cleaners acceptable to manufacturers of sealants and sealant backing materials, free of oily residues or other substances capable of staining or harming in any way joint substrates and adjacent nonporous surfaces, and formulated to promote optimum adhesion of sealants with joint substrates. C. Masking Tape: Non-staining, nonabsorbent material compatible with joint sealants and surfaces adjacent to joints, to mask off adjacent joint surfaces where sealant is not permanently intended to be applied. D. Bondbreaker Tape: Polyethylene pressure sensitive adhesive tape, to be used in areas where backer rod cannot fit and where three-sided adhesion is to be avoided. PART 3 - EXECUTION 3.1 EXAMINATION A. Examine joints indicated to receive joint sealants, with Installer present, for compliance with requirements for joint configuration, installation tolerances, and other conditions affecting joint sealant performance. B. Verify that joint sizes and surfaces are free of defects and acceptable for installation of joint sealants. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 92 00 Page 6 C. Verify joint dimensions and shapes to ensure they are within the sealant manufacturer’s guidelines. Resolve any variances prior to installation. Do not proceed with sealant installation until the unsatisfactory conditions have been corrected. 3.2 PREPARATION A. Surface Cleaning of Joints: Clean out joints immediately before installing joint sealants to comply with recommendations of joint sealant manufacturer. B. Thoroughly clean the areas that the new sealant will contact using a de-greasing solvent such as toluene or xylene and the two-rag wipe technique. IPA (isopropyl alcohol) is not a degreasing solvent. The new sealant should have a minimum contact area of 1/4”. C. Remove all foreign material from joint substrates that could interfere with adhesion of joint sealant, including dust, paints (except for permanent, protective coatings tested and approved for sealant adhesion and compatibility by sealant manufacturer), oil, grease, waterproofing, water repellents, water, surface dirt, and frost. D. Clean porous joint substrate surfaces by oil-free brushing, grinding, blast cleaning, mechanical abrading, or a combination of these methods to produce a clean, sound substrate capable of developing optimum bond with joint sealants. Do not damage finished surface of materials while performing cleaning operations. Remove loose particles remaining from above cleaning operations by vacuuming or blowing out joints with oil-free compressed air. E. Clean metal, glass, porcelain enamel, glazed surfaces of ceramic tile, and other nonporous surfaces with chemical cleaners or other means that do not stain, harm substrates, or leave residues capable of interfering with adhesion of joint sealants. F. Masking Tape: Use masking tape where required to prevent contact of sealant with adjoining surfaces that otherwise would be permanently stained or damaged by such contact or by cleaning methods required to remove sealant smears. Remove tape immediately after tooling without disturbing joint seal. 3.3 JOINT PRIMING A. Prime joint substrates where indicated or where recommended by joint sealant manufacturer based on pre-construction joint sealant-substrate tests or prior experience. Apply primer to comply with joint sealant manufacturer's recommendations. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 92 00 Page 7 B. Confine primers to areas of joint sealant bond; do not allow spillage or migration onto adjoining surfaces. C. Allow primer to dry. Do not prime areas that cannot be sealed the same day. 3.4 INSTALLATION OF SEALANT BACKINGS A. Install joint fillers of type indicated to provide support of sealants during application and at position required to produce the cross-sectional shapes and depths of installed sealants relative to joint widths that allow optimum sealant movement capability. B. Do not leave gaps between ends of joint fillers. C. Do not stretch, twist, puncture, or tear joint fillers. D. Remove absorbent joint fillers that have become wet prior to sealant application and replace with dry material. E. Tolerances: 1. Minimum Sealant Contact Area: 1/4-inch. 2. Minimum Joint Depth: 1/4 + 1/8-inch, with the joint width at least twice the joint depth to allow the sealant its maximum movement capability. 3.5 INSTALLATION OF JOINT SEALANTS A. General: Comply with joint sealant manufacturer's printed installation instructions applicable to products and applications indicated, except where more stringent requirements apply. B. Sealant Installation Standard: Comply with recommendations of ASTM C1193 for use of joint sealants as applicable to materials, applications, and conditions indicated. C. Installation of Sealants: Install sealants by proven techniques that result in sealants directly contacting and fully wetting joint substrates, completely filling recesses provided for each joint configuration, and providing uniform, cross- sectional shapes and depths relative to joint widths that allow optimum sealant movement capability. Install sealants at the same time sealant backings are installed. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 92 00 Page 8 D. Tooling of Non-sag Sealants: Immediately after sealant application and prior to time skinning or curing begins, tool sealants to form smooth, uniform beads of configuration indicated, to eliminate air pockets, and to ensure contact and adhesion of sealant with sides of joint. Remove excess sealants from surfaces adjacent to joint. Do not use tooling agents that discolor sealants or adjacent surfaces or are not approved by sealant manufacturer. 1. Remove excess sealant from surfaces adjacent to joints. 2. Use tooling agents that are approved in writing by sealant manufacturer and that do not discolor sealants or adjacent surfaces. 3. Provide concave joint configuration per Figure 5A in ASTM C1193, unless otherwise indicated. 4. Provide flush joint configuration where indicated per Figure 5B in ASTM C1193. 3.6 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL A. Field-Adhesion Testing: Field test joint-sealant adhesion to joint substrates as follows: 1. Extent of Testing: Test completed elastomeric sealant joints as follows: a. Perform 10 tests for the first 1000 feet (300 m) of joint length for each type of elastomeric sealant and joint substrate. 2. Test Method: Test joint sealants as appropriate for type of joint-sealant application indicated. a. For joints with dissimilar substrates, verify adhesion to each substrate separately; do this by extending cut along one side, verifying adhesion to opposite side. Repeat procedure for opposite side. 3. Inspect joints for complete fill, for absence of voids, and for joint configuration complying with specified requirements. Record results in a field-adhesion-test log. 4. Inspect tested joints and report on the following: a. Whether sealants in joints connected to pulled-out portion failed to adhere to joint substrates or tore cohesively. Include data on pull distance used to test each type of product and joint substrate. Compare these results to determine if adhesion passes sealant manufacturer's field-adhesion hand-pull test criteria. b. Whether sealants filled joint cavities and are free of voids. c. Whether sealant dimensions and configurations comply with specified requirements. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 07 92 00 Page 9 5. Record test results in a field-adhesion-test log. Include dates when sealants were installed, names of persons who installed sealants, test dates, test locations, whether joints were primed, adhesion results and percent elongations, sealant fill, sealant configuration, and sealant dimensions. 6. Repair sealants pulled from test area by applying new sealants following same procedures used originally to seal joints. Ensure that original sealant surfaces are clean and that new sealant contacts original sealant. B. Evaluation of Field Test Results: Sealants not evidencing adhesive failure from testing or noncompliance with other indicated requirements will be considered satisfactory. Remove sealants that fail to adhere to joint substrates during testing or to comply with other requirements. Retest failed applications until test results prove sealants comply with indicated requirements. 3.7 CLEANING A. Construction Waste Management: Manage construction waste in accordance with provisions of Section 01524 Construction Waste Management. Submit documentation for Credit MR 2.1 and Credit MR 2.2to satisfy the requirements of that Section. B. Clean off excess sealants and sealant smears adjacent to joints as the Work progresses by methods and with cleaning materials approved in writing by manufacturers of joint sealants and of products in which joints occur. C. Leave finished work in a neat, clean condition with no evidence of spillovers onto adjacent surfaces. 3.8 PROTECTION A. Protect joint sealants during and after curing period from contact with contaminating substances or from damage resulting from construction operations or other causes so that they are without deterioration or damage at time of Substantial Completion. B. If, despite such protection, damage or deterioration occurs, cut out and remove damaged or deteriorated joint sealants immediately so that and installations with repaired areas are indistinguishable from original work. END OF SECTION Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 09 91 13 Page 1 SECTION 09 91 13 - EXTERIOR PAINTING AND FINISHING PART 1 - GENERAL 1.0 WORK INCLUDED A. Surface preparation for all new gutters, all wood roof fascia boards, existing pipe jacks, existing vents, existing non-galv. metal HVAC units, all counter-flashing, and supports above the roofline, etc. B. Surface finish priming and painting of all new gutters, all wood roof fascia boards, existing pipe jacks, existing vents, existing non-galv. metal HVAC units, all counter-flashing, and all new wood and metals roof surfaces. Paint all items above to match existing. 1.1 RELATED WORK A. Section 06 10 00 - Rough Carpentry. B. Section 07 51 13 - Cold-applied Modified Bitumen Roofing C. Section 07 60 00 - Flashing and Sheet Metal. 1.2 REFERENCES A. ANSI/ASTM D16 - Definitions of Terms Relating to Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and Related Products. B. ASTM D2016 - Test Method for Moisture Content of Wood. 1.3 DEFINITIONS Conform to ANSI/ASTM D16 for interpretation of terms used in this section. 1.4 QUALITY ASSURANCE A. Product Manufacturer - Company specializing in manufacturing quality paints and finish products with five years experience. B. Applicator - Company or individual knowledgeable in commercial painting and finishing with five (5) years documented experience. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 09 91 13 Page 2 1.5 SUBMITTALS A. Submit product data. B. Provide product data on all finishing products. C. Submit samples. D. Submit manufacturer's application instructions. 1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS Do not apply exterior coatings during rain or when relative humidity is above 50 percent, unless required otherwise by manufacturer's instructions. PART 2 - PRODUCTS 2.0 ACCEPTABLE MANUFACTURERS - PAINT A. Kelly Moore or approved equal. 2.1 MATERIALS Accessory Materials - Linseed oil, shellac, turpentine, paint thinners and other materials not specifically indicated but required to achieve the finishes specified, of commercial quality. 2.2 FINISHES Refer to schedule at end of Section for surface finish schedule. Colors to match existing. PART 3 - EXECUTION 3.0 INSPECTION A. Verify that surfaces are ready to receive work as instructed by the product manufacturer. B. Examine surfaces scheduled to be finished prior to commencement of work. Report any condition that may potentially affect proper application. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 09 91 13 Page 3 C. Measure moisture content of surfaces using an electronic moisture meter. Do not apply finishes unless moisture content of surfaces is below the following maximums: 1. Fifteen percent (15%) measured in accordance with ASTM D2016. D. Beginning of installation means acceptance of substrate. 3.1 PREPARATION A. Correct minor defects and clean surfaces which affect work of the section. B. Galvanized Surfaces - Remove surface contamination and oils and wash with solvent. Apply coat of etching primer. 3.2 PROTECTION A. Protect elements surrounding the work of this section from damage or disfiguration. At side adjacent to existing childcare center, it is vital that protection be provided from any work at the roof above. Coordinate with City of Palo Alto Project Manager for best alternatives. B. Repair damage to other surfaces caused by work of this section. C. Furnish drop cloths, shields, and protective methods to prevent spray or droppings from disfiguring other surfaces. 3.3 APPLICATION A. Apply products in accordance with manufacturer's instructions. B. Sand lightly between coats to achieve required finish. C. Allow applied coat to dry before next coat is applied. D. Prime back surfaces of exterior woodwork with primer paint. Cubberley Auditorium Building Re-Roof Specification F001-17 Section 09 91 13 Page 4 3.4 CLEANING A. As work proceeds, promptly remove paint where spilled, splashed, or spattered. B. Collect cotton waste, cloths and material, which may constitute a fire hazard, place in closed metal containers and remove daily from site. 3.5 SCHEDULE - EXTERIOR SURFACES A. Wood - Painted 1. One coat primer, 2201722 latex 2. Two coats exterior paint, 1250 acrylic latex B. Steel - Unprimed 1. One coat zinc chromate primer, 1710 red oxide 2. Two coats exterior paint, 1250 acrylic latex C. Steel - Galvanized 1. One coat primer, 122 latex 2. Two coats exterior paint, 1250 acrylic latex oxford brown. END SECTION 1/8" = 1'-0" AUDITORIUM ROOF PLAN PS-304 SEALANT PARADIENE 30 FR (fully adhere) PARADIENE 20 (fully adhere) LEAD FLANGE (prime and set in mastic) PARADIENE 20 (fully adhere) LEAD FLASHING (4 lb., roll into pipe 1") RIGID INSULATION 4"4" 8" m i n . 3"1" WOOD CURB RIGID INSULATION ACCESS HATCH UNIT NON - COMBUSTIBLE CANT APPROVED COVERBOARD PARADIENE 20 (dry on cant, fully adhere to roof surfaces) PARADIENE 20 (mechanically attach to wood curb with approved fasteners, fully adhere to underlying Paradiene 20, cant, and roof surfaces) PARADIENE 30 FR (fully adhere) VERAL, PARAFOR 50 LT, PARAFOR 30, OR PARADIENE 40 FR (apply in approved Siplast flashing cement) 31 4"4" PARADIENE 20 (fully adhere, extend dry down vertical face) PROFORM GRAVEL STOP (prime metal flange, set in mastic & fasten through pre-punched holes 3" o.c. staggered) PARADIENE 20 (fully adhere) PARADIENE 30 FR (fully adhere) PS-304 SEALANT RIGID INSULATION PROFORM CONTINUOUS CLEAT (set and face nail through pre-punched holes) JOB No.PF-14000 DESC: CUBBERLEY AUDITORIUM RE-ROOF SHEET No.: 1 of 1 BID SUMMARY DATE: 12/14/16 IFB No.:166667 DATE: 12/14/16 BASE BID DESCRIPTION BID Alcal Waterproofing Assoc MP Roofing Southwest Pioneer Andy's Roofing Stronger ITEM QTY UNIT BID BID BID BID BID BID BID A1 1) Remove existing base assemblies of all roof-mounted HVAC equipment. All equipment to be re-installed onto new higher roof curbs. Install crickets/drainage swales to direct rainwater away from units. 2) Remove and replace all existing galvanized edge metal perimeter flashing throughout all roofs. 3) Remove all existing galvanized metal gutters and replace with same-sized, galvanized metal gutter in same location. 4) Remove existing corroded exhaust vents and replace with galvanized metal vents of same size, type, etc. at same locations. Reconnect all existing downspouts at same locations. Seal/prime/paint exterior sides/faces of all gutters to match existing conditions. 5) Remove portions of existing gas pipes and electrical conduits as necessary to vertically extend lines for new, thicker roof system with additional insulation. Install galvanized pipes and conduits. 6) Remove and replace all conduit-topped and gas piping-topped wood sleepers and metal clamps with new rubber Durablok sleepers or approved equal with galv. metal clamps, at all roofs in scope of work. 7) Strip peeling paint at noted fascia boards or remove and replace dry rot-damaged eave and fascia boards. In all cases with wood, prime and paint to match existing conditions. 8) Remove and replace with new all existing counter-flashing on perimeter walls adjacent to roof areas. Caulk top of wall joints of counter-flashing. 9) Remove existing mineral cap roofing system down to the plywood, for three (3) roof levels. 10)Install modified bituminous membrane roofing system over fiberboard over min. R-19 tapered rigid insulation or City-approved equal, throughout roof and around pipe and exhaust ductwork penetrations. Apply acrylic Title-24, CRRC-approved white or light-colored reflective coating over all roofing material areas as final step, after all other roof work completed. 1 LS $319,578 $348,000 $370,000 $375,382 $384,000 $454,300 $525,500 A2 1) Apply rust inhibitor to the inside of all new gutters to prevent future oxidation. 2)Install new galvanized wire mesh screen covers securely over pipe jacks, to prevent both vandalism and pest encroachment. 3) Install plastic gutter screens at tree drip-line areas where applicable. 4)Install standard-size walkway traffic pads over new roof system. 5) Verify and clear all roof drainage pipes servicing as downspouts. 1 LS $6,993 $1,980 $12,100 $7,000 $19,100 $15,000 A3 1) If dry-rot or otherwise damaged underlayment and/or sheathing is discovered, then remove and replace damaged area. 2) Repair and/or replace dry rot-damaged wood soffit boards and/or framing, as needed with approval from City Project Manager. 1LS $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 Base Bid Total $331,571 $354,980 $375,000 $392,482 $396,000 $478,400 $545,500 PREPARED BY: Cecil R. Lectura, Engr Tech III CHECKED BY: Jimmy Y. Chen, Project Mgr Attachment C City of Palo Alto (ID # 7807) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Rinconada Long Range Plan Historical and Cultural Evaluation Title: Approve and Authorize the City Manager to Execute Contract Amendment Number 1 to Contract Number C15157280 in the Amount of $30,000 for Project Consultant David J. Powers for Historical Evaluation of Rinconada Park Additional Services; and Approve a Budget Amendment in the Capital Improvement Fund for Rinconada Long Range Plan (Project PE- 12003) in the Amount of $45,000 From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendations Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. C15157280 with David J. Powers (Attachment A) for $30,000 for Cultural and Historic Resource Technical Reports Including $10,000 in Additional Services for a total contract amount not to exceed $144,565 for the Rinconada Long Range Plan (PE-12003). 2. Amend the Fiscal Year 2017 Budget Appropriation for the Capital Improvement Fund by: a. Increasing the Rinconada Long Range Plan Project (PE-12003) appropriation by $45,000; and b. Decreasing the Infrastructure Reserve by $45,000. Background Council approval of the Rinconada Long Range Plan (Long Range Plan) Capital Improvement Program project (PE-12003) in 2012 initiated the analysis and City of Palo Alto Page 2 review of Palo Alto’s Rinconada Park, including the Junior Museum and Zoo for future renovations and capital improvement needs. This effort preceded the system-wide Parks, Trails, Natural Open Space and Recreation Master Plan process that began in early 2014. The proposed Long Range Plan recommendations include addressing changing needs and the evolving demands for future recreation, programming, environmental and maintenance investments. The planning process to develop the Long Range Plan consists of three phases.  Phase 1: Specific Site and Program Analysis and Community Engagement Development of a comprehensive inventory of Rinconada Park’s recreational facilities and programs, and analysis of community needs. Identification of community and stakeholder needs, interests, and preferences for park enhancements.  Phase 2: Developing and Prioritizing Upkeep and Enhancement Opportunities Identification of capital projects, necessary renovations and improvements, and prioritization of projects into implementation phases.  Phase 3: Drafting of the Long Range Plan and preparing an environmental assessment Review by the public, Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) and Council, as well as Council approval of the Long Range Plan. Completion of an environmental assessment relating to future improvement and expansion of the JMZ and future Long Range Plan projects using the environmental consulting firm David J Powers & Associates, Inc. was approved in December 2014. Discussion The Long Range Plan completion requires additional time and effort to analyze the historical and cultural elements of the proposed improvements to Rinconada Park and Junior Museum and Zoo. Based on requests from the Historic and Architectural Review Boards, additional work is required, exceeding the initial authorized Additional Services budget and requiring a contract amendment. The City of Palo Alto Page 3 additional work will evaluate the entire Rinconada Park with close attention paid to the area around the Junior Museum and Zoo including the parking lot and Lou Henry Hoover Girl Scout house. In addition, the Long Range Plan park concept requires an environmental assessment for adoption. Additional funding is also being requested to add to the project overall budget to cover future additional funding needs that will be necessary to revise and update the draft Long Range Plan report. Staff asked the consultant to perform additional tasks, beyond the original scope, and together negotiated the amendment scope and terms. The additional tasks include analysis of the historical and cultural impacts of the proposed enhancements and additions (including the Junior Museum and Zoo project as requested by the Historic and Architectural Review Boards), meetings and project coordination. The increased scope requires a contract amendment of $30,000, which includes replenishing the Additional Services budget to address any other unforeseen needs which may arise. The requested budget amendment of $45,000 in the CIP project addresses the $30,000 contract amendment amount, while also providing an additional $15,000 to fund revisions to the draft Rinconada Long Range Plan Report that will be necessary once the CEQA process has been completed. The Friends of the Junior Museum & Zoo funded one-half of the initial $114,565 contract with David J. Powers. Staff has not requested further funding from the Friends, as much of the additional scope involves study of existing City buildings and resources. Resource Impact Funding for this contract is budgeted in the Capital Improvement Fund Project PE- 12003, Rinconada Park Master Plan and Design. The project’s funding history is outlined as follows: Prior Years Actuals & Carryforward FY 2017 Adopted Budget Recommended Adjustment FY 2017 Amended Budget Projected Project Total $490,926 $5,429 $45,000 $50,429 $541,355 An adjustment to the FY 2017 budget in the amount of $45,000 is recommended City of Palo Alto Page 4 to amend the contract with David J. Powers as well as to fund necessary revisions to the Rinconada Long Range Plan once the consultant’s study is complete. Policy Implications Approval of the environmental review services for this contract is consistent with City policies. Environmental Review Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff anticipates the preparation of an initial study and completion of technical reports may result in a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Long Range Plan and the Junior Museum and Zoo Projects.. Next Steps February – May 2017: Finalize Initial Study and Reports May2017 – June 2017: Environmental Assessment and Circulation July 2017: Approve the Junior Museum and Zoo and Long Range Plan Environmental Assessment Attachments:  Attachment A: Contract Amendment C15157280 1 Revision July 20, 2016 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. C15157280 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND DAVID J. POWERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. C15157280 (“Agreement”) is entered into March 20, 2017, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and David J. Powers & Associates Inc., a California corporation, located at 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200, San Jose, CA 95126 (“CONSULTANT”). R E C I T A L S A. The Agreement, dated December 1, 2014, was entered into between the parties for environmental assessment of the Rinconada Long Range Plan and Junior Museum and Zoo improvements. B. CITY has determined that more environmental assessment services are required than originally anticipated, and the parties now wish to amend the Agreement to expand the scope of environmental assessment in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to increase the total compensation (including additional services) by $30,000, and to extend the term through September 2018. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 1 of the Agreement, entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”, is hereby amended to incorporate the additional services (described in Exhibit “A- Addendum”), to read as follows: “CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “A- Addendum” in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in the Agreement and this Amendment No. 1. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of the CITY.” SECTION 2. Section 2 of the Agreement, entitled “TERM”, is hereby amended to extend the time for completion of Services, to read as follows: “The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through September 30, 2018 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement.” DocuSign Envelope ID: F481164B-1696-4805-864C-AD06569B2223 Attachment A 2 Revision July 20, 2016 SECTION 3. Section 3 of the Agreement, entitled “SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE”, is hereby amended reflect the time for performance of additional Services, as set forth in Exhibit “B- 1”, to read as follows: “Time is of the essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit “B” and Exhibit “B-1”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY’S agreement to extend the term of the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT.” SECTION 4. Section 4 of the Agreement, entitled “NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION”, is hereby amended to increase the compensation, to read as follows: “The total compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “A-Addendum”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed One Hundred Thirty- Four Thousand Five Hundred Sixty-Five Dollars ($134,565). In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for Services, Additional Services, and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed One Hundred Forty-Four Thousand Five Hundred Sixty-Five Dollars ($144,565). SECTION 5. The following exhibits to the Agreement are hereby added to read as set forth in the attachments to this Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference. a. Exhibit "A-Addendum" entitled: “SCOPE OF SERVICES” b. Exhibit “B-1” entitled “SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE” c. Revised Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION” SECTION 6. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Agreement, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. /// /// /// /// /// DocuSign Envelope ID: F481164B-1696-4805-864C-AD06569B2223 3 Revision July 20, 2016 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO City Manager (Contract over $85k) Purchasing Manager (Contract over $25k) Contracts Administrator (Contract under $25k) APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney or designee (Contract over $25k) Contracts Administrator (Checklist Approval) [ CONSULTANT ] Officer 1 By: Name: Title: Attachments (If applicable): a. Exhibit "A-Addendum" entitled: “SCOPE OF SERVICES” b. Exhibit “B-1” entitled “SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE” c. Revised Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION” DocuSign Envelope ID: F481164B-1696-4805-864C-AD06569B2223 President Judy Shanley 4 Revision July 20, 2016 EXHIBIT “A-ADDENDUM” SCOPE OF SERVICES AMENDMENT NO.1 Background CONSULTANT is under current contract to provide the necessary analysis work to draft the environment Initial Study and environmental documents for the Rinconada Long Range Plan and associated Junior Museum and Zoo project. After preparation of an administrative draft initial study, CITY requested additional historical evaluation of the site which was not included in the original scope; accordingly, adjustments to the project scope of services are necessary. Task 2A of the Exhibit A included Preparation of the Initial Study. Task 2A is modified to include the following additional work: The Consultant shall provide the necessary historical analysis and update to the draft Initial Study from the findings of the Analysis for the Rinconada Long Range Plan as follows: Task One – Historical Resource Evaluation 1. Rinconada Park Reconnaissance Survey 2. Historical Research of Rinconada Park Amenities 3. Draft an Historical Resource Evaluation Report 4. Update/revise Initial Study per revised Junior Museum and Zoo design and added information from the historic evaluation. 5. Additional meetings and coordination per extending scope. Task Two – Historic Resource Evaluation of the Junior Museum and Zoo 1. Review project plans and scope of work 2. Analysis of the proposed Junior Museum and Zoo Project and possible mitigation measures Task Three – Historic Resource Evaluation of Rinconada Long Range Plan 1. Review Long Range Plans and scope of work 2. Analysis of the proposed Long Range Plan Park Enhancements possible mitigation measures DocuSign Envelope ID: F481164B-1696-4805-864C-AD06569B2223 5 Revision July 20, 2016 EXHIBIT “B-1” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE AMENDMENT NO. 1 CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number of days/weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and City so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of receipt of the notice to proceed. Milestones Completion Weeks from NTP Task 2A: Completion of 2A, 2B.1 & 2B.2, and Preparation of the Initial Study 26 DocuSign Envelope ID: F481164B-1696-4805-864C-AD06569B2223 6 Revision July 20, 2016 REVISED EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION AMENDMENT NO. 1 The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “A-Addendum” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $134,565. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $144,565. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, and the total compensation for Additional Services do not exceed the amounts set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT Task 1 $84,475 (Preliminary Studies) Task 2A $50,090 (Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration) Task 2B $0 (EIR optional) Sub-total Basic Services $134,565 Reimbursable Expenses $0 Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $134,565 DocuSign Envelope ID: F481164B-1696-4805-864C-AD06569B2223 7 Revision July 20, 2016 Additional Services (Not to Exceed) $10,000 Maximum Total Compensation $144,565 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: A. Travel outside the San Francisco Bay area, including transportation and meals, will be reimbursed at actual cost subject to the City of Palo Alto’s policy for reimbursement of travel and meal expenses for City of Palo Alto employees. B. Long distance telephone service charges, cellular phone service charges, facsimile transmission and postage charges are reimbursable at actual cost. All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $0 shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement DocuSign Envelope ID: F481164B-1696-4805-864C-AD06569B2223 City of Palo Alto (ID # 7569) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Assessment of Water System Configuration and Emergency Water Supply Title: Approval of a Professional Services Agreement With SRT Consultants for a Total Not-to-Exceed Amount of $708,736 for Assessment of the City's Current Water System Configuration and Recommendations to Enhance City's Emergency Water Supply From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve the following actions: 1. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached professional services agreement (Agreement) with SRT Consultants (Attachment A) in an amount not to exceed $644,306 for professional engineering services to conduct an Assessment of the City's Current Water System Configuration and Recommendations of Improvements to Enhance City's Emergency Water Supply and Delivery. 2. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or more amendments to the Agreement with SRT Consultants for related, unforeseen work which may be required during the course of the project (additional services) for a total value not to exceed $64,430, or 10% of the contract, bringing the total professional service agreement’s not-to-exceed amount to $708,736. Background The City’s primary source of potable water since 1962 has been the San Francisco Public Utility Commission (SFPUC) Hetch Hetchy aqueduct system. The City maintains five receiving stations, or turnouts, with SFPUC. In addition, the City maintains seven (7) water supply wells that are permitted by the State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) for standby/emergency use, one (1) water supply well that is permitted for active use, seven (7) reservoirs, seven (7) booster pumping stations, seven (7) pressure regulating stations, and approximately 235 miles of water transmission and distribution mains. City of Palo Alto Page 2 In 1999, in order to meet new requirements issued by the SWRCB (requirements formerly overseen by the California Department of Public Health) for emergency water supplies, the City began work on the City’s emergency water supply and storage project. As part of this project, the City completed construction of two (2) new emergency water supply wells at Eleanor Pardee Park and Rinconada Library (CMR 371-09), a new reservoir, pump station and well at El Camino Park (Staff Report #1646), a new pump station at the Mayfield Reservoir site (Staff Report #1401), and rehabilitation of five existing water supply wells that were constructed in the 1950’s (Staff Report #1660). In addition to these new/rehabilitated facilities, the City has recently seismically retrofitted the Mayfield Reservoir (Staff Report #2212) and Boronda Reservoir (Staff Report #4811). Currently in construction is the Seismic Upgrade of 4 Steel Tanks and 3 Turnouts project (Staff Report #5634). As part of the Seismic Upgrade Project, the four steel tanks (Corte Madera, Park, Dahl and Montebello Reservoirs) were to be seismically retrofitted and recoated, and the three turnouts (Arastradero, California and Page Mill) were to be seismically retrofitted, interior piping recoated and/or replaced, and upgraded with new electrical equipment, all to ensure reliability of our emergency water supply facilities in the event of an emergency. Work at the Montebello Reservoir and three turnouts is currently scheduled to be completed by the end of March 2017. In regards to the four steel tanks, work started first at the Montebello Reservoir in early 2016. Once the reservoir was drained and the interior scaffolding erected, it was found that both the existing coal tar floor coating and the reservoir roof were in very poor condition. The coal tar floor coating was badly cracked, extremely brittle, and delamination was occuring along the edges of the tank. The existing roof beams and steel roof plates were badly deteriorated and showing signs of structural failure. After additional investigations by the coating consultant and structural engineer, it was determined that both the coal tar coating and reservoir roof must be removed and replaced in order to ensure the reservoir can remain operable and reliable during an emergency. However, this unforeseen work was not budgeted for, and costs quickly escalated (coal tar disposal, new floor coating, existing roof and support demolition, and new roof and support construction), adding approximately 80% of additional cost to construction at the Montebello Reservoir. By the time the interior coating and structural issues were discovered, the contractor had already completed all of the exterior seismic upgrades to the Montebello Reservoir. As a result, staff determined that it would be most cost effective to complete the seismic upgrade and coating work at this site. However, due to the findings, and the fact that the remaining three reservoirs were constructed during the same time period as the Montebello Reservoir, staff has assumed that the Corte Madera, Park and Dahl Reservoirs are in a similar state of deterioration as the Montebello Reservoir. Furthermore, inspections of the interior reservoir walls by the original design consultant indicate that the three remaining reservoirs have only one coating cycle remaining (approximately 15-20 years of service life), and has indicated that construction of new reservoirs should be considered. As a result of these findings and recommendation, staff has suspended all remaining seismic upgrade and recoating work at the Corte Madera, Park and City of Palo Alto Page 3 Dahl reservoirs from the existing construction contract. Instead, staff would like to conduct an overall water system study to determine if the City’s emergency water storage and supplies can be reconfigured and enhanced to better supply our customers, while still meeting SWRCB emergency water requirements. Discussion Consultant’s Scope of Services A Request for Proposals (RFP #165977) was issued on September 30, 2016 seeking consultant services for “Assessment of the Current Water System Configuration and Recommendations of Improvements to Enhance City’s Emergency Water Supply and Delivery”. The scope of work includes the following tasks:  Project management and administration.  Data collection and review of operational requirements.  Development, calibration and maintenance of the City’s Hydraulic Model for a period of three (3) years.  Using the City’s hydraulic model, Consultant will examine the existing transmission, distribution, and storage system to determine how to improve water quality, meet peak fire demands, and improve overall system reliability. This includes making recommendations for resolving existing low pressures in various locations throughout the City, and increasing available emergency supplies and storage.  Development of an overall emergency response plan that will serve as guidance to operations staff during various types of emergencies. The deliverables will include:  Fully developed and calibrated water model.  Water system assessment report containing recommendations for future capital improvement projects.  Overall emergency response plan for the City’s water system. Attachment A, the Agreement, contains a complete description of the scope of services. Due to the specialized nature of this work, services of an expert consultant are required. Solicitation Process Summary of Solicitation Process Proposal Title Engineering Services for Assessment of Current Water System Configuration and Recommendation of Improvements to Enhance City’s Emergency Water Supply and Delivery Proposal Number 165977 Proposed Length of Project 13 months Number of RFPs Mailed/Emailed 19 City of Palo Alto Page 4 Total Days to Respond to Proposal 34 Pre-Proposal Teleconference October 11, 2016 Number of Company Attendees at Pre-proposal Meeting 4 Number of Proposals Received: 2 Company Name Location (City, State) Amount* SRT Consultants San Francisco, CA $644,306 *Based on scope of work. See Cost of Services below. The proposal cost from the second vendor was $699,465. Cost of Services An evaluation committee reviewed the proposals, proposer qualifications and responses to the criteria identified in the RFP. After meeting with both proposing consultants, staff determined that the SRT Consultants team has the expertise and experience necessary to perform the work. The following criteria were used during the evaluation process to identify the most qualified firms, considering qualitative factors before viewing price proposals:  Quality and completeness of Proposal.  Quality, performance and effectiveness of the work plan and demonstrated ability in project thoroughness.  Proposer’s experience and qualifications of key staff to be assigned to the project.  Proposer’s ability to understand the project scope and meet schedule.  Cost to the City. Additional services that are related but not included within the scope will be determined by the City to be necessary for its proper completion, will be paid on a time and material basis up to a maximum amount of $64,430, using the consultant’s Charge Rates schedule shown in Exhibit C- 1 to the Agreement. The consultant shall not commence with additional services before the City approves of them in advance and in writing. The City may require the consultant to submit a written proposal detailing the proposed maximum compensation for any additional services. The total not to exceed budget amount proposed for this project is $708,736, comprising $644,306 for the based consultant services and $64,430 for additional services, as needed. The consultant’s final proposal cost was based on certain modifications to the scope of services provided in the City’s original proposal. The RFP process allowed the City to negotiate the price of the work, and the scope of work, upon selection of the successful firm. Resource Impact The funds for this professional services agreement and required staff time are budgeted in the Water Fund Seismic Water System Upgrades capital improvement project (WS-09000) which was approved in the FY 2017 Adopted Capital Budget at $1.9 million. Current staffing levels and the level of expertise needed to see this project through to completion prevent City staff from being able to perform this work. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Policy Implications The approval of this Enterprise Fund professional services contract is consistent with existing City policies. This recommendation is consistent with the Council-approved Utilities Strategic Plan (Staff Report 1880), especially Key Strategy No. 1, “Ensure a high level of system reliability in a cost effective and timely manner.” Environmental Review Council’s award of this contract does not meet the California Environmental Quality Act’s definition of a “project”, under Public Resources Code Section 21065, therefore, environmental review is not required. Attachments:  20170302 C17165977 Water Assessment (Final) CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C17165977 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND SRT CONSULTANTS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this 20th day of March, 2017, (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and SRT CONSULTANTS, a California corporation, located at 90 New Montgomery Street, Suite 905, San Francisco, CA 94105 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to assess the current domestic water system and operations configuration (“Project”) and desires to engage a consultant to provide engineering services in connection with the Project (“Services”). B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit “A”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described at Exhibit “A” in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through completion of the services in accordance with the Schedule of Performance attached at Exhibit “B”, or no later than March 20, 2020, whichever is shorter, unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit “B”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 ATTACHMENT A Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 2 not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”), and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Six Hundred Forty-four Thousand Three Hundred Six Dollars ($644,306.00). CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for Basic Services, Additional Services, and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed Seven Hundred Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty Six Dollars ($708,736.00) Dollars. The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C”, entitled “COMPENSATION” and Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described at Exhibit “A”. SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges (including an identification of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT’s billing rates (set forth in Exhibit “C- 1”). If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT’s payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City’s project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services. All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 3 and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services. SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT is solely responsible for costs, including, but not limited to, increases in the cost of Services, arising from or caused by CONSULTANT’s errors and omissions, including, but not limited to, the costs of corrections such errors and omissions, any change order markup costs, or costs arising from delay caused by the errors and omissions or unreasonable delay in correcting the errors and omissions. SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. If this Agreement pertains to the design of a public works project, CONSULTANT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of design submittal. If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (10%) of CITY’s stated construction budget, CONSULTANT shall make recommendations to CITY for aligning the PROJECT design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to CITY. SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the city manager. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the city manager will be void. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. Notwithstanding Section 11 above, CITY agrees that subconsultants may be used to complete the Services. The subconsultants authorized by CITY to perform work on this Project are: TJC and Associates, Inc. Balance Hydrologics, Inc. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of the city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Tanya Yurovsky as the project supervisor to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 4 progress, and execution of the Services to represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the Project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project director and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written approval of the CITY’s project manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY’s request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. CITY’s project manager is Jennifer Cioffi, Utilities Department, Engineering Division, 1007 Elwell Court, Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone: (650)496-4525. The project manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. CITY may designate an alternate project manager from time to time. SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specifications, calculations, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements (“Claims”) that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. 16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from Claims arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 5 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30) days’ notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT’s receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Chief Procurement Officer during the entire term of this Agreement. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 6 SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. 19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4, 20, and 25. 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 7 SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. 21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a “Consultant” as that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the CITY’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at CITY’s Purchasing Department, incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of CITY’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, CONSULTANT shall comply with the following zero waste requirements: (a) All printed materials provided by CCONSULTANT to CITY generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by CITY’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post- consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks. (b) Goods purchased by CONSULTANT on behalf of CITY shall be purchased in accordance with CITY’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Division’s office. (c) Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by CONSULTANT, at no DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 8 additional cost to CITY, for reuse or recycling. CONSULTANT shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. COMPLIANCE WITH PALO ALTO MINIMUM WAGE ORDINANCE. CONSULTANT shall comply with all requirements of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 4.62 (Citywide Minimum Wage), as it may be amended from time to time. In particular, for any employee otherwise entitled to the State minimum wage, who performs at least two (2) hours of work in a calendar week within the geographic boundaries of the City, CONSULTANT shall pay such employees no less than the minimum wage set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 4.62.030 for each hour worked within the geographic boundaries of the City of Palo Alto. In addition, CONSULTANT shall post notices regarding the Palo Alto Minimum Wage Ordinance in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code section 4.62.060. SECTION 25. NON-APPROPRIATION 25.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 26. PREVAILING WAGES AND DIR REGISTRATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS 26.1 CONSULTANT is not required to pay prevailing wages in performance and implementation of the Project in accordance with SB 7 if the contract is not a public works contract, if the contract does not include a public works construction project of more than $25,000, or the contract does not include a public works alteration, demolition, repair, or maintenance (collectively, ‘improvement’) project of more than $15,000. SECTION 27. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 27.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. 27.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 27.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third parties. 27.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 9 parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 27.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 27.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 27.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 27.8 In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the exhibits hereto or CONSULTANT’s proposal (if any), the Agreement shall control. In the case of any conflict between the exhibits hereto and CONSULTANT’s proposal, the exhibits shall control. 27.9 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, CITY shares with CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5(d) about a California resident (“Personal Information”), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform City immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the security of the Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct marketing purposes without City’s express written consent. 27.10 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement. 27.11 The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. 27.12 This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 1 CONTRACT No. C17165977 SIGNATURE PAGE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO City Manager or designee APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney or designee SRT CONSULTANTS Officer 1 By: Name: Title: Officer 2 By: Name: Title: Attachments: EXHIBIT “A”: SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT “B”: SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE EXHIBIT “C”: COMPENSATION EXHIBIT “C-1”: SCHEDULE OF RATES EXHIBIT “D”: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Tanya Yurovsky Principal Mark Quady Vice President and CFO Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 2 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES This Scope of Services addresses the CITY’s need to conduct an assessment of the CITY’s domestic water system and operations, recommend improvements in efficiency, and improve emergency response planning and the overall reliability of the system. The CITY’s overall project objectives include the following: 1. Review the Foothills Transmission System and provide recommendations for re- engineering. 2. Conduct a feasibility study of adding a new reservoir, pump station, and well to the system to increase emergency supply readiness. 3. Conduct a feasibility study of adding a new emergency standby well to Pressure Area 2. 4. Conduct a feasibility study for adding a new turnout to replace the Arastradero Turnout, in an effort to improve water quality. 5. Conduct a feasibility study for upgrading the capacity of the California Turnout. 6. Review the operation of the system’s pressure reducing valves and provide recommendations for adjustments. 7. Conduct a feasibility study for installing a new pump station at the El Camino Reservoir to improve service to Pressure Area 1. 8. Create a comprehensive Emergency Response Plan for system operations during various outages. The Scope of Services shall be carried out within eight (8) tasks (“Basic Services”), detailed below. BASIC SERVICES Task 1: Project Management and Administration CONSULTANT shall provide full-service project management and administration of the contract within the following sub-tasks. Subtask 1A – Kickoff Meeting Following the Notice to Proceed (NTP) from the CITY, CONSULTANT shall set up a Kickoff Meeting with the CITY’s staff. The goal of the meeting is to confirm the project goals and objectives, deliverables, and schedule. The meeting shall also serve to communicate CONSULTANT’s requests for specific information including any recent as-built drawings for the water system, along with other pertinent information. The meeting shall additionally establish project communications between CONSULTANT and CITY stakeholders including managers, operations, engineering, and support staff. Notes of the meeting shall be documented and distributed to the meeting attendees. The CITY shall provide a room for the meeting and secure participation of the appropriate CITY’s staff. DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 3 Subtask 1B – Monthly Progress Review Meetings CONSULTANT shall participate in monthly project meetings at the CITY’s offices to discuss work completed; project and task to-date status; and determine and manage action items, milestones, and deliverables. In addition to a monthly in-person meeting, CONSULTANT shall also coordinate with CITY staff on a weekly basis by phone conference. Following each monthly meeting, CONSULTANT shall distribute meeting notes to include action items, action leaders, and “required by” dates. The CITY shall provide a room for the meetings and secure participation of the appropriate CITY’s staff. Subtask 1C – Budget Management Following each monthly progress review meeting, CONSULTANT’s Project Manager shall meet with CITY’s Project Manager to review the project budget and discuss any previously unforeseen needs and tasks. Subtask 1D – Schedule Management CONSULTANT’s Project Manager shall meet with CITY’s Project Manager after each monthly progress meeting to review the project schedule and make any necessary adjustments. The Project Managers shall work together to identify and anticipate any potential roadblocks or long lead action items before they impact the schedule. This shall allow for schedule adjustments, as necessary, or to add any previously unforeseen needs and tasks to the schedule. CONSULTANT shall provide an updated schedule on a monthly basis following each monthly progress review meeting. Subtask 1E – Staff and Sub-Contractor Coordination CONSULTANT shall manage the budget, schedule, and as-needed tasks for the CONSULTANT’s subcontractors: TJCAA (structural and instrumentation and controls engineering) and Balance Hydrologics (groundwater/hydrogeology). Deliverables and Assumptions CONSULTANT Deliverables: • Draft Kickoff Meeting Agenda for CITY’s comments • Final Kickoff Meeting Agenda with the CITY’s comments incorporated • Kickoff Meeting notes documenting the discussion and updated project schedule with milestones • Monthly Progress Meeting agenda with action items • Monthly Budget Status Report • Monthly Schedule Update CITY Deliverables: • Conference Room for meetings • CITY staff attendance to meetings • CITY shall provide comments to draft agenda within 3 business days of receipt • CITY shall provide one consolidated set of review comments to CONSULTANT Task 2: Data Collection and Review of Operational Requirements CONSULTANT shall work with CITY staff to identify all data that needs to be collected to effectively assess the operational requirements of the water system. DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 4 Subtask 2A – Interview Engineers and Operators CONSULTANT shall conduct staff interviews and gather relevant information gathering to further inform the project and assist with assessment of the current facilities and procedures. CONSULTANT believes that the project can be streamlined if key CITY staff input is received upfront in an effort to gain updated and accurate information on the current operations of CITY’s water system, and to identify any information gaps. CONSULTANT shall schedule a meeting with key CITY’s engineering and operations staff to review the various tasks and the related facilities. For any additional information identified, CONSULTANT shall contact the appropriate CITY staff and arrange to collect the information. Subtask 2B – Review Existing Information and Collect Data CONSULTANT shall review relevant previous applicable reports and studies, as well as applicable plans, specifications, and process and instrumentation diagrams for the facilities in question. Deliverables and Assumptions CONSULTANT Deliverables: • Draft Staff Interview Outline for CITY’s comments • Final Staff Interview Outline with CITY’s comments incorporated • Staff Interview notes and list of any additional information needs identified CITY Deliverables: • CITY shall review and comment on the proposed meeting agenda within 3 business days of receipt • CITY shall provide a conference room and secure staff attendance at the interviews • CITY shall provide all identified information within two (2) weeks of request • One consolidated set of review comments shall be provided Task 3: Hydraulic Model CONSULTANT shall assess the existing hydraulic model and update and expand it as needed or construct a new hydraulic model. Subtask 3A – Assess Existing Hydraulic Model The CITY shall provide CONSULTANT with the existing WaterCAD hydraulic model. CONSULTANT shall review the model and assess the quality of the records in the model. This shall include reviewing system demands and multipliers, pipeline records (size, material, and location), and facility records (tanks, reservoirs, pump stations, wells, and pressure reducing valves). CONSULTANT shall compare the model facilities with CITY’s most recent facility records to determine the updates required for the model. If the CITY’S existing WaterCAD hydraulic shows that required updates are minimal, then CONSULTANT may recommend the existing model be updated, and then expanded, to provide a completed model. However, if the necessary updates are significant or excessive, CONSULTANT may recommend a new model be created. If CITY provides updated records in GIS or AutoCAD format, these can be utilized to construct a new hydraulic model. DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 5 Subtask 3B – Update or Renew Existing Model Based on the results of the assessment in Task 3A, CONSULTANT shall either update the existing model to encompass the entire water system, or shall develop a new model based on current water system information. If the model can be updated, then the existing pipes shall be updated to reflect 2016 records, and the remaining infrastructure shall be created from 2016 records and attached to the existing model. If an entirely new model is to be developed (existing model cannot or should not be updated), all 2016 records shall be imported and the model built from the ground up. Subtask 3C –Develop New Demand Allocation CONSULTANT shall utilize the SCADA production records and 2016 billing records to assign new demands to the model and to calculate demand sets, including ADD, MDD, and PHD. Subtask 3D – Validate and Calibrate Updated or New Model CONSULTANT shall utilize standard methods for validating and calibrating the model. The activities may include the following: Model Validation – CONSULTANT shall utilize available operational data, from SCADA records or other sources, to compare the results of the model to those present in the real world. Validation usually occurs by “stressing” the model to see how the model reacts to an extraordinary situation and then comparing the results (indicated by pressure) to actual conditions. For example, this might entail comparing pressures between the system and model during a flush-down operation, or checking the model against previous fire hydrant test records or main breaks. If there were insufficient data available, new hydrant tests or other operational scenarios shall be defined to help validate the model. Model Calibration – Based on the validation runs, the model may need to be adjusted. If validation runs showed a significant difference between actual and model conditions, the model is adjusted, or calibrated, to better reflect the real system conditions. This usually entails adjusting pipeline roughness factors, and adjusting elevations and settings (e.g. pressure reducing valve settings). After the model is calibrated it should closely resemble how the system actually reacts under all typical operational conditions as well as stressed conditions. Subtask 3E – Maintain CITY’s Model CONSULTANT shall be available on an on-call basis to regularly maintain the CITY’s hydraulic model for three (3) years. This subtask would include the following activities: • Update the model to include repaired or replaced infrastructure – Annually • Re-calibration of the model for current flow and pressure trends – Annually • Maintain all licenses and updates – Annually Task 3F – As-Needed Hydraulic Modeling Services CONSULTANT shall be available on an on-call basis to provide as-needed water system modeling for CITY whenever necessary for three (3) years. As-needed modeling tasks might include, but are not limited to, the following: DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 6 • Assessment of the system’s hydraulic capacity for future growth and for new buildings, including assessment of fire flow deficiencies • Validation of fire flow capacity for new developments • Investigations of new and improved operational strategies • Investigation of flow, pressure, and water quality issues that may arise in the system • Shut-down planning and alternative flow routing • Unidirectional flushing (UDF) planning • New water sources’ (wells and turnouts) planning • Other assignments to be determined by CITY staff The level of effort for Maintaining CITY’s Model and providing As-Needed Hydraulic Modeling Services for three (3) years is not known; however, budget estimates have been provided that will allow CONSULTANT to proceed on a time and materials basis based on CITY’s needs until budgets are fully utilized. If additional modeling services are needed, an additional fee will be negotiated with the CITY at that time, or both parties will agree to use any available budget from the Additional Services task. Deliverables and Assumptions CONSULTANT Deliverables: • Technical Memorandum (TM) summarizing the assessment, and recommending either to update or develop a new model, summarizing the demands and boundary conditions for the model, and summarizing the proposed method for validating and calibrating the model • Ongoing record of model activities required to “maintain the CITY’s model,” such as infrastructure updates and model updates • As-needed TMs for as-needed modeling analysis (e.g., Fireflow TM) CITY Deliverables: • CITY shall provide the latest model for CONSULTANT to open and assess within 2 weeks after request • CITY shall provide comprehensive 1-year production data within 2 weeks after request • CITY shall provide comprehensive 1-year billing data within 2 weeks after request • CITY shall provide any existing unaccounted for water estimates upon request • Billing records have a location field (either address or spatial coordinates) that can be used by CONSULTANT to spatially geocode the customer demands in GIS • All of CITY’s existing and updated pipeline records are available electronically, either in GIS Shapefile format, or AutoCAD, and records are scaled and indicate size and material. Manual input or development of pipeline drawings shall require additional fee be negotiated with CITY. • For model validation/calibration, it is assumed that SCADA records and/or flushing records exist that are sufficient for validating the model, and that two flushing records per pressure area exist and are sufficient for validating the model. Any special validation DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 7 activities required (such as physical hydrant testing throughout the system) to validate the model shall be considered Additional Services and require advance, written approval from CITY. • Task cost estimate assumes a completely new model shall be constructed; if model can be updated, CONSULTANT shall negotiate a fee reduction for this task with CITY as necessary. Task 4: Evaluation and Recommendations CONSULTANT shall work with CITY to provide a comprehensive assessment of the system’s operations by utilizing the newly developed/updated model, as well as by interviewing operators and reviewing SCADA records. The assessment shall include a detailed analysis of every pressure area individually and together as part of an integrated system. Subtask 4A – Assess Existing Water System Configuration All water systems must provide a balance between (1) emergency supplies and fire flow, and (2) water quality and public health. These goals can at times be contrary to one another; however it is the constant task of a water utility to maintain sufficient hydraulic capacity and redundancy to provide emergency supply and fire flow while minimizing overall water age in the system. Task 4A shall assess each CITY pressure area in terms of its ability to achieve these two goals. Activities related to this task include the following: • Emergency Supply Assessment – CONSULTANT shall define the emergency supply needs for each pressure area and utilize the hydraulic model to determine if there is sufficient supply and/or storage to meet these demands. • Fire flow Analysis – CONSULTANT shall conduct a batch fire flow analysis for each pressure area using the WaterCAD fire flow tool and determine areas of insufficient hydraulic capacity. • Water Age Analysis – An extended period simulation is needed to determine water age in the system, which is not included in this scope of work, however CONSULTANT shall utilize a benchtop spreadsheet model to estimate the water age in each pressure area, based on how the system is normally operated. This analysis shall be cross-referenced with water quality data to see if high water age areas agree with past water quality measurements. • Operational Efficiency Analysis – CONSULTANT shall review historic SCADA data to assess the operations of tanks, reservoirs, and pump stations and determine the overall efficiency of the system. This analysis shall indicate which storage is over/underutilized, and which pump stations are over/underutilized. • Financial Analysis – CONSULTANT shall cross-reference the above assessments and analyses with related energy cost data for the various facilities to see if better efficiencies can be achieved. Subtask 4B – Determine Operational Inefficiencies After the assessments and analyses under Subtask 4A are completed, CONSULTANT shall meet with CITY engineering and operations staff to discuss preliminary findings and to determine known or suspected inefficiencies. CONSULTANT shall then utilize financial data to investigate and determine system inefficiencies, reviewing the costs to operate various pump stations and DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 8 other facilities. CONSULTANT shall then meet with CITY staff to present the identified inefficiencies. Subtask 4C – Provide Recommendations for Improvements / New Facilities Based on the inefficiencies identified in Subtask 4B, CONSULTANT shall provide operational recommendations, maintenance recommendations, and capital improvement project recommendations, including combinations of the following: installation of a new pump station, new well, turnout, and/or reservoir, and many other currently unforeseen recommendations. CONSULTANT shall develop a TM summarizing the inefficiencies identified and proposed alternatives for increased efficiency, which shall include the following: 1. Current cost of business under typical operations 2. Planning level capital and O&M cost estimate of installing improvements 3. Cost savings over time including return on investment and pay-off period analysis These improvement recommendations shall be at the pre-planning level and shall initially assume few to no siting and permit issues. Deliverables and Assumptions CONSULTANT Deliverables: • Email or memorandum with exhaustive list of necessary records, studies, and data required to conduct the water system assessment • Meeting agenda and notes for inefficiency review meeting with CITY engineers and operators • Draft TM summarizing inefficiencies identified during assessment and potential alternatives and recommendations developed to minimize inefficiencies for CITY’s review and comments • Final TM within 2 weeks of receiving comments from CITY CITY Deliverables: • All identified as-built records, studies, and SCADA records required to assess the water system within 2 weeks of request • CITY shall provide a meeting room and ensure critical staff is present to review system inefficiencies • CITY shall provide review and comments to Draft TMs within 2 weeks of submittal to the CITY • CITY shall provide one consolidated set of review comments Task 5: Project Feasibility and Constructability for New Facilities CONSULTANT shall further investigate proposed improvement alternatives developed under Task 4 with a comprehensive feasibility study that includes an assessment of the proposed alternatives with respect to constructability, siting, and construction/environmental permitting. Subtask 5A – New Storage Facility Feasibility, Siting, and Permitting Requirements CONSULTANT shall provide a comprehensive review of any new storage facilities identified in previous tasks, including the following: DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 9 • Type of storage (concrete, steel, sub-surface, etc.) • Storage dimensions and size • Foundation needs compared with existing soil type • Site access for construction • Environmental impacts and corresponding permit needs • Local and SWRCB permitting requirements Subtask 5B – New Pump Station(s) Feasibility, Siting, and Permitting Requirements CONSULTANT shall provide a comprehensive review of any new pump station facilities identified, including the following: • Type of pump station to be installed (vertical turbine, centrifugal, dry-pit, etc.) • Size of the facility and its enclosure • Required accessories (variable frequency drives and controls) • Foundation requirements • Site access for construction • Environmental impacts (siting, sound issues) and corresponding permit needs • Local and SWRCB permitting requirements Subtask 5C – New Well Facility Feasibility, Siting, and Permitting Requirements CONSULTANT shall provide a comprehensive review of any new well facilities identified, including the following: • Type/size of well and pump to be installed (above grade or submersible) • Facility size and footprint • Likelihood of sustainable yield • Enclosure needs • Sanitary siting issues • Accessories such as VFDs and controls • Access for drilling and construction • Environmental impacts (siting, sound) and corresponding permit needs • Local and SWRCB permitting requirements Subtask 5D – New Turnout Feasibility, Siting, and Permitting Requirements CONSULTANT shall provide a comprehensive review of expanding the existing California Turnout, and replacing the Arastradero Turnout, including the following: • SFPUC requirements for upgrading or replacing a turnout on their Bay Division Pipelines • Likely size and footprint required to upsize or replace a turnout • Review of possible siting locations for a new turnout • Siting to minimize water quality issues (sited at higher elevation on the BDPL) • Feasibility of a new screening system to remove material (e.g. algae mats) • Hydraulic analysis of upgraded or replaced turnout DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 10 • Access for construction • Environmental impacts and corresponding permit needs • Local and SWRCB permitting requirements CONSULTANT shall summarize the findings of the constructability reviews in a Draft TM and present it to the CITY for comments. Deliverables and Assumptions CONSULTANT Deliverables and Limitations: • Draft planning level feasibility / constructability report with potential improvements • Meeting and presentation to CITY of findings • Final planning level feasibility / constructability report with proposed improvements within two (2) weeks of receiving CITY’s comments to the Draft report • The feasibility and constructability report shall include up to: one (1) new pump station, one (1) new reservoir or tank, one (1) new well, one (1) new turnout, and one (1) upgrade of existing turnout. Any reduction or increase in the number of reviewed facilities may require a fee adjustment. • Any foundation analysis or recommendations may require a geotechnical study be conducted under the Additional Services budget. CITY Deliverables: • CITY shall provide a meeting room and ensure proper staff is available to review the report • CITY shall provide review and comments to report within two (2) weeks of submittal to the CITY • CITY shall provide one consolidated set of review comments Task 6: Emergency Response Plan Based on the results of the hydraulic analyses in Task 3, CONSULTANT shall conduct a more detailed analysis to develop a comprehensive Emergency Response Plan (ERP) for alternative routing of water under various emergency scenarios. CONSULTANT shall work with CITY staff to develop and assess these scenarios, analyze alternatives, and summarize the scenarios in a new ERP for the CITY. CONSULTANT shall then summarize the procedures for CITY staff in a concise, easy-to-use format. Subtask 6A – Develop Emergency Scenarios with CITY Staff CONSULTANT staff shall work with CITY’s engineering and operations staff to determine a list of potential emergency scenarios, for instance: • Large local earthquake • Large local fire • Large catastrophic transmission pipeline rupture • Large catastrophic flood or landslide • Large and sustained electrical outage • Significant water quality event or chemical misfeed DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 11 • Hetch Hetchy supply outage After inventorying the potential emergency scenarios, CONSULTANT shall assess all scenarios according to their likelihood and consequence of occurrence, and narrow the list of scenarios down according to overall risk. Those with the highest risk shall be addressed in more detail, whereas lower risk scenarios shall be addressed more generally. Subtask 6B – Conduct Desktop Exercise of Emergency Response CONSULTANT shall set up a meeting with CITY staff to conduct an emergency response desktop exercise. During this exercise, scenarios shall be walked through in a step-by-step process to flesh out potential issues that need to be addressed. By going through each scenario with staff, CONSULTANT shall be able to determine the key issues that must be overcome to achieve a reliable and effective response. This task shall be conducted concurrently with Task 4 to identify emergency response-related improvements that shall be included in the feasibility study in Task 5. Subtask 6C – Develop Emergency Response Plan for Water Operations Based on the above tasks, and based on the feedback from CITY staff, CONSULTANT shall develop an ERP for the existing system that addresses the most significant emergency response scenarios. The ERP shall be developed for the existing system; however, recommendations for future improvements related to emergency response shall be included in the TMs provided under Tasks 4 and 5. The ERP shall define the hierarchal structure for decision-making, create the incident command structure, and provide procedures for responding to the emergency scenarios identified in Subtasks 6A and 6B. Deliverables and Assumptions CONSULTANT Deliverables: • Meeting to develop emergency scenarios and meeting minutes • Meeting to conduct desktop exercises for emergency response and meeting minutes • Draft ERP for CITY’s review and comments • Final ERP with CITY’s comments incorporated, within two (2) weeks of receiving CITY comments • Meeting to present final ERP CONSULTANT Assumptions/Limitations: • CITY shall provide a meeting room and ensure all critical staff members are available to attend the three meetings to be conducted under this subtask • CITY shall provide comments within two (2) weeks of receiving a draft deliverable from CONSULTANT • CITY shall provide one consolidated set of review comments to CONSULTANT Task 7: Assessment Report Based on all of the analyses and assessments conducted in the previous tasks, CONSULTANT shall develop an Assessment Report summarizing all findings, recommendations, and emergency DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 12 response planning. The Assessment Report shall include relevant information previously included in the TMs developed for Tasks 2 through 6. Subtask 7A – Draft Assessment Report and Review Meeting CONSULTANT shall develop a Draft Assessment Report for CITY review and comments. The subtask shall include a review meeting with CITY staff to present and discuss the report. Subtask 7B –Final Assessment Report and Presentation to the CITY CONSULTANT shall integrate the CITY’s review comments into a Final Assessment Report and shall provide CITY staff with a presentation of findings. Deliverables and Assumptions CONSULTANT Deliverables: • Draft Assessment Report and meeting to review preliminary recommendations and findings • Final Assessment Report and meeting to present finalized recommendations and findings • Consultant shall finalize Assessment Report within three (3) weeks of receiving comments from the CITY • The ERP shall be a stand-alone document and shall not be included in the Assessment Report • The Final Assessment Report shall incorporate information from the TMs and reports developed for tasks 2 through 5 CONSULTANT Assumptions/Limitations • CITY shall provide a meeting room and ensure all critical staff members are present. • CITY shall provide comments within three (3) weeks of receiving the Draft Assessment Report • CITY shall provide one consolidated set of review comments to CONSULTANT Task 8: Ancillary Services The purpose of this task is to provide the CITY with flexibility for utilizing ancillary services as needed. The analyses under this project shall illuminate several alternatives for new or upgraded facilities, and therefore additional work may be needed to conduct more detailed investigations into the design feasibility of such alternatives. Such ancillary services may include: • As-needed field testing, such as geotechnical soil testing or environmental reviews. • Advanced modeling activities, such as implementing an extended period simulation (EPS) for water age and water quality analysis, or conducting transient analysis. • Further pre-design activities, as determined and needed. Pre-design activities and expertise that CONSULTANT believes shall be required to completely assess the recommended improvements, include: - Process Controls – how recommended improvements would be controlled and interfaced through the CITY’s existing Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system; CONSULTANT shall utilize TJCAA for expertise required for controls. DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 13 - Miscellaneous Structural Review – for constructability reviews, structural questions shall invariably arise; CONSULTANT shall utilize TJCAA for structural reviews and questions. - Well Feasibility and Hydrogeology – for feasibility of various well sites, a hydrogeologist shall likely be needed to investigate potential sites and recommend locations with the best geology and potential yields. Although Ancillary Services differ from Additional Services, the City and Consultant will nevertheless follow the requesting procedures and other requirements for Additional Services (section 4, Exhibit C) when requesting Ancillary Services. As with Additional Services, City will not be required to pay for Ancillary Services unless the requirements for requesting such services are met. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Additional Services, which are unforeseen but nevertheless may be required, are distinct from the Basic Services set forth above and the cost of such Additional Services, if requested by City in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 4 and Exhibit “C” shall not exceed Sixty-Four Thousand, Four Hundred and Thirty dollars ($64,430). Additional unforeseen services may include, but are not limited to the following: additional meetings, field investigations and testing, and any other miscellaneous tasks related to but not otherwise covered by Basic Services (Tasks 1 through 8). DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 14 EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number of days/weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of receipt of the notice to proceed. Task Start End Duration 1 – Project Management 3/20/2017 9/20/2018 18 Months 2 – Data Collection and Operational Review 3/20/2017 4/20/2017 1 Month 3 – Hydraulic Model 4/20/2017 7/20/2017 3 Months* 4 – System Evaluation 7/20/2017 9/20/2017 2 Months 5 – Project Feasibility 9/20/2017 11/20/2017 2 Months 6 – Emergency Operations Plan 11/20/2017 3/20/2018 4 Months 7 – Assessment Report (DRAFT) 3/20/2018 6/20/2018 3 Months 7 – Assessment Report (FINAL) 6/20/2018 8/20/2018 2 Months 8 – Ancillary Services 9/20/2017 8/20/2018 11 Months *Task 3 includes both development of the hydraulic model (Task 3A thru 3D) and a three year maintenance agreement for on-call maintenance and modeling services (Task 3E and 3F). Tasks 3A thru 3D will take approximately three months to complete. All work associated with Tasks 3E and 3F will begin upon approval of this Contract on March 20, 2017, and will extend three years to March 20, 2020. DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 15 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, and the total compensation for Additional Services do not exceed the amounts set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. Scope/Task Item Total NTE TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED, TASK 1 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT $69,756 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED, TASK 2 – DATA COLLECTION/OPERATIONS $10,945 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED, TASK 3 – HYDRAULIC MODELING $136,230 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED, TASK 4 – EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS $80,575 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED, TASK 5 – FEASIBILITY AND CONSTRUCTABILITY $100,670 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED, TASK 6 – EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN $58,650 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED, TASK 7 – ASSESSMENT REPORT $44,980 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED, TASK 8 – ANCILLARY SERVICES $132,500 Total Not To Exceed For Basic Services (Tasks 1-8) $634,306 Total Not to Exceed For Reimbursable Expenses $10,000 Total Not To Exceed For Basic Services (Task 1-8) and Reimbursable Expenses $644,306 Total Not To Exceed, Additional Services $64,430 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FOR BASIC SERVICES (TASKS 1-8), REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES $708,736 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: A. Travel outside the San Francisco Bay area, including transportation and meals, will be reimbursed at actual cost subject to the City of Palo Alto’s policy for reimbursement of travel and meal expenses for City of Palo Alto employees. DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 16 B. Long distance telephone service charges, cellular phone service charges, facsimile transmission and postage charges are reimbursable at actual cost. All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $250 shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s project manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 17 EXHIBIT “C-1” SCHEDULE OF RATES Principal Engineer 200$ Project Manager 200$ Senior Operations Specialist 185$ Senior Engineer 163$ Project Engineer 118$ Staff Engineer 100$ Labor Categories Hourly Rate DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 18 EXHIBIT “D” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: REQUIRE D TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY (30) DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE AT THE FOLLOWING URL: https://www.planetbids.com/portal/portal.cfm?CompanyID=25569. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 19 B. CROSS LIABILITY THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON- PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. VENDORS ARE REQUIRED TO FILE THEIR EVIDENCE OF INSURANCE AND ANY OTHER RELATED NOTICES WITH THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AT THE FOLLOWING URL: HTTPS://WWW.PLANETBIDS.COM/PORTAL/PORTAL.CFM?COMPANYID=25569 OR HTTP://WWW.CITYOFPALOALTO.ORG/GOV/DEPTS/ASD/PLANET_BIDS_HOW_TO.ASP DocuSign Envelope ID: 15442B60-7A14-4234-B860-41E397E7F465 City of Palo Alto (ID # 7719) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Contract Amendments for Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP Title: Approval of Contract Amendment Number 2 With SP Plus in the Amount of $368,390 for Additional Services for Parking Permits and On-Site Customer Service and to Extend the Term of the Agreement to March 15, 2019; Approval of Contract Amendment Number 2 With Serco, Inc. in the Amount of $751,224 for Enforcement of Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) District and to Extend the Term of the Agreement to May 31, 2019; Approval of Contract Amendment Number 2 With McGuire Pacific Constructors in the Amount of $181,035 for Construction Services for Evergreen Park - Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking District From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council take the following actions to update the contracts in support of the Downtown RPP to accommodate recent changes to the program and to allow for implementation of the Evergreen Park – Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program: 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the attached contract amendment (Attachment A) with SP Plus in the amount of $368,390 for Additional Services for Parking Permits and On-Site support for a total contract amount not to exceed $746,458, and to extend the term of the agreement to March 15, 2019. 2. Approve and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the attached contract amendment (Attachment B) with SERCO in the amount of $751,224 for Parking Enforcement for a total contract amount not to exceed $2,320,854, and to extend the term of the agreement to May 31, 2019. 3. Approve and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the attached contract amendment (Attachment C) with McGuire Pacific Constructors in the amount City of Palo Alto Page 2 of $181,035 for Construction Services (sign installation) for a total contract amount not to exceed $704,035. 4. Find these actions exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). Background and Discussion Council adopted Ordinance 5294 that established a City-wide framework for establishment of neighborhood-specific residential Preferential Parking (RPP) in December of 2014 to address parking challenges throughout the City. At that time, Council approved the establishment of the first RPP district for residential areas surrounding the Downtown area. Subsequently, the City released three Requests for Proposals (RFP’s) in support of the Downtown RPP program. One was a solicitation to create a new public parking website for the City and develop an online permit sales portal, the second for parking enforcement, and the third for installation of signage. After vetting by City staff of several proposals received, Council approved the award of contracts to SP Plus, SERCO, and McGuire Pacific Constructors respectively. On January 23, 2017 (Staff Report 7375), the City Council adopted a new resolution creating a RPP program in the Evergreen Park and Mayfield Neighborhoods. The implementation of this new district, which is bounded by Park Boulevard, Caltrain Rail Corridor, Oregon Expressway, Page Mill Road and El Camino Real, requires amending the existing contracts with SP Plus, SERCO and McGuire Pacific Constructors in order to provide needed services. As discussed under Resource Impacts below, only one-time funding has been approrpiated for initial start-up costs associated with the Evergreen Park - Mayfield RPP. The approval of additional ongoing funding will require additional budgetary actions including an estimated General Fund subsidy of approximately $40,000 in Fiscal Year 2018. Contract Amendments This report recommends amendments to three contracts that will support both the implementation of the Evergreen Park – Mayfield RPP as well as the ongoing operations of the current Downtown RPP. Amendment Two to Contract No. C15156501: SP Plus (Attachment A) The formation of the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP District necessitates the extension of services of SP Plus. The amendment provides Permit Fulfillment/Customer Support for the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP, including on-site customer service support at City Hall on a regular basis. On-site service assists those customers that do not have email addresses or aren’t comfortable navigating the internet. Lastly, the amendment extends the term date of the contract one additional year, to March 15, 2019. Because this amendment includes City of Palo Alto Page 3 services to the Downtown RPP and Evergreen Park - Mayfield, the portion that applies to Downtown RPP will be borne by the Downtown RPP budget ($219,733) and the portion that applies to Evergreen Park - Mayfield ($148,657) will be budgeted to the Evergreen Park - Mayfield RPP Operating Budget. Amendment Two to Contract No. C15156763: Serco Inc. (Attachment B) The contract amendment will enable Serco to hire, train and equip one new officer to provide parking enforcement in the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP District. The amendment will also extend the term of the contract one additional year, to May 31, 2019 to provide services to both the Evergreen Park - Mayfield and Downtown RPP districts. Similar to the SP Plus amendment above, the portion that applies to Downtown RPP ($572,333) will be borne by the Downtown RPP budget and the portion that applies to Evergreen Park – Mayfield ($178,891) will be budgeted to the Evergreen Park – Mayfield RPP Operating Budget. A total of seven officers will be enforcing two RPP jurisdictions. Amendment Two to Contract No. C15157271: McGuire Pacific Constructors (Attachment C) This amendment will extend the existing contract with the Consultant to provide and install RPP signs in the newly created Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP District. The amendment also provides for the fabrication and installation of stickers for Downtown RPP signage indicating the expanded hours of enforcement in the Downtown RPP District. This amendment is budgeted to CIP PL-15003, Residential Preferential Parking. Timeline Upon approval of respective contract amendments, the program could be in place and ready for enforcement on or about April 1, 2017. Resource Impact Combined, the contracts for operations of the Evergreen Park-Mayfield district equal $1,119,614 over two years. The contract for the initial installation of signage to implement the program costs an additional $181,035. Although implementation costs are accounted for in the FY 2017 Adopted Budget, ongoing management of the Evergreen Park – Mayfield RPP will require a subsidy from the General Fund beginning in Fiscal Year 2018. The chart below outlines the anticipated FY 2018 budget for Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP (exclusive of City staff charges which may be budgeted in the future, depending upon the level of required staff involvement): City of Palo Alto Page 4 Estimated Revenue Permit Type Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP Resident Annual 68,285$ Resident One-day Scratcher 1,444$ Employee One-day Scratcher 285$ Total Employee Annual 22,400$ Citations 40,000$ Total Estimated Annual Revenue 132,414$ Expenses Enforcement (Serco)91,099$ Permits, website, customer service (SP Plus) 73,578$ Citation processing 4,620$ Bank charges, misc 2,800$ Total Expense 172,097$ Fiscal Year 2018 Proposed Operating Budget (Exclusive of City staff costs) The signage costs in the amendment are expected to be fully expended within the first year. The Fiscal Year 2017 Adopted Capital Budget provides sufficient resources in Capital Project PL-15003, RPP, for the amendment of the McGuire Pacific Constructors contract. No additional resources are needed. Policy Implications The following comprehensive Plan goals, programs and policies are relevant to the implementation of the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP program. POLICY T-2: Consider economic, environmental, and social cost issues in local transportation decisions. POLICY T-45: Provide sufficient parking in the University Avenue/Downtown and California Avenue business districts to address long-range needs. PROGRAM T-50: Continue working with merchants, the chamber of Commerce, neighbors, and a parking consultant to explore options for constructing new parking facilities or using existing parking more efficiently. City of Palo Alto Page 5 PROGRAM 51: Work with merchants to designate dedicated employee parking areas. POLICY T-46: Minimize the need for all-day employee parking facilities in the University Avenue/Downtown and California Avenue business districts and encourage short-term customer parking. POLICY T-47: Protect residential areas from the parking impacts of nearby districts. PROGRAM T-52: Evaluate options to ensure maximum use of the City parking structures in the University Avenue/Downtown and California Avenue areas. PROGRAM 53: Discourage parking facilities that would intrude into adjacent residential neighborhoods. Environmental Review The recommended actions are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the adoption and implementation of these documents may have a significant effect on the environment and Section 15301 in that these proposed documents will have a minor impact on existing facilities. Attachments:  Attachment A: SP Plus Contract Amendment (PDF)  Attachment B: SERCO Contract Amendment (PDF)  Attachment C: McGuire Contract Amendment (PDF) Attachments:  Attachment A C15156501 SP Plus Contract Amendment No 2  Attachment B C15156763 SERCO Amendment No 2 Council Ready  Attachment C C15157271 McGuire Amendment No 4 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 2014 1 of 11 AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. C15156501 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND SP PLUS CORPORATION This Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. C15156501 (“Contract”) is entered into February 27, 2017 by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and SP PLUS CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation ("CONSULTANT"). R E C I T A L S A. The Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of design and implementation of a new hosted parking website which includes all information on permits, garages. B. CITY intends to extend the term and increase the compensation from $378,068.00 by $368,390.00 to $746,458.00 for the continuation of services as stated in EXHIBIT “A” Scope of Services. C. The parties wish to amend the Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 2 TERM is hereby amended to read as follows: “SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through March 15, 2019 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement.” SECTION 2. Section 4 COMPENSATION is hereby amended to read as follows: “SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed, Year One, Not to Exceed: $160,429.00 Year Two, Not To Exceed: $142,545.00 Year Three, Not to Exceed: $219,507.00 Year Four, Not to Exceed: $223,977.00 Total Compensation for all four years shall not exceed Seven Hundred Forty Six Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Eight Dollars ($746,458.00). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C- 1”, entitled “RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. If any regulatory changes, or changes in applicable laws, have a material impact on CONSULTANT’s expenses in performing its obligations under this Agreement, CONSULTANT and CITY agree that the parties will negotiate in good faith equitable adjustments in compensation. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CEE2604-3EDC-4367-8BDC-38BE78977B04 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 2014 2 of 11 Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibit “A”.” SECTION 3. The following exhibit(s) to the Contract is/are hereby amended to read as set forth in the attachment(s) to this Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference: a. Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION”. b. Exhibit “C1” entitled “RATE SCHEDULE”. SECTION 4. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVED AS TO FORM: SP PLUS CORPORATION Attachments: EXHIBIT "C": COMPENSATION EXHIBIT "C1": RATE SCHEDULE DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CEE2604-3EDC-4367-8BDC-38BE78977B04 Regional Manager Bill Kepp Senior Vice President Steve Aiello Professional Services Rev. Feb. 2014 3 of 11 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $746,458.00. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $746,458.00. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT Task 1 $43,804.00 (T2 Flex, T2 eBusiness, and T2 Travel) Task 2 $6,150.00 (Website Design) Task 3 $12,080.00 (Website Development) Task 4 $24,665.00 (Website Hosting & Maintenance) Task 5 $55,636.00 (Project Management) Task 6 $45,253.00 (T2 Flex & eBusiness Annual Subscription Fees) Task 7 $95,130.00 (T2 Flex & eBusiness Permit Fulfillment/ Customer support) Task 8 $1,350.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CEE2604-3EDC-4367-8BDC-38BE78977B04 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 2014 4 of 11 (Permit Configuration Fee) AMENDMENT NO. 1 Task 9 $25,000.00 (In-Person Support for Phase 1) Task 10 $15,000.00 (In-Person Support for Phase 2) Task 11 $54,000.00 (Permit costs for Phase 2, based on an estimate of 11,900 permits at a cost of $4.53 per permit) AMENDMENT NO. 2 Additional Compensation for year 3 $144,413.00 Year Four $223,977.00 Sub-total Basic Services $746,458.00 Maximum Total Compensation $746,458.00 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: NONE All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CEE2604-3EDC-4367-8BDC-38BE78977B04 5 of 6 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “C-1” RATE SCHEDULE Fixed Start Up Costs (based on specified scope/development hours): Task 1 T2 Flex, T2 eBusiness, and T2 Travel $43,804 Task 2 SP+ Website Design $6,150 Task 3 SP+ Website Development $12,080 Total Fixed Start Up Costs $62,034 Recurring Annual Costs: Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Task 4 SP+ Website Hosting and Maintenance $7,980 $8,219 $8,466 Task 5 SP+ Project Management $18,000 $18,540 $19,096 T2 Recurring T2 Flex & eBusiness Annual Subscription Fees $14,355 $15,072 $15,826 Total Recurring Annual Costs $40,335 $41,831 $43,388 Optional Costs: T2 Recurring T2 Flex & eBusiness Permit Fulfillment/Customer Support Fees $31,710 $31,710 $31,710 Estimated cost to provide permits and permit support based on and estimate of 7,000 permits at a cost of $4.53 per permit ($0.99 WW&L Permits, and, $3.54 Permits Direct Fulfillment)*. T2 Fixed Permit Configuration (one time only fee) $1,350 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 TOTAL PER YEAR $135,429 $73,541 $75,098 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED: $284,068.00 * If more than 7,000 permits are sold, the City agrees to pay an additional $4.53 per permit over and above the not to exceed compensation amounts reflected in the agreement by issuance of an amendment to the agreement. AMENDMENT NO. 1 CITY will pay CONTRACTOR an hourly rate of $41.16 per person per hour for on-site customer service support. $25,000 (In-Person Support for Phase 1) $15,000 (In-Person Support for Phase 2) $54,000 (Permit costs for Phase 2, based on an estimate of 11,900 permits at a cost of $4.53 per permit) AMENDMENT NO. 1 TOTAL $94,000.00 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 TOTAL PER YEAR $160,429 $142,541 $75,098 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED: $378,068.00 AMENDMENT NO. 2 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CEE2604-3EDC-4367-8BDC-38BE78977B04 6 of 6 Revision April 28, 2014 Year 3 Year 4 Recurring Annual Cost: 3/16/17 through 3/8/18 3/9/2018 through 3/9/2019 Task 4 SP+ Website Hosting and Maintenance $10,159 $10,464 Task 5 SP+ Project Management $22,915 $23,603 T2 Recurring T2 Flex & eBusiness Annual Subscription Fees $15,826 $16,617 Total Recurring Annual Costs $48,900 $50,684 Permit Administrator Based on monthly billing of $7,460 with annual 3% increase $89,520 $92,206 Permit Fulfillment T2 Recurring, T2 Flex, & eBusiness Permit Fulfillment/Customer Support fees based on an estimate of 11,900 permits at $4.53 per permit ( $0.99 WW&L, $3.54 direct fulfillment)* $53,907 $53,907 Additional Evergreen Park-Mayfield Permit Fulfillment costs 6,000 permits at $4.53* $ 27,180 $ 27,180 Total Per Year $219,507 $223,977 Total for Years 3 & 4 $443,484.00 Total for Years 1 & 2 $302,974.00 Contract Total Not to Exceed $746,458.00 *If more that 17,900 total permits are sold, the City agrees to pay an additional $4.53 per permit over and above the not to exceed compensation AMENDMENT NO. 2 TOTAL $368,390.00 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 TOTAL PER YEAR $160,429 $142,541 $219,507 $223,977 TOTAL CONTRACT NOT TO EXCEED: $746,458.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CEE2604-3EDC-4367-8BDC-38BE78977B04 1 Revision April 28, 2014 AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. C15156763 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND SERCO INC. This Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. C15156763 (“Contract”) is entered into February 27, 2017 by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and SERCO INC., a New Jersey corporation, located at 1818 Library Street, Suite 1000, Reston, Virginia 20190 ("CONSULTANT"). R E C I T A L S A. The Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of parking enforcement services for the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) district. B. CITY intends to extend the Term and increase the total not to exceed compensation from $1,569,630.00 by $751,224.00 to $2,320,854.00 for additional services as specified in Exhibit “A” Scope of Service C. The parties wish to amend the Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 2 TERM is hereby amended to read as follows: “SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through May 31, 2019 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement.” SECTION 2. Section 4 COMPENSATION is hereby amended to read as follows: “SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed per year per the following: Year One $503,210.00 Year Two $563,210.00 Year Three $615,708.00 Year Four $638,726.00 Total contract compensation shall not exceed Two Million Three Hundred Twenty Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Four Dollars ($2,320,854.00). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 2 Revision April 28, 2014 Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibit “A”.” SECTION 3. The following exhibit(s) to the Contract is/are hereby amended to read as set forth in the attachment(s) to this Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference: a. Exhibit “A” entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”. b. Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION”. c. Exhibit “C1” entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE”. SECTION 4. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVED AS TO FORM: SERCO INC. Attachments: EXHIBIT "A": SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT "C": COMPENSATION EXHIBIT "C1": HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 David Cornell Manager Contracts Chan Phuong Contracts Representative 3 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSULTANT will provide enforcement services for the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) district, issuing parking citations to violators for a period of up to 3 years. Information on the design of the Downtown RPP district is found in Attachment A. TASK 1: ONBOARDING AND STARTUP – 60 DAYS CONSULTANT will provide the appropriate and necessary training to employees who work for the CITY, relevant to their respective job duties. CONSULTANT shall maintain complete training records for each employee, as well as any other records prescribed by law or CITY policy as appropriate. The CITY’s Police Department will provide all materials related to enforcement rules and regulations currently in place; all other training materials are to be provided by CONSULTANT. Training topics include, but are not limited to, to the following topics: a. Design of the Downtown RPP District, including information on employee and resident permits and history of the program development b. Enforcing parking permit violations and other parking regulations c. Marking and tagging of vehicles using Consultant-provided handheld devices d. Palo Alto Municipal Codes, California Vehicle Code, state statutes, and ordinances related to parking enforcement e. Chain of command and authority levels f. Marking, tagging, towing, and impoundment of vehicles g. Job procedures and emergency protocol h. Responding to calls for service i. Customer service delivery and expectations j. Courtroom procedures and testimony k. Workplace safety l. Civil rights law and procedures m. Information on history of Palo Alto, City Downtown, and City Attractions The training program should provide the CONSULTANT’s personnel with sufficient understanding of the RPP District as well as operation of required equipment and enforcement protocol. All personnel are to complete and pass the training course prior to starting service, and the training procedures must be approved by the CITY. The time period from CITY’s notice to proceed to start of enforcement shall not be less than sixty (60) days. CONSULTANT will also train staff to appear in court in a professional manner with related documentation and evidence to support the case. CONSULTANT’s Project Manager will represent the company on most court appearances unless an enforcement officer is specifically required to be DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 4 Revision April 28, 2014 present, in which case the Project Manager will accompany the enforcement officer or Supervisor to the hearing. Deliverable: CONSULTANT will provide a training plan upon receiving notice to proceed from the CITY. The training plan will include all training activities planned for enforcement officers and include information from the CITY required to complete the training, as well as a detailed schedule. PERSONNEL CONSULTANT will ensure that all new employees meet all CITY of Palo Alto and CONSULTANT employment requirements as listed below. CONSULTANT will comply with all existing Government code and CITY non-discrimination policies. All candidates must complete a job application and provide a DMV printout. To be offered a position, candidates must pass a pre-screening at CONSULTANT’s expense. The pre-screening includes the following: a. Pre-employment drug and alcohol testing b. Criminal history background check c. DMV record check d. Social Security Number verification e. Eligibility to work in the United States f. Ability to speak and write in English g. LiveScan/Fingerprinting h. California Department of Justice background check Drivers will undergo further screening: a. Comply with USDOT/Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and California DMV regulations b. DMV nationwide records check c. Pass the Smith Systems Defensive Driver Safety Training d. 40 hours on-the-job training CONSULTANT shall select and hire only persons who are well-qualified to perform the duties for their respective job positions, and should provide classifications of all employee positions within their proposal, including a job description. Classifications might include, but are not limited to:  Parking Enforcement Supervisor/Manager: Assist the parking enforcement staff with day-to- day operations and staffing issues. Supervisor shall be responsible to report with the on a bi- monthly basis and provide updates on the enforcement process, any feedback from the public, incidents and number of citations issued. A supervisor should possess sufficient IT knowledge to be able to handle employee equipment issues in the field, and the capability of working with the citation processing agency for any citation issues. DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 5 Revision April 28, 2014  Parking Enforcement Staff: Responsible for the day-to-day management, supervision, and operation of parking enforcement services. These individuals must have the capacity to act as “Ambassadors” for the CITY, providing information about parking enforcement practices and other information on Palo Alto’s Downtown.  CONSULTANT should provide performance metrics for each position so that performance evaluations may take place. CONSULTANT will provide eleven (11) shirts and eleven (11) pants to full-time employees. CONSULTANT will issue staff jackets, hats, and rain attire for inclement weather, all bearing the company logo. CONSULTANT and uniform company will be responsible for cleaning of uniforms. Cleaning of uniforms is not the responsibility of the CITY. CONSULTANT will provide sample uniforms for CITY review prior to any issuance of uniforms. Employees will wear CONSULTANT-issued photo ID at all times while on duty. CONSULTANT will be expected to purchase parking permits for any employees driving to Palo Alto. CONSULTANT will be responsible for all personnel supervision, discipline, and termination actions. However, the CITY may require the removal of any CONSULTANT’s personnel, when it is determined to be in the best interest of the CITY, at any time. CONSULTANT will address temporary vacancies due to vacations, illness, leaves of absence, or termination and provide continuous staffing. Deliverables: a. CONSULTANT will supply an updated organization chart and complete list of employees and roles at the CITY’s request and annually on contract anniversary date. b. CONSULTANT will provide draft design of enforcement uniforms for approval during transition phase. c. At the request of the CITY, Consultant will allow CITY to participate in employee interviews. TASK 2: Enforcement of Phase 1 and Phase 2 of RPP Program (18 Months) CONSULTANT will be responsible for issuing citations for parking permit violations within the Downtown RPP District, in accordance with the rules specified in Attachment A. Citations must include the make, model, color, and style of vehicle, license tag number or Vehicle Identification DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 6 Revision April 28, 2014 Number (VIN), violation code number and description, base fine amount and additional fine amount in the event there is a failure to respond timely, badge number, the location of the parking offense, type of offense (e.g. permit incorrectly displayed, no valid permit, not parked in the right location) and the time and date of the offense. CONSULTANT staff will be fully trained on Consultant-furbished handheld devices. Staff will also be trained on how to capture digital images of vehicle license plates, and how to issue manual paper citations. Consultant will work with CITY’s existing citation processing vendor to ensure that citations associated with the RPP district may be recorded and tracked separately from existing parking enforcement. CONSULTANT will be trained on proper placement of citations on the windshield, how to complete and issue citations for drive offs and covered VIN numbers, missing license plates, and other unusual occurrences. In the event the driver drives away, the citation will be mailed as required by the California Vehicle Code. CONSULTANT will furnish two (2) hybrid vehicles for parking enforcement services and will be responsible for all on-going operating expenses including insurance, fuel, maintenance, and repairs. The vehicles will be equipped with GPS tracking units and LPR technology as necessary. CONSULTANT’s vehicles shall be clearly identifiable as performing parking enforcement and parking meter maintenance and collection operations for the CITY. CONSULTANT’s staff shall operate all vehicles at all times in compliance with all state and local motor vehicle and emissions laws. Vehicles shall not have missing parts or dents, and the rear of all patrol vehicles shall have a sign warning of frequent vehicle stops. All vehicles used by CONSULTANT shall have blinking flasher lights installed on each vehicle's roof. CONSULTANT will obtain approval by the CITY Manager and the Chief Communications Officers or his/her designee prior to ordering decals for the marking of vehicles. CONSULTANT will also provide officers with four (4) Trek Marlin 6 bicycles, anticipating that some enforcement officers may be able to use this method of enforcement for either Phase 1 or Phase 2. Deliverable: CONSULTANT will provide draft design for vehicle marking. Consultant will provide a an enforcement strategy document for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the program, including anticipating beats, schedule, and personnel assigned to each phase of the project. Consultant will work with CITY to identify opportunities for improving and modifying enforcement strategy at periodic intervals during Phase 2 of the program, especially opportunities which could be afforded by the introduction of technology (e.g. LPR). The Consultant will use mark-moding and chalking as the main forms of DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 7 Revision April 28, 2014 enforcement during Phase 1, but will work with the CITY to identify other modes of enforcement as the program moves forward. CONSULTANT will provide a schedule of estimated patrol routes and frequency recommendations. The CITY seeks to ensure that coverage is adequate, fair, regular, and consistent, although it is also expected that CONSULTANT will alternate the patrol routes on a regular basis to eliminate predictability. CONSULTANT can propose changes to routes and schedules to the CITY as part of their performance reporting meetings and documentation. CONSULTANT will be responsible for maintaining records of employment and, upon request, provide the CITY with personnel and training information for each employee. CONSULTANT will require Parking Enforcement Officers to submit daily reports regarding issues such as: a. Missing or damaged or conflicting parking signs, or traffic control signs, or curb markings b. Obstructed parking signs, stop signs, yield signs or any safety hazard c. Parking abnormalities or abnormal parking patterns d. Beat analysis and beat enforcement e. Incidents/accidents CONSULTANT will update and meet with CITY staff regularly, including the following: a. Weekly status reports with Parking Operations Lead and other staff as necessary b. Monthly progress meetings c. Quarterly evaluation and status report d. Annual performance review CONSULTANT will seek CITY approval on operational changes including but not limited to: a. Schedules b. Routes c. Operations ATTACHMENT A The proposed Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program is being introduced as part of a suite of parking management strategies aimed at improving parking and traffic conditions in Downtown Palo Alto. The program will restrict commuter parking during hours of operation, although limited numbers of commuter-employee permits will also be sold. Over time, the number of employee permits will be reduced as additional parking supply is provided within the Downtown area. DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 8 Revision April 28, 2014 The proposed RPP District includes a geographic area surrounding Palo Alto’s Downtown commercial zone and bounded by the City of Menlo Park to the Northwest. Currently, the only existing parking restrictions within this boundary include the Downtown Business District color zone and the SOFA business District:  The SOFA business district has 2-hour parking along streets which house mainly local businesses. Customers may re-park after two hours in any of the spaces.  The Downtown color zone has 2-hour parking which is limited to a specific color zone – Blue, Coral, Lime or Purple. Parking twice within the same color zone during the time period 8:00 to 5:00 is not permitted. The physical boundaries of the new Downtown RPP District will not include the existing SOFA and Downtown areas, which are currently enforced by the Palo Alto Police Department using mark- moding and chalking. The area within the dotted blue line will be included in the new parking District (see below). DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 9 Revision April 28, 2014 The program as currently proposed has two distinct phases, where parking restrictions will differ: Phase 1: 6 Months For the first phase of the program, the CITY will sell RPP permits to residents and to employees who live or work within the boundaries of the District. Permits will be sold online using an online issuance system by T2 Systems. It is expected that guest permits will be hangtags and that individual permits will be stickers on vehicles. There will be several types of valid permits:  Resident Permit (sold to individuals living at residential addresses within the blue line area).  Standard Commuter Employee Permit: This is a permit that will be sold to employee commuters who work within the RPP District Boundary.  Residential Annual Guest Permits / Visitor Permits DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 10 Revision April 28, 2014 All permits shall be valid anywhere within the District during this phase. Although the CITY recognizes that license plate recognition (LPR) equipment could be used for enforcement and physical permits may not be necessary for Phase 1 enforcement, the CITY wishes to use Phase 1 of the program to collect needed parking occupancy data, and therefore will require physical permits during Phase 1. This phase of the program will be used to determine the appropriate “permit cap” for employee permit sales in future phases of the program. The CITY is proposing that Phase 1 of the program last for 6 months only. All permits sold within Phase 1 will expire at the end of 6 month period, which will be identified on the permit. Phase 2: 12+ Months After Phase 1, the CITY will begin to limit the number of employee permits which will be sold for the program. Rather than allowing employees with permits to park anywhere within the District, employee permits will be allocated in one of the following ways: 1. Employee permits may be sold specific to a block face or faces, e.g. the “900-1000 Block of Ramona”, which would be visible on the permit, or; 2. Employees with permits can only park during enforcement hours at specific “employee” spots within the District, which would be allocated along block faces within the residential area. Residential permits, Annual Guest Permits and Visitor permits will be valid anywhere within the District. Anyone without a valid permit will be allowed to park for two (2) hours, at which point they would need to move their car to a different parking space. The hours of enforcement of the program are expected to be Monday through Friday, 8:00am – 5:00pm. AMENDMENT NO. 1 ADDITIONAL SERVICES CONSULTANT will provide one additional Parking Enforcement Officer to support enforcement of newly annexed streets and approved neighborhoods in the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program in accordance with this Contract and as shown in Appendix B. CONSULTANT will begin enforcing street faces in yellow once signage is installed on those streets. CONSULTANT will not begin enforcing areas shown in blue until receiving further direction from the City. Once the City provides direction, CONSULTANT shall enforce newly annexed streets in accordance with the terms of this Contract. CONSULTANT will follow and be subject to all other protocols as listed previously in this exhibit. DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 11 Revision April 28, 2014 Appendix B: Annexation of Downtown RPP District AMENDMENT NO. 2 ADDITIONAL SERVICES CONSULTANT will provide one additional Parking Enforcement Officer to support enforcement of newly annexed streets and approved neighborhoods in the Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program in accordance with this Contract and as shown in Appendix C. CONSULTANT will begin enforcing street faces in yellow once signage is installed on those streets. CONSULTANT will not begin enforcing areas shown in blue until receiving further direction from DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 12 Revision April 28, 2014 the City. Once the City provides direction, CONSULTANT shall enforce newly annexed streets in accordance with the terms of this Contract. CONSULTANT will follow and be subject to all other protocols as listed previously in this exhibit. CITY wishes to extend term of contract for a fourth (4th) year. Appendix C: Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP District DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 13 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed: Year One $503,210.00 (6/1/15 through 5/31/16) Year Two $563,210.00 (6/1/16 through 5/31/17) Year Three $615,708.00 (6/1/17 through 5/31/18) Year Four $638,726.00 (6/1/18 through 5/31/19) Total contract compensation shall not exceed $2,320,854. Consultant agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $2,320,854. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT YEARS 1-3 Task 1 (Project Manager per year) $141,446.00 Task 2 (Parking Enforcement Officer per year) $242,304.00 Task 3 (ODC’s & Materials per year) $119,460.00 Sub-total Basic Services per Years 1-3 $503,210.00 Sub-total Basic Services for Three Year Term $1,509,630.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 14 Revision April 28, 2014 AMENDMENT NO. 1 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Additional Enforcement Officer. Year 2 $52,500.00 One-time start-up and equipment costs (Year 2) $7,500.00 Subtotal for AMENDMENT No. 1 $60,000.00 AMENDMENT NO. 2 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Additional Compensation for Year 3 $112,498.00 (2 Additional Enforcement Officers Compensation for Year 4 $638,726.00 Subtotal for AMENDMENT No. 2 $751,224.00 Reimbursable Expenses None Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $2,320,854.00 (Includes Amendment 1 & 2) Maximum Total Compensation $2,320,854.00 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: None All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 15 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “C-1” HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT FOR TERM 3 YEARS @ $503,210.00 PER YEAR = $1,509,630.00 AMENDMENT NO. 1 City will pay CONSULTANT an hourly rate of $25.24 for the additional enforcement officer, for a total not to exceed amount of $52,499.20 annually. City will pay CONSULTANT $7,500 for one-time start-up and equipment costs for the additional enforcement officer. Year One $503,210.00 Year Two $563,210.00 Year Three $503,210.00 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT FOR THE TERM: $1,569,630.00 Scope Labor Categories (e.g., Consultant, Sr. Consultant, etc.) Est Hours Hourly Rate Extended Rate Task 1 Project Manager – Direct Labor Rate 1,920 $ 40.87 $ 78,470 Overhead Rate (including Fringe, G&A and Fee) 1,920 $ 32.80 $ 62,976 Total not to exceed, Task 1 Project Manager (fully burdened) 1,920 $ 73.67 $ 141,446 Task 2 Parking Enforcement Officer (5 FT PEO) – Direct Labor Rate 9,600 $ 14.00 $ 134,400 Overhead Rate (including Fringe, G&A and Fee) 9,600 $ 11.24 $ 107,904 Total not to exceed, Task 2 Parking Enforcement Officer (fully burdened) 9,600 $ 25.24 $ 242,304 Task 3 ODCs / Materials to include: bicycles / vehicles, uniforms, ticket writers, cell phones, and other misc. supplies N/A $ 97,033 Burdens and Fee G& N/A N/A $ 22,427 Total not to exceed, Task 3 ODCs and Materials (fully burdened) N/A $ 119,460 Total not to exceed (Tasks 1 – 3) Project Manager (1), Parking Enforcement Officers (5) and ODCs / Materials (all fully burdened) N/A Annual NTE $ 503,210 DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 16 Revision April 28, 2014 AMENDMENT NO. 2 Scope Labor Categories (e.g., Consultant, Sr. Consultant, etc.) Est Hours Hourly Rate Year 1 through 3 Costs In Year 3 Hourly Rate Year 4 Extended Rate 4 Task 1 Project Manager – Direct Labor Rate 1,920 $ 40.87 $ 78,470 $ 42.83 $ 82,233.6 Overhead Rate (including Fringe, G&A and Fee) 1,920 $ 32.80 $ 62,976 $ 34.52 $ 66,278.4 Total not to exceed, Task 1 Project Manager (fully burdened) 1,920 $ 73.67 $ 141,446 $77.35 $148,512 Task 2 Parking Enforcement Officer (5 FT PEO) – Direct Labor Rate 9600 $ 14.00 $ 134,400 $ 14.67 $ 140,832 Overhead Rate (including Fringe, G&A and Fee) 9600 $ 11.24 $ 107,904 $ 11.84 $ 113,664 Parking Enforcement Officer 2 additional FT PEO - Direct Labor Rate 4160 $ 14.00 $58,240 $ 14.67 $61,027.2 Overhead Rate (including Fringe, G&A and Fee) 4160 $ 11.24 $46,758.4 $ 11.84 $49,254.4 Total not to exceed, Task 2 Parking Enforcement Officer (fully burdened) 13,760 $ 25.24 $ 347,302.4 $26.51 $364,777.6 MISC On-time start-up and equipment costs for the additional enforcement officer $7,500 Task 3 ODCs / Materials to include: bicycles / vehicles, uniforms, ticket writers, cell phones, and other misc. supplies N/A $97,033 Burdens and Fee G&A N/A $ 22,427 Total not to exceed, Task 3 ODCs and Materials (fully burdened) Per month $9,955 $ 119,460 $10,453 $ 125,436 Total not to exceed (Tasks 1 – 3) Project Manager (1), Parking Enforcement Officers (5) and ODCs / Materials (all fully burdened) N/A Annual NTE $ 615,708.40 Annual NTE $ 638,725.6 DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 17 Revision April 28, 2014 Year 4 A. Extend term of contract to 5/31/2019 B. Fees for Project Manager, Seven (7) Parking Enforcement Officer, and ODC’s have increased. Please see Exhibit C-2 $23,017.2 A. Year 3 (6/1/17 through 5/31/18) City will pay CONSULTANT for the 6th Parking Enforcement Officer that was added in year 2 at an hourly rate of $25.24 for the additional for a total not to exceed amount of $52,499.20 annually. B. Year 3 (6/1/17 through 5/31/18) City will pay CONSULTANT an hourly rate of $25.24 for a 7th enforcement officer to provided additionally staffing for the new Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP District, for a total not to exceed amount of $52,499.20 annually. City will pay CONSULTANT $7,500 for one-time start-up and equipment costs for the additional enforcement officer. C. Year 4 (6/1/18 through 5/31/19) Year 3 A. Continuation of Additional Enforcement Officer (6th Officer). $52,499.20 B. Additional Enforcement Officer for Evergreen Park Mayfield RPP District (7th Officer). $52,499.20 On-time start-up and equipment costs $7,500.00 Subtotal for AMENDMENT No. 2 $112,498.40 Reimbursable Expenses None DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 18 Revision April 28, 2014 D. City will pay CONSULTANT an increased hourly rate of $26.51 for the all seven (7) enforcement officers ( previous rate was $25.24): increased hourly rate of $77.35 for Project Manager (previous rate was $73.67). Year One (6/1/15 through 5/31/16) $503,210.00 Year Two (6/1/16 through 5/31/17) $563,210.00 Year Three (6/1/17 through 5/31/18) $615,708.00 Year Four (6/1/18 through 5/31/19) $638,726.00 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT FOR THE TERM: $2,320,854. DocuSign Envelope ID: 290F0274-6F4E-4CD0-A2CB-3090FB0BC643 Certificate Of Completion Envelope Id: 290F02746F4E4CD0A2CB3090FB0BC643 Status: Completed Subject: Please DocuSign: C15156763 SERCO Amendment No 2.pdf Source Envelope: Document Pages: 18 Signatures: 2 Envelope Originator: Supplemental Document Pages: 0 Initials: 0 Christopher Anastole Certificate Pages: 2 AutoNav: Enabled EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled Time Zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) Payments: 0 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto , CA 94301 chris.anastole@cityofpaloalto.org IP Address: 12.220.157.20 Record Tracking Status: Original 2/8/2017 2:23:46 PM Holder: Christopher Anastole chris.anastole@cityofpaloalto.org Location: DocuSign Signer Events Signature Timestamp David Cornell David.Cornell@serco-na.com Manager Contracts Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None)Using IP Address: 208.185.76.50 Sent: 2/8/2017 2:30:31 PM Viewed: 2/9/2017 4:50:05 AM Signed: 2/9/2017 5:52:10 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign ID: Chan Phuong Chan.Phuong@serco-na.com Contracts Representative Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None)Using IP Address: 208.185.76.50 Sent: 2/9/2017 5:52:11 AM Viewed: 2/9/2017 6:12:24 AM Signed: 2/9/2017 6:14:33 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign ID: In Person Signer Events Signature Timestamp Editor Delivery Events Status Timestamp Agent Delivery Events Status Timestamp Intermediary Delivery Events Status Timestamp Certified Delivery Events Status Timestamp Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp Elizabeth Egli elizabeth.egli@cityofpaloalto.org Managment Analyst City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 2/9/2017 6:14:34 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign ID: Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp Sherry Nikzat Sherry.Nikzat@CityofPaloAlto.org Sr. Management Analyst City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 2/9/2017 6:14:34 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign ID: Yolanda Cervantes Yolanda.Cervantes@CityofPaloAlto.org Administrative Assistant City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 2/9/2017 6:14:35 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign ID: Notary Events Timestamp Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps Envelope Sent Hashed/Encrypted 2/9/2017 6:14:35 AM Certified Delivered Security Checked 2/9/2017 6:14:35 AM Signing Complete Security Checked 2/9/2017 6:14:35 AM Completed Security Checked 2/9/2017 6:14:35 AM Payment Events Status Timestamps 1 of 9 Revision April 28, 2014 AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO CONTRACT NO. C15157271 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND MC GUIRE PACIFIC CONSTRUCTORS This Amendment No. 4 to Contract No. C15157271 (“Contract”) is entered into February 27, 2017, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and MC GUIRE PACIFIC CONSTRUCTORS, a Sole Proprietor, located at 12500 Locksley Lane, Auburn, California, 95602, Telephone Number: (530) 888-0527 (“CONTRACTOR”). R E C I T A L S A. The Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision to perform standard highway sign installations in support of a new Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) district in Downtown Palo Alto. B. CITY intends to increase the compensation from $523,000.00 by $181,035.00 to $704,035.00 for additional services as stated in Exhibit “A” Scope of Services. C. The parties wish to amend the Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 5 COMPENSATION is hereby amended to read as follows: “5. COMPENSATION FOR ORIGINAL TERM. CITY shall pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept as not to exceed compensation for the full performance of the Services and reimbursable expenses, if any: A sum calculated in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit C, not to exceed a total maximum compensation amount of Seven Hundred Four Thousand Thirty Five dollars ($704,035.00). CONTRACTOR agrees that it can perform the Services for an amount not to exceed the total maximum compensation set forth above. Any hours worked or services performed by CONTRACTOR for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth above for performance of the Services shall be at no cost to CITY. ” SECTION 2. The following exhibit(s) to the Contract is/are hereby amended to read as set forth in the attachment(s) to this Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference: a. Exhibit “A” entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”. DocuSign Envelope ID: 795D90CC-70DE-49F9-BDBA-62BC0D6C4271 2 of 9 Revision April 28, 2014 b. Exhibit “C” entitled “SCHEDULE OF FEES”. SECTION 3. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVED AS TO FORM: MC GUIRE PACIFIC CONSTRUCTORS Attachments: EXHIBIT "A": SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT "B": SCHEDULE OF FEES DocuSign Envelope ID: 795D90CC-70DE-49F9-BDBA-62BC0D6C4271 John McGuire owner 3 of 9 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES CONTRACTOR to perform standard highway sign installations in support of a new Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) district in Downtown Palo Alto. The scope of work includes fabrication of the RPP signage and the installation of the signage based on City- generated work-orders. The City shall provide Contractor with a work order-type improvement plan for RPP sign installation; Contractor should provide cost estimates for completion of the work and complete the work after written authorization to proceed. The first phase of the work is anticipated to be completed between March and May of 2015, which a potential second phase of installation during December of 2015. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS The following types of signage will be required to be manufactured and installed for the project. A) Standard Regulatory Parking Signs – Sign Installation onto Existing Sign Post The Contractor shall install parking regulatory sign(s) onto existing sign posts that require the addition of a riser to accommodate new sign(s). Addition of a riser shall include the threading of the existing sign post, installation of a coupling bracket, and pole extension to support the new sign. The Contractor shall be responsible for providing all material. B) Standard Regulatory Parking Signs – Sign & Sign Post Installation The Contractor shall install parking regulatory sign(s) onto contractor-furnished and installed sign post. Installation of a new sign post shall include coordination with U.S.A. Underground, the use of a core drill with a 6-inch bit to cut through existing concrete, installation of a new 2-inch sign post, and the use of a Portland cement to secure post and finishing to grade. Signs shall be installed a minimum of 7-ft from bottom of sidewalk or existing grade. New sign post installations shall not use any pole risers to accommodate the new sign installation(s). The contractor shall be responsible for providing all material. C) Standard Regulatory Signs – Sign Installation onto Existing Streetlight The Contractor shall install city-furnished parking regulatory sign(s) onto existing street lights, including all required brackets and hardware. The contractor shall be responsible for providing all material. ADDITIONAL SERVICES DocuSign Envelope ID: 795D90CC-70DE-49F9-BDBA-62BC0D6C4271 4 of 9 Revision April 28, 2014 The need for additional types of General Street services may be required during the term of this contract. The City shall work with the Contractor to identify a fee schedule for any additional services prior to the start of work. Provided in Attachment A is Sample Sign Bracketing Hardware used by the City of Palo Alto. The Contractor is required to use the same sign bracketing material to ensure compatibility with existing field hardware. AMENDMENT NO. 1: ADDITIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTOR to perform sign installations on newly annexed streets into the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) district in Downtown Palo Alto shown in Appendix B. The scope of work includes fabrication of the RPP signage and the installation of the signage based on City-generated work-orders. CONTRACTOR shall also fabricate and perform installation of stickers on all existing and future signs in the Downtown RPP district per the specification chart shown below. The City shall provide CONTRACTOR with a work order-type improvement plan for RPP sign installation; CONTRACTOR should provide cost estimates for completion of the work and complete the work after written authorization to proceed. Quantity Furnish and install 3M Engineer grade sheeting 3" x 4" screen print zone stickers 2000 Furnish and install, per the current Caltrans sign specifications, 12"x18" regulatory parking sign onto a new 2" galvanized sign post, 6 inch core drill into the existing hardscape area 300 Furnish and install, per the current Caltrans sign specifications, 12"x18" regulatory parking sign onto a new 2" galvanized sign post, 6 inch core drill into the existing concrete area 50 DocuSign Envelope ID: 795D90CC-70DE-49F9-BDBA-62BC0D6C4271 5 of 9 Revision April 28, 2014 Appendix B: Annexation of Downtown RPP District AMENDMENT NO 4 #1  Install new RPP signage in the Evergreen Area on new 2 inch round sign posts with “L” brackets and on existing light posts. DocuSign Envelope ID: 795D90CC-70DE-49F9-BDBA-62BC0D6C4271 6 of 9 Revision April 28, 2014  All signs mounted to light posts are mounted with side mount brackets per city requirements.  Sign manufactured to match existing RPP signage in Zones 1-10 with new Zones, A, B, and C. #2  Existing RPP signage, change time from 5 pm to 6 pm with same screen design as the Zone labels.  Clean the existing RPP signs and apply new “6” to cover the “5”.  Signs are double face. DocuSign Envelope ID: 795D90CC-70DE-49F9-BDBA-62BC0D6C4271 7 of 9 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF FEES CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR according to the following rate schedule. The maximum amount of compensation to be paid to Contractor, including both payment for services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Three Hundred Sixty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($368,500.00). Any services provided or hours worked for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to City. Furnish and install, per the current Q U A N T I T Y U N I T U N I T C O S T T O T A L Caltrans sign specifications, 12"x18" regulatory parking sign onto an existing standard 2" galvanized sign post with required galvanized riser. 100 EACH $210.00 $21,000.00 EACH $410.00 $328,000.00 Furnish and install, per the current Caltrans sign specifications, 12"x18" regulatory parking sign, new 2" Galvanized sign post, 6 inch core drill into the existing sidewalk 800 EACH $410.00 $328,000.00 Furnish and install, per the current Caltrans sign specifications, 12"x18" regulatory parking sign, installed onto the existing Streetlight pole with 3/4", type 201 stainless steel banding and heavy duty buckle with straight leg stainless steel brackets. 100 EACH $195.00 $19,500.00 TOTAL $368,500.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: 795D90CC-70DE-49F9-BDBA-62BC0D6C4271 8 of 9 Revision April 28, 2014 AMENDMENT NO. 1 Quantity Unit Cost Total Furnish and install 3M Engineer grade sheeting 3" x 4" screen print zone stickers 2000 $11.00 $22,000.00 Furnish and install, per the current Caltrans sign specifications, 12"x18" regulatory parking sign onto a new 2" galvanized sign post, 6 inch core drill into the existing hardscape area 300 $365.00 $109,500.00 Furnish and install, per the current Caltrans sign specifications, 12"x18" regulatory parking sign onto a new 2" galvanized sign post, 6 inch core drill into the existing concrete area 50 $460.00 $23,000.00 AMENDMENT TOTAL $154,500 Total Contract Not To Exceed: $523,000.00 AMENDMENT NO. 4 Service Items Calculations Total Cost #1  Install new RPP signage in the Evergreen Area on new 2 inch round sign posts with “L” brackets and on existing light posts.  All signs mounted to light posts are mounted with side mount brackets per city requirements.  Sign manufactured to match existing RPP signage in Zones 1-10 with new Zones, A, B, and c. 325 signs @ 445.00 a piece $144,625.00 #2  Existing RPP signage, change time DocuSign Envelope ID: 795D90CC-70DE-49F9-BDBA-62BC0D6C4271 9 of 9 Revision April 28, 2014 from 5 pm to 6 pm with same screen design as the Zone labels.  Clean the existing RPP signs and apply new “6” to cover the “5”.  Signs are double face. 3310 sign faces @ $11.00 a piece $36,410.00 Signage Costs for Downtown and Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP Districts $181,035.00 Total Contract not to exceed $704,035.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: 795D90CC-70DE-49F9-BDBA-62BC0D6C4271 City of Palo Alto (ID # 7808) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 429 University Avenue: Appeal of Mixed Use Project Title: 429 University Avenue [14PLN-00222]: Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Mitigation Monitoring Plan, and a Record of Land Use Acton Approving a Mixed Use Project with 28,547 Square Foot of Floor Area and Two Subterranean Levels of Parking on an 11,000 Square Foot Site. Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration was Circulated on November 17, 2014 to December 12, 2014. Zoning District: CD-C (GF)(P). From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment C), the Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Plan, and the Record of Land Use Action (both in Attachment A) approving an Architectural Review for a new mixed-use project commonly known as 429 University. Background: This report transmits a Record of Land Use Action and associated environmental documents supporting the approval a mixed-use project reviewed by the City Council on February 6, 2017. A majority of the Council supported the project identified as Option 1 and imposed staff recommended conditions of approval, which were identified the corresponding staff report. The February 6, 2017 staff report is available online at: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/55707. Since the hearing, staff received correspondence from the applicant dated February 27, 2017 (Attachment B) indicating an inability to comply with certain conditions of approval. In response, staff recommends two minor adjustments as discussed below. Discussion: Adoption of the project’s associated environmental studies and the Record of Land Use Action City of Palo Alto Page 2 (RLUA) memorializes the City Council’s decision to approve the subject project. The attached RLUA contains statements of fact, project findings and conditions of approval. In the Council’s motion on February 6, 2017, the Council accepted staff-recommended conditions of approval (see Conditions Two and Three in Attachment A). Since the hearing, staff received a letter from the applicant’s architect indicating an inability to comply with three of the eight conditions; there was no expressed objection to the other five conditions. These conditions are identified below along with a summary of the applicant’s explanation as well as staff’s response. Condition Number 2b The fourth floor guardrails and planters shall be set back a minimum of five feet from the edge of the third floor roofline (all elevations), as modified by these conditions. The applicant’s representative asserts the above condition would tempt an individual to jump over the guardrail to sit at the edge of the roofline or place objects that may fall and cause injury to people or damage property. The applicant identifies this risk as a liability not only to the owner but also the city. Moreover, the applicant claims proposed setbacks and the design of a glass railing are sufficient to not require further setbacks. Finally, according to the applicant, the proposed condition would violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Staff disagrees with the applicant’s assertions. The guardrail requirement is set forth in the technical building codes and its placement away from the edge of the building is necessary to reduce building mass and ensure an appropriate transition in scale to adjacent properties. The property owner is responsible for maintaining the property in safe manner and in compliance with applicable codes, not the city. As to the ADA claim, the applicant can make modifications to the elevator and still comply with this condition and other applicable requirements. Specifically, the elevator could be redesigned to allow two-way passage, which is not an uncommon design feature. Elevators can be designed to open one set of doors on certain floors and another set of elevator doors on other floors. Since there are design solutions available, staff does not see a need to modify this condition. Condition Number 2d The third floor roofline above the removed ‘library’ area shall be setback to follow the proposed third floor roofline; reducing the building mass at the street corner. The applicant seeks to maintain a three-foot overhang at the location where the library on the third floor is removed. The overhang adjacent to University Avenue and Kipling Street have a similar dimension. Applicant asserts this is needed to address minimum City of Palo Alto Page 3 requirements for shading, energy conservation and weather protection. Additionally, the applicant is concerned about the architectural design continuity if the overhang is not permitted in this area. Staff agrees that not allowing a modest overhang at this location could result in a design that is not beneficial to the overall architecture. The objective of this condition and condition number 10, which requires removal the third floor library is to reduce building mass at the corner and support a more human-scaled design. This objective is still achieved with the allowance of a three-foot overhang. Accordingly, staff has amended this condition as follows, which is reflected in Attachment A: The third floor roofline above the removed ‘library’ area shall be removed, except to allow a three-foot overhang. setback to follow the proposed third floor roofline; reducing the building mass at the street corner. Condition Number 2e The elevator adjacent to Kipling Street, inclusive of any associated mechanical equipment, shall not exceed fifty feet (50’) in height. Applicant seeks to modify this condition to allow the elevator mechanical equipment to extend to 54.5 feet in height. The applicant notes the zoning code allowance that permits elevator equipment to extend up to 15 feet above the height limit and provided information from Otis Elevator Company about the technical requirements for a specific elevator model that is designed to minimize the amount of space needed for rooftop mechanic equipment. Staff has reviewed this information and informally consulted with a trade professional who installs elevators and has determined that the requested increase is appropriate. The elevator shaft is approximately 9 feet by 11 feet and is setback five feet from the Kipling Street building facade (11 feet from the property line). The plans reviewed by the Council showed the elevator extending 15 feet above the height limit or 65 feet in height. The applicant’s request to extend to a total height of 54.5 feet (as opposed to 50 feet as first conditioned) will not be substantially visible from Kipling Street and is not anticipated to have a significant visual impact or compromise the Council’s context compatibility analysis. Based on the foregoing, staff has amended this condition as follows, which is reflected in Attachment A: The elevator adjacent to Kipling Street, inclusive of any associated mechanical equipment, shall not exceed fifty-four and one-half feet (54.50') in height. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Environmental Review Pursuant to the requirements of the CEQA, a Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated along with the required 20-day public review. The public comment period for this project was from November 17, 2014 to December 12, 2014. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) have been updated to include the findings of additional analyses, including the historic resources memorandum, shadow study and the traffic operations study (Attachments C). The plan revisions did not result in any additional impacts nor require additional mitigation measures. The original mitigation monitoring and reporting program remains the same (Attachment A). Attachments: Attachment A: Draft Record of Land Use and Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (PDF) Attachment B: Applicant's February 27, 2017 Response to Conditions (PDF) Attachment C: Environmental Assessment (DOCX) APPROVAL NO. ____ RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION FOR 425 AND 429 UNIVERSITY AVENUE: MAJOR ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPLICATION [14PLN-0022] On February 6, 2017, the City Council of the City of Palo Alto considered an appeal of the Planning and Community Environment Director’s decision to approve a Major Architectural Review for the development of a four-story, 50-foot tall, 28,547 square-foot, mixed-use project at 429 University Avenue and directed staff to return to Council with the following findings, determinations and declarations to support their decision to adopt a modified project design: SECTION 1. Background. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City Council”) finds, determines, and declares as follows: A. The project site is comprised of two lots, 425 and 429 University Avenue (APN Nos. 120-15- 029 and 120-15-028, respectively) of approximately 11,000 square feet. The site contains two commercial structures bordered by University Avenue to the southeast, Lane 30 E to the northwest, and Kipling Street to the northeast. Single-story businesses border the site to the northeast along Kipling Street, and one and two story buildings border the project site along University Avenue. B. On June 19, 2014, Kipling Post LP applied for a Major Architectural Review for the development of a mixed-use project on an 11,000 square foot parcel (“The Project”). C. On February 25, 2015, the Planning and Community Environment Director approved the Major Architectural Review. D. On March 11, 2015, a timely appeal was filed by Dr. Michael Harbour (“the Appellant”) stating concerns related to parking, traffic and circulation concerns and safety issues, impacts to historical resources, and the size and massing of the project E. On May 4, 2015, the City Council remanded the project to the Historic Resource Board (HRB) and Architectural Review Board (ARB) for further review and requested project revisions to address issues of scale and compatibility. Specifically, the Council requested that the applicant redesign the project and return to the HRB and ARB to address a variety of concerns. The HRB was asked to review and comment on the historic resource evaluation report as it relates to the project’s potential impact to other historic resources in the area; the applicable ‘area of potential affect’ pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); the potential impact of the project’s mass, scale and compatibility to existing historic properties; and whether the proposed building would change the setting of the historic properties on Kipling Street or University Avenue and have an impact under CEQA. The Council directed the ARB to evaluate the project’s compatibility with the immediate environment of the site; neighborhood character; other buildings in the area; consistency with the roof lines, entries, setbacks, mass and scale with context based design criteria; shadow patterns; vehicular access to the site, including possible impacts to Lane 30 (alley) circulation; and, to provide direction on the design linkages with the overall pattern of development in the area. On September 10 and 17, 2015, the HRB and ARB, respectively, considered project revisions presented by the applicant. Their respective comments are available in the administrative record and meeting minutes. The HRB members expressed concern with various aspects of the project, notably related to the mass and scale of the proposed building and expressed concerns regarding the project’s compatibility to nearby designed Birge Clark buildings and the Victorian-style structures on Kipling Street. The ARB had a variety of comments regarding the project, including expressing concerns with project compatibility when viewed from Kipling Street and encouraged further architectural refinement to address other concerns expressed by Council. On November 30, 2015, the City Council remanded the project to ARB for further review and consideration as it relates to the following specific Architectural Review Findings and Context-Based Design Criteria: PAMC chapter 18.76.020(d): • (1): Architectural Review Findings in relation to design’s consistency and compatibility with applicable elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan • (2): Architectural Review Findings in relation to design’s compatibility with the immediate environment of the site • (4): Architectural Review Findings in relation to design’s compatibility with areas as having a unified design character or historic character • (12): Architectural Review Findings in relation to compatibility and appropriateness in materials, textures, colors, details of construction and plant materials to the project’s function and to adjacent structures, landscape elements and functions And PAMC Section 18.18.110  (a)(2)(B)(i): Contextual and Compatibility Criteria – Compatibility goal in relation to siting, scale, massing and materials  (a)(2)(B)(iii): Contextual and Compatibility Criteria – Compatibility goal in relation to pattern of roof lines and projections  (b)(2)(B): Context-based Design Considerations and Findings – Street building facades in relation to eaves, overhang, porches and other architectural elements that provide human scale and help break up building mass F. On March 17, 2016 the applicant returned to the ARB with a revised project, consisting of two options prepared by Topos Architecture. The ARB preferred Option B with recommended changes to better reduce building scale and mass, and continued the project to May 19, 2016. G. On August 4 the applicant returned to the ARB with a revised project prepared by Jo Bellomo and Associates, the fourth design professional known to the City to be engaged by the applicant to prepare plans and make presentations regarding the project. Based on the administrative record, including meeting minutes, the ARB expressed concern that this latest iteration was not responsive to earlier ARB or City Council comments and requested staff prepare recommended findings to deny the project. H. On September 1, 2016, at the applicant’s request, the ARB conducted a study session of a project that closely resembled Option 1. While ARB members continued to express concerns, the Board commented that this design concept showed progress toward addressing previously stated concerns regarding the project’s compatibility to adjacent structures and neighborhood character. I. The ARB reviewed a project on October 20, 2016 (described as Option 2 in the February 6, 2017 City Council report). This design included changes that increased the mass of the building at the street corner on the third floor and additional mass on the fourth floor that was previously removed from the plans reviewed on September 1, 2016. The ARB forwarded a recommendation of denial of the project to the City Council. J. The Applicant submitted revised plans on October 26, 2016 (described as Option 1 in the February 6, 2017 City Council report), which was a refined version of the plans presented at a study session of the ARB on September 1, 2016, which addressed many of the Board’s comments. K. The Applicant submitted revised plans on December 8, 2016 (described as Option 3 in on the February 6, 2017 City Council report), which represented another iteration of the Option 1 design, but included concepts previously reviewed by the ARB on August 4, 2016. L. The City Council reviewed Option 1, Option 2, and Option 3 of the project on February 6, 2017 and approved Option 1 based on the findings and subject to the conditions of approval included below. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City as the lead agency for the Project has determined that the project is subject to environmental review under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Guideline section 15070, Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration. An initial study was prepared for the project in 2014 and was updated in August of 2015 and it was determined that, with the implementation of conditions of approval, and mitigation measures no potentially adverse impacts would result from the development, therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact on the environment. SECTION 3. Architectural Review Findings. Pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.76.020(d), neither the director, nor the city council on appeal, shall grant architectural review approval, unless it is found that the project is consistent with certain adopted findings. At the time that the project application was filed and appealed to Council, the findings presented in this section were in use, and the Council finds that the project is consistent with them as follows: Comprehensive Plan and Purpose of ARB: Finding #1: The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. Finding #16: The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose of architectural review, which is to:  Promote orderly and harmonious development in the city;  Enhance the desirability of residence or investment in the city;  Encourage the attainment of the most desirable use of land and improvements;  Enhance the desirability of living conditions upon the immediate site or in adjacent areas; and  Promote visual environments which are of high aesthetic quality and variety and which, at the same time, are considerate of each other. The project is consistent with Findings #1 and #16 because: On balance, the project is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project is in conformance with the following Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies. The project is compatible with the surrounding development based on the building’s size, scale and mass. The project reflects a similar massing and rhythm to other properties along University Avenue and includes building articulate and setbacks at the third and fourth floors that provide for an appropriate transition, particularly along Kipling Street, to the lower profile buildings nearby. Some of the goals and policies the project is in compliance with include the following:  Goal L-1: A well-designed, compact city, providing residents and visitors with attractive neighborhoods, work places, shopping district, public facilities and open spaces.  Policy L-5: Maintain the scale and character of the City. Avoid land uses that are overwhelming and unacceptable due their size and scale.  Goal L-4: Inviting, pedestrian-scale centers that offer a variety of retail and commercial services and provide focal points and community gathering places for the City’s residential neighborhoods and Employment Districts.  Policy L-20: Encourage street frontages that contribute to retail vitality in all Centers. Reinforce street corners with buildings that come up to the sidewalk or that form corner plazas.  Policy L-23: Maintain and enhance the University Avenue/Downtown area as the central business district of the City, with a mix of commercial, civic, cultural, recreational and residential uses. Promote quality design that recognizes the regional and historical importance of the area and reinforces its pedestrian character.  Policy L-24: Ensure that University Avenue/Downtown is pedestrian-friendly and supports bicycle use. Use public art and other amenities to create an environment that is inviting to pedestrians.  Goal L-6: Well-designed buildings that create coherent development patterns and enhance city streets and public spaces.  Policy L-48: Promote high quality, creative design and site planning that is compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.  Policy L-49: Design buildings to revitalize streets and public spaces and to enhance a sense of community and personal safety. Provide an ordered variety of entries, porches, windows, bays and balconies along public ways where it is consistent with neighborhood character; avoid blank or solid walls at street level; and include human-scale details and massing.  Goal T-3: Facilities, services and programs that encourage and promote walking and bicycling.  Policy T-21: Support the use of Downtown alleyways for pedestrian- and bicycle-only use.  Policy T-23: Encourage pedestrian-friendly design features such as sidewalks, street trees, on-site parking, public spaces, gardens, outdoor furniture, art, and interesting architectural details. Option 1, as presented to the City Council on February 6, 2017, provides a transition in scale and character along University Avenue. The building’s modern design blends and transitions with the surrounding buildings through similar materials and horizontal rooflines. The building reinforces the pedestrian character of University Avenue as required by Policy L-23 and Policy L-24 because it provides a widened sidewalk for pedestrians with sheltered entrances. These same pedestrian features are extended to Kipling Street as well, and the seating area at the rear of the building activates a pedestrian space in the alley. Conditions of Approval Nos. 2b, 2c, 2d, and 2e all reduce the massing and visual prominence of the building along Kipling Street, creating the appearance of a three-story structure. This design provides a smoother transition from the single and two-story structures along Kipling Street. The proposed project incorporates similar pedestrian and human friendly features found in other buildings along University Avenue. The first floor plate height reflects the plate height of the buildings to the west along University Avenue. The surrounding buildings contain sidewalk dining areas, recessed entries, and are predominantly two-story structures, with a low first floor plate height to relate to a human and pedestrian scale. The project incorporates similar features with designated pedestrian areas at the entryways and natural building overhangs along University Avenue and Kipling Street. These design features create a project that is pedestrian friendly and designed at a human scale on elevations fronting rights-of-way. Condition of Approval No. 2e requires that the elevator tower height not exceed 54.5 feet and Condition of Approval No. 2b requires the fourth floor guardrails to be setback from the edge of the terrace along all streetscapes. These conditions reduce the visual prominence of the structure along Kipling Street, and they create the appearance of a three story building. The appearance of a three-story building helps the project achieve an orderly and harmonious design along Kipling Street, which has lower profile buildings. Compatibility and Character: Finding #2: The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site. Finding #4: This finding of compatibility with unified or historic character is not applicable to the project (there is no unified design or historic character). Finding #5: The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between different designated land uses. Finding #6: The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site. The project is consistent with Findings #2, #4, #5 and #6 because: The project is compatible with the immediate environment of the site. Buildings located to the southwest of the site along University Avenue consist of two-story buildings. The first two floors of the project are consistent with the height of these buildings, while the third floor is setback approximately eight-feet. The fourth floor is setback approximately 40-feet. These features result in a gradual transition in scale thereby increasing the compatibility and character of the project with its immediate environment. Further, the design obscures the fourth floor from views along University Avenue. The setbacks along Kipling Street and Lane 30 also promote a design that is compatible with the immediate environment of the site and offer harmonious transitions. The setbacks on the fourth floor along Kipling Street obscure views of the building features above the third floor from many vantage points, thereby reducing the building scale and improving compatibility with smaller structures nearby. To accomplish this result, the conditions of approval require that the elevator tower height be reduced to a maximum of 54.5 feet and the elevator shaft is setback 11 feet from Kipling Street, while the stairs and office are setback approximately 20 feet and 37 feet, respectively. This condition and these design features will obscure views of the fourth floor and result in a building with a three-story appearance from vantage points that are close to the site on Kipling Street. This results in a harmonious transition from the two story structures along Kipling Street to the proposed project because it effectively only increases the height of the project by one story from the structure at the corner of Kipling and University and two stories from the business at Kipling Street and Lane 30. Conditions of approval for the project also ensure that the design of the building will be compatible with the immediate environment of the site. Conditions No. 3b and 3c require that the applicant return to the ARB for approval of the materials, colors, craftsmanship and landscaping, and Condition No. 3a requires a decorative wall treatment, feature or element along the southern elevation of the building. These requirements will ensure that design features are compatible with the immediate environment of the site. The design of the building offers a harmoniously compatible transition with the design character of the streetscape along University Avenue. The design of the project transitions from the mid-century designs found along University Avenue to a more modern looking building that defines the street corner. The project consists of rectilinear features in a glass and concrete style building. These features are consistent with the character of the surrounding buildings to the east of the site along University Avenue and the building located at the corner of Kipling Street and University Avenue. The Historic Resources Memorandum notes that the historic character of the area has been compromised by intrusions including incompatible materials, height, massing and architectural features. features. Because the area has not been recognized as having a unified design or historic character, this finding is not applicable. Functionality and Open Space: Finding #3: The design is appropriate to the function of the project. Finding #7: The planning and siting of the building on the site creates an internal sense of order and provides a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and the general community. Finding #8: The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate to the design and the function of the structures. The project is consistent with Findings #3, #7, and #8 because: The design and arrangement of the open space is appropriate for the function of the project. The project proposes a seating area off the alley at the back of the project. The Comprehensive Plan encourages these spaces such as these to activate alley spaces for pedestrian use. Further, the project incorporates terraced areas around the third floor for the residential users and on the fourth floor for the office use. These areas serve as a functional open space for residents and tenants of the project and are easily accessible to the building users. Therefore, the design, amount, arrangement and planning of open space is appropriate and creates a sense of order for the project. The planning and siting of the building on the site creates a sense of order and provides a desirable environment for visitors, occupants and the general community. The siting of the building is located along the back of the sidewalk, consistent with other buildings along University Avenue streetscape and forms an edge along Kipling Street consistent with the existing buildings along both streets. Vehicle access to the building from the alley provides convenient and safe accessibility that minimizes vehicle interactions along Kipling Street and University Avenue. Internally, stairs and elevators provide access to each floor, and these are conveniently reached from the street or the subterranean parking. The floorplans create individualized floors that separates the residents and commercial and office tenants. Occupants, visitors and the community are provided with a desirable environment because of this ease of access to the individualized uses on each floor. Therefore, the siting and floor plan create a sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and the general public. Circulation and Traffic: Finding #9: Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support the main functions of the project and the same are compatible with the project’s design concept. Finding #10: Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles. The project is consistent with Findings #9 and #10 because: The project contains sufficient ancillary functions to support the main functions. Access to the property and circulation thereon is convenient for cyclists because it provides long-term and short-term bicycle parking. The short term parking is easily accessible from the street and the long term parking is located in the garage where it is screened from public view. Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for all users. The alley provides a dedicated, separate access point to the project from the street. This will minimize vehicle interactions with other vehicles as well as pedestrians and cyclists. Further, the traffic study has determined that there is adequate site distance for exiting the alley onto Kipling Street. The project will incorporate mirrored installations at the parking garage ingress and egress to improve visibility and reduce conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians and cyclists. The onsite circulation was reviewed in accordance with generally accepted traffic engineering standards. Generally, the proposed plan would provide one main drive aisle that would lead to an underground parking structure. Parking is shown at 90 degrees to the main drive aisle. This drive aisle makes several 90 degree turns to spiral down to the farthest parking spaces. The City parking facility design standards specify a minimum width of 16 feet for two-way underground ramps; 25 feet for two-way drive aisles lined with 8.5 foot wide, 90 degree spaces; and maximum slope of 2% adjacent to accessible parking spaces. The proposed project meets these standards. Further, the project was also found to meet the applicable parking requirements of the PAMC. Therefore, these features ensure access and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for all users. The project is subject to the loading area requirements in the City’s Zoning Code because it is a mixed-use project with commercial, office and residential uses. Consistent with past practice, the staff has recommended approval of an off-site loading area near the building rather than on the project site itself. There is a loading zone at Kipling Street and the alley provides sufficient loading space for the project and service alleys throughout downtown have historically been used for the purpose of shared loading and access. Using the alley is consistent with prior projects reviewed by the City and with previous iterations of the project design, and meets the intent of the City’s Code requirement. Landscaping and Plant Materials: Finding #11: Natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project. Finding #12: The materials, textures and colors and details of construction and plant material are an appropriate expression to the design and function and compatible with the adjacent and neighboring structures, landscape elements and functions. Finding #13: The landscape design concept for the site, as shown by the relationship of plant masses, open space, scale, plant forms and foliage textures and colors create a desirable and functional environment on the site and the landscape concept depicts an appropriate unit with the various buildings on the site. Finding #14: Plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site, capable of being properly maintained on the site, and is of a variety that would tend to be drought-resistant and to reduce consumption of water in its installation and maintenance. The project is consistent with Findings #11- #14 because: The project will preserve existing street trees along University Avenue and will replace two perimeter trees along Kipling Street with ginkgo biloba. Two other street trees along Kipling Street will be retained. The project proposes appropriate, drought tolerant, sustainable landscaping in key open space areas that will complement and enhance the design of these spaces. The landscaping will form a soft edge and perimeter around the ground floor and terrace area on the third floor. Further, as conditioned, the project is required to return to the Architectural Review Board for review and recommendation to the Director of Planning and Community Environment for landscape details and plans for all proposed planting, including individual planters, the greenwall, and landscaping near the rooftop elevator. Therefore, the landscape design is appropriate and compatible for the project. The proposed project is consistent with the above finding because it corporates materials, textures, colors and details that are compatible with adjacent structures and functions. Adjacent structures employ brick, stucco and glass windows with a rough texture and organic colors. The proposed structure consists of concrete, glass windows, and metal mesh screens. These features compliment the adjacent buildings and the third and fourth floor consist of a similarly colored concrete as nearby buildings. Further, as conditioned, the project is required to return to the Architectural Review Board for review and recommendation to the Director of Planning and Community Environment of exterior building materials, colors and craftsmanship-related detailing associated with the project. Therefore, the project is compatible with the materials, colors and textures of adjacent buildings. Sustainability: Finding #15: The design is energy efficient and incorporates renewable energy design elements including, but not limited to:  Careful building orientation to optimize daylight to interiors  High performance, low-emissivity glazing  Cool roof and roof insulation beyond Code minimum  Solar ready roof  Use of energy efficient LED lighting  Low-flow plumbing and shower fixtures  Below grade parking to allow for increased landscape and stormwater treatment areas The project is consistent with Finding #15 because: In accordance with the City’s Green Building Regulations, the building will satisfy the requirements for CALGreen Mandatory + Tier 2. SECTION 4. Architectural Review Findings. Revised Architectural Review Findings were adopted by ordinance of the City Council on November 14, 2016 (second reading December 12, 2016) and became effective on January 12, 2017. The Council finds that the project as modified is consistent with these findings and the Context- Based Design Criteria in PAMC 18.18.110 as follows: Finding #1: The design is consistent with applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, coordinated area plans (including compatibility requirements), and any relevant design guides. The proposed project, as modified by the conditions of approval, is generally consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, including the following goals and policies:  Goal L-1: A well-designed, compact city, providing residents and visitors with attractive neighborhoods, work places, shopping district, public facilities and open spaces.  Policy L-5: Maintain the scale and character of the City. Avoid land uses that are overwhelming and unacceptable due their size and scale.  Goal L-4: Inviting, pedestrian-scale centers that offer a variety of retail and commercial services and provide focal points and community gathering places for the City’s residential neighborhoods and Employment Districts.  Policy L-20: Encourage street frontages that contribute to retail vitality in all Centers. Reinforce street corners with buildings that come up to the sidewalk or that form corner plazas.  Policy L-23: Maintain and enhance the University Avenue/Downtown area as the central business district of the City, with a mix of commercial, civic, cultural, recreational and residential uses. Promote quality design that recognizes the regional and historical importance of the area and reinforces its pedestrian character.  Policy L-24: Ensure that University Avenue/Downtown is pedestrian-friendly and supports bicycle use. Use public art and other amenities to create an environment that is inviting to pedestrians.  Goal L-6: Well-designed buildings that create coherent development patterns and enhance city streets and public spaces.  Policy L-48: Promote high quality, creative design and site planning that is compatible with surrounding development and public spaces.  Policy L-49: Design buildings to revitalize streets and public spaces and to enhance a sense of community and personal safety. Provide an ordered variety of entries, porches, windows, bays and balconies along public ways where it is consistent with neighborhood character; avoid blank or solid walls at street level; and include human-scale details and massing.  Goal T-3: Facilities, services and programs that encourage and promote walking and bicycling.  Policy T-21: Support the use of Downtown alleyways for pedestrian- and bicycle-only use.  Policy T-23: Encourage pedestrian-friendly design features such as sidewalks, street trees, on-site parking, public spaces, gardens, outdoor furniture, art, and interesting architectural details. More specifically, the project is consistent with Policy L-5, which seeks to maintain the scale and character of the City. Avoid land uses that are overwhelming and unacceptable due their size and scale. As conditioned, the approved project reduces the scale and visual prominence of the building along University Avenue and Kipling Street, creating the appearance of a three-story structure. This design provides a smoother transition from the single and two-story structures along University Avenue and Kipling Street, thereby maintaining the scale of the blocks. The building’s modern design blends and transitions with the surrounding buildings and other buildings in the City through use of similar materials, design features, massing, and character. The project is further consistent with Goals L-4 and Policies L-20, L-23 and L-24 and L-49, in that the project provides ground floor commercial space at a prominent intersection that serves as a focal point for a variety of retail uses that could occupy the space. The rhythmic position of the doors along University Avenue and Kipling Street also enhance retail vitality of the streets by locating retail uses immediately adjacent to the sidewalk and reflects the pattern of development along University Avenue. The project is consistent with Policy L-23 as it provides a mixture of commercial, office and residential uses comprised in a quality designed building. The project is consistent with Policies L-24, L-49, T-21 and T-23 because it provides a widened sidewalk for pedestrians with sheltered entrances. These same pedestrian features are extended to Kipling Street as well, and the seating area at the rear of the building activates a pedestrian space in the alley. The project is consistent with Goal L-6 and Policies L-48 and L-49 because the project is well designed, creates a coherent development pattern, is of high quality, and creative design that is compatible with surrounding development. Conditions of Approval Nos. 2b, 2c, 2d, 3b, 3c ensure that materials, landscaping and colors will be of high quality; reduce the massing and scale of the building to make it compatible with the surrounding buildings by limiting the elevator tower height, removing the library from the third floor, and reducing the projection of the eyebrow on the building; and setting back the guardrails and planters on the fourth floor to further reduce the massing and scale and enhance the buildings compatibility with the surrounding environment. The project has also been reviewed to the objective development standards in the zoning code and found to be in compliance with the intent and regulations contained therein. A comprehensive review of the project to applicable development standards is included in the administrative record. The project is consistent with the Downtown Urban Design plan. The project is located in the Commercial Core and more specifically the University Avenue District. The Urban Design plan notes that the alley from Kipling Street is designated for opportunities for pedestrian friendly use. The project satisfies this design requirement by providing a courtyard area with tables for pedestrians to use at the rear of the project site. The alley façade also incorporates a green wall which provides a sense of life to the alleyway. Other relevant goals in the plan include reinforcing University Avenue as the retail core by maintaining ground floor retail space, develop and enhance the qualities of University Avenue which make it an exciting outdoor and pedestrian environment with eclectic architecture, outdoor food, and entertainment and public amenities. The project maintains commercial uses along University Avenue by designating the ground floor area of the building for commercial spaces. The design of the project generates interests on the side streets. The clear glass windows allow pedestrians to see through the corner of the building which strengthens the pedestrian experience. The project provides pedestrian spaces through the recessed entries and widened sidewalk. The building is designed with attention to all facades. Kipling Street and University Avenue have the same attention to detail as the alley and southern elevation. The attention to detail in the alley is exhibited through the use of a green wall planter. Further, as conditioned, the southern elevation is required to incorporate a decorative wall treatment, feature or element. Therefore, the project is conditioned and incorporates attention to detail on each façade. The ground floor of the project is primarily comprised of glass which is consistent with the plan’s requirement for ground floor treatments that allow for easier pedestrian views of displays and merchandise. Further, the project is located in the Kipling Street secondary district. The plan calls for Kipling Street between Lytton and University Avenue to retain older single family structures and the architectural character they provide. The project is not subject to this requirement because it does not propose to convert a single-family structure, and therefore its architecture, on Kipling Street. The project would convert commercial structures. The plan also calls for the terminus of Kipling Street and University Avenue to be enhanced through tie-ins to the Varsity Theater. The project would tie-in to the Varsity Theater by providing a structure that is of similar height and massing, located at the street front. The project is not subject to any coordinated area plans. Finding #2: The project has a unified and coherent design, that: a. creates an internal sense of order and desirable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community, b. preserves, respects and integrates existing natural features that contribute positively to the site and the historic character including historic resources of the area when relevant, c. is consistent with the context-based design criteria of the applicable zone district, d. provides harmonious transitions in scale, mass and character to adjacent land uses and land use designations, e. enhances living conditions on the site (if it includes residential uses) and in adjacent residential areas. The project is consistent with Finding #2 because: The project has a unified and coherent design and creates an internal sense of order in that each use of the building is separated onto a specific floor. Each use also has access to own open space and the floor plans facilitate the proposed uses through appropriate layouts and configurations of the internal spaces. Internal spaces are provided with direct access and circulation routes and amenities like kitchen spaces for the commercial and office uses. The project is designed to preserve, respect and integrate natural features. Natural features for this project consist of street trees along University Avenue and Kipling Street. The project site will preserve the existing street trees along University Avenue and will replace the ginkgo biloba trees along Kipling Street with new gingko biloba trees. The building respect the street trees by maintain setbacks from the vegetation and Condition of Approval No. 3b ensures that vegetation from the project will integrate with the street trees. Because the area has not been recognized as having a unified design or historic character, the finding for historic character is not applicable Therefore, the project will preserve, respect and integrate natural features that contribute positively to the site. The project is consistent with the context-based design criteria for the applicable zone district: The design and architecture of the proposed project has been reviewed with respect to the Context-Based Design Criteria set forth in PAM 18.18.110. Section 18.18.110 notes that the project shall be:  Responsible to its context and compatible with adjacent development, and shall promote the establishment of pedestrian oriented design (where “responsible to context” is not a desire to replicate surroundings, but provide appropriate transitions to surroundings), and  Compatible with adjacent development, when apparent scale and mass is consistent with the pattern of achieving a pedestrian oriented design and when new construction shares general characteristics and establishes design linkages with the overall pattern of buildings so the visual unit of the street is maintained. Pursuant to PAMC 18.18.110(b), the following additional findings have been made in the affirmative: (1) Pedestrian and Bicycle Environment: The design of new projects shall promote pedestrian walkability, a bicycle friendly environment, and connectivity through design elements. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project supports widen sidewalk with recessed entries on primary pedestrian routes, at-grade bicycle racks near the building entrances, secured bicycle facility at ground level and within the underground parking garage. (2) Street Building Facades. Street facades shall be designed to provide a strong relationship with the sidewalk and the street(s), to create an environment that supports and encourages pedestrian activity through design elements. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed street facades are designed to create an environment that supports and encourages pedestrian activity. The building façade facing University Avenue preserves the existing storefront pattern with distinguish architectural elements to break up building mass. Entries are clearly defined and have a scale that is in proportion to the building functions. Elements that signal habitation such as entrances, stairs, and balconies are visible to people on the street. Proposed placement and orientation of doorways, windows and landscape elements are appropriate to create strong and direct relationships with the streets. Upper floors are setback, width of overhang is reduced and elevator shaft is oriented inward to reduce building mass and to fit in with the context of the neighborhood; (3) Massing and Setbacks. Buildings shall be designed to minimize massing and conform to proper setbacks. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project incorporates design with a series of recessed terraces and interchange in materials to break down the scale of building and provide visual interest. Variation in massing and materials create a façade with two distinctive frontages, which respect the existing storefront patterns and rhythms on University Avenue. Proposed design incorporates columns framework and tall display windows to reinforce the street corner. With the intent to minimize massing and ensure greater setback, proposed design has reduced the height of stairway tower and setback roofline for upper floor terrace at the corner of Lane 30 and Kipling Street; (4) Low-Density Residential Transitions. Where new projects are built abutting existing lower scale residential development, care shall be taken to respect the scale and privacy of neighboring properties. Although the parcels abutting the project site along Kipling Street have a commercial zoning designation, most of the built forms have a low density residential appearance. While the height is taller than most of the buildings in the neighborhood, the proposed building height of 50 feet is compliant with the height limit in the Downtown Commercial District. Proposed design includes at least a 10 feet setback with open terraces at the second and third floors to reduce the impact of the building height on to adjacent lower density neighborhood. Potential privacy concern is at a less than significant level as the buildings behind the project site are mostly one-story with commercial/office uses and mature trees along Kipling Street would provide some degree of screening. Proposed design includes storefront glass on both frontages to introduce a daylight source on the ground level. (5) Project Open Space. Private and public open space shall be provided so that it is usable for residents, visitors, and/or employees of the site. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project provides open space with wider sidewalks, balconies, and a roof-top terrace. The balconies are accessible by residents on the site and are located on four sides of the building that encourage ‘eyes on the street’. Proposed roof-top terrace is for office tenants and would provide ample solar exposure; (6) Parking Design. Parking needs shall be accommodated but shall not be allowed to overwhelm the character of the project or detract from the pedestrian environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project’s parking is located within the below-grade garage and does not detract from pedestrian environment. The project includes a well-integrated garage entry, four feet setback, and mirrors that aid traffic and improve visibility on Lane 30. In addition, the project incorporates landscaping element to soften the exit of Lane 30. The intent is to enhance the character of pedestrian environment, while maintaining traffic visibility with low profile plant materials; (7) Large (Multi-Acre) Sites. Large sites (over one acre) shall be designed so that street, block, and building patterns are consistent with those of the surrounding neighborhood. This finding does not apply; (8) Sustainability and Green Building Design. Project design and materials to achieve sustainability and green building design should be incorporated into the project. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project would comply with the City’s green building ordinance, and the design includes overhangs, recesses, and other shading devices and techniques to reduce the solar heat gain and energy consumption related to the cooling of the building. Design is easy for pedestrian, bicycle and transit access. The project incorporates high efficiency LED light fixtures, low-flow plumbing fixtures and high efficiency HVAC equipment for efficiency energy and water use. Green building features will be incorporated to achieve CalGreen Tier 2 standards for the commercial portion and Green Point rated standards for the residential portion. Condition of Approval No. 2e requires that the elevator tower height not exceed 54.5 feet and Condition of Approval No. 2b requires the fourth floor guard rails to be setback from the edge of the terrace along all streetscapes. These conditions reduce the visual prominence of the structure along Kipling Street, and they create the appearance of a three story building. Along Kipling Street and University Avenue, the project would constitute a one to two-story increase in height from the adjacent structures. Additionally, the second and third floors are setback 10-feet from the alley way, and the third floor is setback approximately seven-feet off of Kipling Street and University Avenue. Condition Nos. 2c and 2d requires the library to be removed from the third floor at the intersection of Kipling Street and University Avenue and for the third floor roofline to follow the fourth floor plan, which further reduces the mass and scale of the building. These conditions and design feature help the project achieve a harmonious transition in scale and mass between adjacent land uses along Kipling Street and University Avenue. Further, the project is consistent with Finding #2 because it enhances the living conditions on the site by providing residential units in downtown. The project enhances the adjacent residential areas because it provides space for employment and commerce that residences can access easily from surrounding areas. Finding #3: The design is of high aesthetic quality, using high quality, integrated materials and appropriate construction techniques, and incorporating textures, colors, and other details that are compatible with and enhance the surrounding area. The project is consistent with Finding #3 because: The project has a high aesthetic quality, materials, construction techniques, textures, colors and other details that are compatible with and enhance the surrounding area. The buildings surrounding the site are comprised of concrete, stone, glass, brick, and metal and range in height from two to four stories along University Avenue. Along Kipling Street, buildings consist of cement, stucco, glass and brick structures. The proposed structure is comprised of high quality glass, concrete and steel design which is similar and representative of the materials found in the surrounding environment. Further, the materials, textures, and attention to detail in the structure is consistent throughout each elevation which represents a high quality aesthetic design. Lastly, the project, will have high quality materials, textures, colors and finishes because it is conditioned to return to the Architectural Review Board for review and recommendation to the Director of Planning and Community Environment of exterior building materials, colors and craftsmanship-related detailing associated with the project. Therefore, the project is consistent with Finding #3 because it consists of a high quality aesthetic design with integrated materials, textures, colors and other details that are compatible with the surrounding environment. Finding #4: The design is functional, allowing for ease and safety of pedestrian and bicycle traffic and providing for elements that support the building’s necessary operations (e.g. convenient vehicle access to property and utilities, appropriate arrangement and amount of open space and integrated signage, if applicable, etc.). The project is consistent with Finding #4 because: Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for all users. The alley provides a dedicated, separate access point to the project from the street. This will minimize vehicle interactions with other vehicles as well as pedestrians and cyclists. Further, the traffic study has determined that there is adequate site distance for exiting the alley onto Kipling Street. The project will incorporate mirrored installations at the parking garage ingress and egress to improve visibility and reduce conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians and cyclists. The onsite circulation was reviewed in accordance with generally accepted traffic engineering standards. Generally, the proposed plan would provide one main drive aisle that would lead to an underground parking structure. Parking is shown at 90 degrees to the main drive aisle. This drive aisle makes several 90 degree turns to spiral down to the farthest parking spaces. The City parking facility design standards specify a minimum width of 16 feet for two-way underground ramps; 25 feet for two-way drive aisles lined with 8.5 foot wide, 90 degree spaces; and maximum slope of 2% adjacent to accessible parking spaces. The proposed project meets these standards. Further, the project was also found to meet the applicable parking requirements of the PAMC. Therefore, these features ensure access and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for all users. Finding #5: The landscape design complements and enhances the building design and its surroundings, is appropriate to the site’s functions, and utilizes to the extent practical, regional indigenous drought resistant plant material capable of providing desirable habitat that can be appropriately maintained. The project is consistent with Finding #5 because: The project will preserve existing street trees along University Avenue and will replace two perimeter trees along Kipling Street with ginkgo biloba. Two other street trees along Kipling Street will be retained. The project proposes appropriate, drought tolerant, sustainable landscaping in key open space areas that will complement and enhance the design of these spaces. The landscaping will form a soft edge and perimeter around the ground floor and terrace area on the third floor. Further, as conditioned, the project is required to return to the Architectural Review Board for review and recommendation to the Director of Planning and Community Environment for landscape details and plans for all proposed planting, including individual planters, the greenwall, and landscaping near the rooftop elevator. Therefore, the landscape design is appropriate and compatible for the project. Finding #6: The project incorporates design principles that achieve sustainability in areas related to energy efficiency, water conservation, building materials, landscaping, and site planning. The project is consistent with Finding #6 because: In accordance with the City’s Green Building Regulations, the building will satisfy the requirements for CALGreen Mandatory + Tier 2. SECTION 7. Conditions of Approval. The following conditions of approval shall be implemented as part of the modified project approved by this Record of Land Use Action. Condition numbers 2 and 3 are those specifically adopted by the City Council to ensure that the modified project is consistent with all applicable findings. Planning Division 1. SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE. The plans submitted for a Building Permit shall be in substantial conformance with plans received on October 26, 2016, hereby labeled as Option 1, containing 24 pages, except as modified to incorporate the following conditions of approval. 2. BUILDING PERMIT PLAN SET. A copy of this cover letter and conditions of approval, including Exhibit A (MMRP), shall be printed on the second page of the plans submitted for building permit. Project plans submitted for Building permits shall incorporate the following changes, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Community Environment: a. Applicant shall submit detailed plans that demonstrate compliance with floor area and other applicable development standards. b. The fourth floor guardrails and planters shall be set back a minimum of five feet from the edge of the third floor roofline (all elevations), as modified by these conditions. c. The ‘library’ shown on the third floor, floor plans, at the street corner, shall be removed. d. The third floor roofline above the removed ‘library’ area shall be removed, except to allow a three-foot overhang. e. The elevator adjacent to Kipling Street, inclusive of any associated mechanical equipment, shall not exceed fifty-four and one-half feet (54.5') in height. 3. BOARD LEVEL ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall return to the ARB for approval of the following items, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Community Environment: a. A decorative wall design treatment, feature or element, shall be applied to the exterior walls immediately adjacent to the southern property line (project’s south elevation) starting at an elevation equivalent to the building height of the adjacent structure and extending to the roofline of the proposed building. b. Landscape details and plans for all proposed planting, including individual planters, the greenwall, and landscaping near the rooftop elevator. c. The exterior building materials, colors and craftsmanship-related detailing associated with the project. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall demonstrate how interior and exterior lighting sources will be reduced after operating hours or when the use of the facility is reduced. This may require the use of timing devices for exterior and interior lights in order to minimize light glare at night without jeopardizing security of employees/residents. 5. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: All modifications to the approved project shall be submitted for review and approval prior to construction. If during the Building Permit review and construction phase, the project is modified by the applicant, it is the responsibility of the applicant to contact the Planning Division/project planner directly to obtain approval of the project modification. It is the applicant’s responsibility to highlight any proposed changes to the project and to bring it to the project planner’s attention. 6. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES: Estimated Development Impact Fees in the amount of $312,634.85 plus the applicable public art fee, per PAMC 16.61.040, shall be paid prior to the issuance of the related building permit. 7. REQUIRED PUBLIC ART. In conformance with Ordinance No. 5226, and to the satisfaction of the Public Art Commission, the property owner and/or applicant shall select an artist and received final approval of the art plan , or pay the in-lieu fee equivalent to 1% of the estimated construction valuation, prior to issuance of a Building permit. All required artwork shall be installed as approved by the Public Art Commission and verified by Public Art staff prior to release of the final Use and Occupancy permit. The Public Art requirements Application information and documents can be found at www.cityofpaloalto.org/publicart under the “policies and documents” tab. 8. IMPACT FEE 90-DAY PROTEST PERIOD. California Government Code Section 66020 provides that a project applicant who desires to protest the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project must initiate the protest at the time the development project is approved or conditionally approved or within ninety (90) days after the date that fees, dedications, reservations or exactions are imposed on the Project. Additionally, procedural requirements for protesting these development fees, dedications, reservations and exactions are set forth in Government Code Section 66020. IF YOU FAIL TO INITIATE A PROTEST WITHIN THE 90-DAY PERIOD OR FOLLOW THE PROTEST PROCEDURES DESCRIBED IN GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66020, YOU WILL BE BARRED FROM CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OR REASONABLENESS OF THE FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, AND EXACTIONS. If these requirements constitute fees, taxes, assessments, dedications, reservations, or other exactions as specified in Government Code Sections 66020(a) or 66021, this is to provide notification that, as of the date of this notice, the 90-day period has begun in which you may protest these requirements. 9. INDEMNITY. To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City for its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. 10. MITIGATION MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP). The MMRP associated with the project and attached here as Exhibit A is incorporated by reference and all mitigation measures shall be implemented as described in said document. 11. PLANNING FINAL INSPECTION. A Planning Division Final inspection will be required to determine substantial compliance with the approved plans prior to the scheduling of a Building Division final. Any revisions during the building process must be approved by Planning, including but not limited to; materials, fenestration and hard surface locations. Contact your Project Planner at 650-329-2441 x0 to schedule this inspection. 12. EXPIRATION. The project approval shall be valid for a period of one year from the original date of approval. In the event a building permit(s) is not secured for the project within the time limit specified above, the ARB approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect. Application for extension of this entitlement may be made prior to the one year expiration. Building Division 13. The permit application shall be accompanied by all plans and related documents necessary to construct the complete project. 14. A demolition permit shall be required for the removal of the existing building(s) on site. 15. The entire project is to be included under a single building permit and shall not be phased under multiple permits. 16. Separate submittals and permits are required for the following systems: E.V., P.V. and Solar Hot Water. 17. Design of building components that are not included in the plans submitted for building permit and are to be “deferred” shall be limited to as few items as possible. The list of deferred items shall be reviewed and approved prior to permit application. 18. The plans submitted for the building permit shall include an allowable floor area calculation that relates the mixed occupancies to type of construction. 19. The plans submitted for the building permit shall include allowable floor area calculations that relate the proposed occupancies to type of construction. This includes possible future installation of assembly occupancies such as large conference rooms or cafeterias, for example. 20. An acoustical analysis shall be submitted and the plans shall incorporate the report’s recommendations needed to comply with the sound transmissions requirements in CBC Section 1207. Green Building 21. Green Building Ordinance: a. Commercial Portion - CALGreen Tier 2: The project must meet the California Green Building Code Tier 2 requirements. Due to the size of the project, the team must engage a commissioning agent and fulfil on the commissioning requirements. Additional information may be found at the following link http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/ds/green_building/default.asp. The new Energy California Energy Code contains significant changes and Palo Alto is currently enforcing code minimum for the energy code. The details can be found at the following link. http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2013standards/ b. Residential Portion- Green Point Rated: The project is required to achieve Green Point Rated Certification through Build It Green. The project team must engage a Green Point Rater. The required minimum points value is 70. The required prerequisite and points associated with exceeding the code shall be excused. Additional information may be found at the following linkhttp://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/ds/green_building/default.asp 22. EV Parking Ordinance: The project is subject to meet the new Electric Vehicle Parking Ordinance that requires but is not limited to: a. Multi-family: One EVSE Ready or EVSE Installed per unit. For guest parking, either conduit only, EVSE Ready or EVSE Installed shall be provided for 25% of the parking. A minimum of 1 EVSE Installed for multi-family guest parking shall be provided. b. Commercial: For commercial parking, either conduit only, EVSE Ready or EVSE Installed shall be provided for 25% of the parking. A minimum of 1 EVSE Installed for commercial parking shall be provided. Urban Forestry 23. STREET TREES: City street trees approved to remain shall be maintained and protected during construction per City of Palo Alto standard requirements as further described in the City’s Tree Technical Manual and below: a. UNIVERSITY AVENUE: Two regulated street trees (London Plane) on University Ave frontage are to be retained and protected. Protection shall consist of Modified Type III for the entire trunk and will include primary branches on the building side. Prior to any clearance/pruning, the project applicant shall: i. Submit a written Tree Care Application to Dorothy.dale@cityofpaloalto.org, ii. Receive approval of said Tree Care Application, and iii. Shall coordinate with Urban Forestry for direct supervision by staff of private tree contractor. b. KIPLING STREET: Four trees in the right of way are approved for removal. Four replacement trees shall be installed, Ginkgo biloba ‘Autumn Gold’, Maidenhair, 36-inch box size, in 5’x5’ Kiva tree grates, two irrigation bubblers per tree (PW Standard Detail # 603a and 513). A certified arborist for the applicant shall evaluate/select matching trees for quality. Contractor shall coordinate an Urban Forestry inspection of the new trees, before they are planted in the ground. i. SIDEWALK BASE MEDIUM: As a root growing medium between the curb and building face, Silva Cell technology or approved equal, shall be designed as a suspended sidewalk element and provide low compaction area for long term root growth. A certified arborist for the applicant shall calculate how many cubic feet of soil and Silva cell material will be needed for each tree, for approval by the Urban Forester. 24. All landscape material shall be well maintained for the life of the project and replaced if it fails. Public Works Engineering Department PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT AND GRADING AND EXCAVATION PERMIT SUBMITTAL: 25. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE: The applicant has revised the project description to indicate that she is no longer pursuing the development of condominiums. Since the project site is located within two parcels 120-15-029 and 120-15-028 a certificate of compliance for a lot merger is required. Applicant shall apply for a certificate of compliance and provide the necessary documents. Certificate of Compliance shall be recorded prior to issuance of a building or grading and excavation permit. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A DEMOLITION PERMIT: 26. LOGISTICS PLAN: The applicant and contractor shall submit a construction logistics plan to the Public Works Department that addresses all impacts to the City’s right-of-way, including, but not limited to: construction fence, construction entrance, stockpile areas, office trailer, temporary bathroom, measures for dewatering if needed, pedestrian control, traffic control, truck routes, material deliveries, contractor’s parking, on-site staging and storage areas, concrete pours, crane lifts, work hours, noise control, dust control, storm water pollution prevention, contractor’s contact. The plan shall be prepared and submitted along the Rough Grading and Excavation Permit. It shall include notes as indicated on the approved Truck Route Map for construction traffic to and from the site. Plan shall also indicate if the bus stop will need to be relocated. 27. Applicant shall schedule a meeting with Public Works Engineering and Transportation Division to discuss the existing building demolition, excavation and building construction logistics. Construction fence shall be located at the building property line, travel lane closures will not be permitted. Applicant shall propose a logistics plan that shows how pedestrian access is maintained and eliminating the least number of parking spaces during construction. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF EXCAVATION AND GRADING PERMIT: 28. GRADING PERMIT: An Excavation and Grading Permit is required for grading activities on private property that fill, excavate, store or dispose of 100 cubic yards or more based on PAMC Section 16.28.060. Applicant shall prepare and submit an excavation and grading permit to Public Works separately from the building permit set. The permit application and instructions are available at the Development Center and on our website: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pwd/forms_and_permits.asp 29. ROUGH GRADING: provide a Rough Grading Plan for the work proposed as part of the Grading and Excavation Permit application. The Rough Grading Plans shall including the following: pad elevation, basement elevation, elevator pit elevation, ground monitoring wells, shoring for the proposed basement, limits of over excavation, stockpile area of material, overall earthwork volumes (cut and fill), temporary shoring for any existing facilities, ramps for the basement access, crane locations (if any), etc. Plans submitted for the Grading and Excavation Permit, shall be stand-alone, and therefore the plans shall include any conditions from other divisions that pertain to items encountered during rough grading for example if contaminated groundwater is encountered and dewatering is expected, provide notes on the plans based Water Quality’s conditions of approval. Provide a note on the plans to direct the contractor to the approve City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map, which is available on the City’s website. 30. BASEMENT SHORING: Provide shoring plans for the basement excavation, clearly including tiebacks (if any). Tieback shall not extend onto adjacent private property or into the City’s right-of-way without having first obtained written permission from the private property owners and/or an encroachment permit from Public Works. During the ARB process and via email dated 9/25/14 the applicant indicated that the tiebacks will extend into the adjacent private property. As such provide a letter from the neighboring property owner to allow the encroachment of permanent tiebacks into their property. In addition the shoring plans shall clearly show the property line and the dimension between the outside edge of the soldier piles and the property line for City records. Also provide notes on the Shoring Plans for the “Contractor to cut-off the shoring 6-feet below the sidewalk elevation.” AND “Contractor shall submit and obtain a permanent encroachment permit from Public Works for the tiebacks and shoring located within public right-of-way. 31. DEWATERING: Basement excavation may require dewatering during construction. Public Works only allows groundwater drawdown well dewatering. Open pit groundwater dewatering is not allowed. Dewatering is only allowed from April through October due to inadequate capacity in our storm drain system. The geotechnical report for this site must list the highest anticipated groundwater level. We recommend that a piezometer be installed in the soil boring. The contractor shall determine the depth to groundwater immediately prior to excavation by using a piezometer or by drilling an exploratory hole if the deepest excavation will be within 3 feet of the highest anticipated groundwater level. If groundwater is found within 2 feet of the deepest excavation, a drawdown well dewatering system must be used, or alternatively, the contractor can excavate for the basement and hope not to hit groundwater, but if he does, he must immediately stop all work and install a drawdown well system before he continues to excavate. Based on the determined groundwater depth and season the contractor may be required to dewater the site or stop all grading and excavation work. In addition Public Works may require that all groundwater be tested for contaminants prior to initial discharge and at intervals during dewatering. If testing is required, the contractor must retain an independent testing firm to test the discharge water for contaminants Public Works specifies and submit the results to Public Works. Public Works reviews and approves dewatering plans as part of a Street Work Permit. The applicant can include a dewatering plan in the building permit plan set in order to obtain approval of the plan during the building permit review, but the contractor will still be required to obtain a street work permit prior to dewatering. The street work permit to dewater must be obtained in August to allow ample to time to dewater and complete the dewatering by October 31st. Alternatively, the applicant must include the above dewatering requirements in a note on the site plan. Public Works has a sample dewatering plan sheet and dewatering guidelines available at the Development Center and on our website: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pwd/forms_and_permits.asp The following links are included to assist the applicant with dewatering requirements: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/30978 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/51366 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/47388. 32. WATER FILLING STATION: Applicant shall install a water station for the non-potable reuse of the dewatering water. This water station shall be constructed within private property, next to the right-of- way, (typically, behind the sidewalk). The station shall be accessible 24 hours a day for the filling of water carrying vehicles (i.e. street sweepers, etc.). The water station may also be used for onsite dust control. Before a discharge permit can be issued, the water supply station shall be installed, ready for operational and inspected by Public Works. The groundwater will also need to be tested for contaminants and chemical properties for the non-potable use. The discharge permit cannot be issued until the test results are received. Additional information regarding the station will be made available on the City’s website under Public Works. 33. GROUNDWATER USE PLAN: A Groundwater Use Plan (GWUP) shall be submitted for review for any project which requires dewatering. The GWUP, a narrative that shall be included in or accompany the Dewatering Plan, must demonstrate the highest beneficial use practicable of the pumped groundwater. The GWUP shall also state that all onsite, non-potable water needs such as dust control shall be met by using the pumped groundwater. Delays in submitting the GWUP can result in delays in the issuance of your discharge permit as Public Works requires sufficient review time which shall be expected by the applicant. 34. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: Shall clearly identify the highest projected groundwater level to be encountered in the area of the proposed basement in the future will be ______ feet below existing grade. Provide a note on the Rough Grading Plan that includes the comment above as a note. 35. GAS METERS: In-ground gas meters are not typically allowed by Public Works Utilities. If in-ground gas meters are not allowed, the above ground gas meter shall be located complete within private property. Plot and label the proposed location. If in-ground gas meters are permitted, applicant shall submit an email from Utilities that indicates in-ground gas meters are acceptable for this project. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT 36. MAPPING: Applicant has revised the project description to indicate that she is no longer pursuing the development of condominiums. If at any point the applicant intends to sell portions of the building a Minor or Major Subdivision Application will be required. Public Works’ Tentative Maps and Preliminary Parcel Maps checklist must accompany the completed application. All existing and proposed dedications and easements must be shown on the submitted map. The map would trigger further requirements from Public Works, see Palo Alto Municipal Code section 21.12 for Preliminary Parcel Map requirements and section 21.16 for Parcel Map requirements. 37. OFFSITE IMPROVEMENT PLANS: Prior to submittal of Building and/or Grading permit applicant shall meet with Public Works to discuss off-site improvements. These may include but are not limited to new concrete or asphalt work, utility upgrades or relocations, and/or street resurfacing. 38. The following items were not addressed through the final ARB submittal and shall be shown on the plans. a. Explain how all of the site runoff will drain directly into the media filter. The media filter shall be located complete with the private property as shown on the approve ARB plans. The details provided indicate that the media filter is to be installed below ground and discharge would need to be pumped to the surface. However that is not reflected on the Utility Plan. b. Plot and label the total the number of disconnected downspouts. The civil has indicated that the downspouts runoff will drain into the media filter, but it’s not clear on the plans how this will be accomplished. c. The site plan shall demonstrate how the runoff from the MFS flows by gravity into the gutter, provide pipe inverts and flowline grades. If a new separate structure is required to allow runoff to flow by gravity into the gutter or reduce the velocity, then the structure shall be located completely within the private property. The 4th and 5th resubmittal ARB plans show a junction box within the public right of way, this box shall be located completely within the private property. d. The 5th submittal shows a planter box adjacent to the alley and the MFS has been relocated to be within this planter boxes. The plans submitted lack information, show how the roof runoff is directed into the mechanical treatment facility. Plot and label the pump, drain lines, downspouts. Show how all of the site runoff is treated by the proposed MFS. e. It’s not clear if the planter box is intended to provide C3 treatment. If LID treatment is proposed provide the surface drainage areas and calculations. f. Resize the new planter box to allow the junction box to be within the private property and behind the Kipling Street sidewalk. The planter box and planting material shall be revised to meet the 4-ft by 6-ft clear site distance and height clearance. In addition the planter box shall be located 1-foot minimum away from the adjacent alley. 39. GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: The plan set must include a grading & drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional that includes existing and proposed spot elevations, earthwork volumes, finished floor elevations at every at grade door entrance, area drain and bubbler locations, drainage flow arrows to demonstrate proper drainage of the site. See Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.28 Adjacent grades must slope away from the building foundation at minimum of 2% or 5% for 10-feet per 2013 CBC Section 1804.3. Downspouts and splashblocks should be shown on this plan, as well as any site drainage features such as swales. Grading will not be allowed that increases drainage onto, or blocks existing drainage from, neighboring properties. Public Works generally does not allow rainwater to be collected and discharged into the street gutter or connected directly to the City’s infrastructure, but encourages the developer to keep rainwater onsite as much as feasible by directing runoff to landscape and other pervious areas of the site. Plan shall also include a drainage system as required for all uncovered exterior basement-level spaces such as lightwell, stairwells or driveway ramps. 40. BASEMENT DRAINAGE: Due to high groundwater throughout much of the City and Public Works prohibiting the pumping and discharging of groundwater, perforated pipe drainage systems at the exterior of the basement walls or under the slab are not allowed for this site. A drainage system is, however, required for all exterior basement-level spaces, such as lightwells, patios or stairwells. This system consists of a sump, a sump pump, a backflow preventer, and a closed pipe from the pump to a dissipation device onsite at least 10-feet from the property line, such as a bubbler box in a landscaped area, so that water can percolate into the soil and/or sheet flow across the site. The device must not allow stagnant water that could become mosquito habitat. Additionally, the plans must show that exterior basement-level spaces are at least 7-3/4” below any adjacent windowsills or doorsills to minimize the potential for flooding the basement. Public Works recommends a waterproofing consultant be retained to design and inspect the vapor barrier and waterproofing systems for the basement. 41. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA: The project will be creating or replacing 500 square feet or more of impervious surface. Accordingly, the applicant shall provide calculations of the existing and proposed impervious surface areas with the building permit application. The Impervious Area Worksheet for Land Developments form and instructions are available at the Development Center or on our website. 42. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION: The City's full-sized "Pollution Prevention - It's Part of the Plan" sheet must be included in the plan set. The sheet is available here: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/2732 43. STORM WATER TREATMENT: This project shall comply with the storm water regulations contained in provision C.3 of the NPDES municipal storm water discharge permit issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (and incorporated into Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.11). These regulations apply to land development projects that create or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface, and restaurants, retail gasoline outlets, auto service facilities, and uncovered parking lots that create and/or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface. In order to address the potential permanent impacts of the project on storm water quality, the applicant shall incorporate into the project a set of permanent site design measures, source controls, and treatment controls that serve to protect storm water quality, subject to the approval of the Public Works Department. The applicant shall identify, size, design and incorporate permanent storm water pollution prevention measures (preferably landscape-based treatment controls such as bioswales, filter strips, and permeable pavement rather than mechanical devices that require long-term maintenance) to treat the runoff from a “water quality storm” specified in PAMC Chapter 16.11 prior to discharge to the municipal storm drain system. Effective February 10, 2011, regulated projects, must contract with a qualified third-party reviewer during the building permit review process to certify that the proposed permanent storm water pollution prevention measures comply with the requirements of Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.11. The certification form, 2 copies of approved storm water treatment plan, and a description of Maintenance Task and Schedule must be received by the City from the third- party reviewer prior to approval of the building permit by the Public Works department. Within 45 days of the installation of the required storm water treatment measures and prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for the building, third-party reviewer shall also submit to the City a certification for approval. 44. UTILITY PLAN: shall be provided with the Building Permit that demonstrates how the site’s drainage flows by gravity into the City’s system and is not pumped. Public Works generally does not allow downspout rainwater to be collected, piped and discharged directly into the street gutter or connect directly to the City’s infrastructure. The utility plan shall indicate that downspouts are disconnected, daylight at grade, and are directed to landscaped and other pervious areas onsite. Downspouts shall daylight away from the foundation. If pumps are required, plot and label where the pumps will be located on-site, storm water runoff from pumped system shall daylight onto onsite landscaped areas and be allow to infiltrate and flow by gravity to the public storm drain line. Storm water runoff that is pumped shall not be directly piped into the public storm drain line. 45. TRANSFORMER AND UTILITIES: Applicant shall be aware that the project may trigger water line and meter upgrades or relocation, if upgrades or relocation are required, the building permit plan set shall plot and label utility changes. The backflow preventer, and above grade meters shall be located within private property and plotted on the plans. Similarly if a transformer upgrade or a grease interceptor is required it shall also be located within the private property. 46. WORK IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY: The plans must clearly indicate any work that is proposed in the public right-of-way, such as sidewalk replacement, driveway approach, or utility laterals. The plans must include notes that the work must be done per City standards and that the contractor performing this work must first obtain a Street Work Permit from Public Works at the Development Center. This project may be required to replace the driveway approach the sidewalk associated with the existing driveway may be required to replaced with a thickened (6” thick instead of the standard 4” thick) section. 47. SIDEWALK ENCROACHMENT: Add a note to the site plan that says, “The contractor using the city sidewalk to work on an adjacent private building must do so in a manner that is safe for pedestrians using the sidewalk. Pedestrian protection must be provided per the 2013 California Building Code Chapter 32 requirements. If the height of construction is 8 feet or less, the contractor must place construction railings sufficient to direct pedestrians around construction areas. If the height of construction is more than 8 feet, the contractor must obtain an encroachment permit from Public Works at the Development Center in order to provide a barrier and covered walkway. The contractor must apply to Public Works for an encroachment permit to close or occupy the sidewalk(s) or lane.” 48. SIDEWALK, CURB & GUTTER: As part of this project, the applicant must replace all of the existing sidewalks, ramps, curbs, gutters or driveway approaches in the public right-of-way along the frontage(s) of the property. Applicant shall be responsible for replacing the two ramps immediately across the street from the project site. Applicant shall meet with Public Works and Transportation to discuss the potential for adding a bulb-out along the University Avenue side to widen the sidewalk. If construction of the new ramps and/or sidewalk results in a conflict with utilities or traffic signal than applicant will be responsible for adjusting to grade or relocating conflict and to bring the improvements to current designs standards. The site plan and grading and drainage plan submitted with the building permit plan set must show the extent of the replacement work. Provide references to the specific City’s Standard Drawings and Specification. The plan must note that any work in the right-of-way must be done per Public Works’ standards by a licensed contractor who must first obtain a Street Work Permit from Public Works at the Development Center. 49. RESURFACING: The applicant is required to resurface (grind and overlay) the entire width of the street on University Avenue and Kipling Street frontages adjacent to the project. In addition this project is required to resurface the full width of the Lane along the project frontage. Note that the base material for these 3 streets varies. Thermoplastic striping of the street(s) will be required after resurfacing. Include an off-site plan that shows the existing signage and striping that is to be replaces as part of this project and for the contractor’s use. 50. DEMOLITION PLAN: Place the following note adjacent to an affected tree on the Site Plan and Demolition Plan: “Excavation activities associated with the proposed scope of work shall occur no closer than 10-feet from the existing street tree, or as approved by the Urban Forestry Division contact 650- 496-5953. Any changes shall be approved by the same”. 51. STREET TREES: The applicant may be required to replace existing and/or add new street trees in the public right-of-way along the property’s frontage(s). Call the Public Works’ arborist at 650-496-5953 to arrange a site visit so he can determine what street tree work, if any, will be required for this project. The site plan submitted with the building permit plan set must show the street tree work that the arborist has determined, including the tree species, size, location, staking and irrigation requirements, or include a note that Public Works’ arborist has determined no street tree work is required. The plan must note that in order to do street tree work, the applicant must first obtain a Permit for Street Tree Work in the Public Right-of-Way from Public Works’ arborist (650-496-5953). 52. GARBAGE/TRASH RECEPTACLES: The plans provided for preliminary review do not include the existing garbage/trash receptacle along University Avenue. This shall be shown on the Building permit plans and remain in its location for as long as possible during construction. If construction activities require the temporary removal of the receptacle, the contractor may remove during that construction activity but must place it back as soon as those activities have been completed. Prior to doing so, the contractor must notify the public works department to determine if Public Works Operations should pick it up for storage during that time. 53. ADJACENT NEIGHBORS: For any improvements that extend beyond the property lines such as tie-backs for the basement or construction access provide signed copies of the original agreements with the adjacent property owners. The agreements shall indicate that the adjacent property owners have reviewed and approved the proposed improvements (such as soldier beams, tiebacks) that extend into their respective properties 54. “NO DUMPING” LOGO: The applicant is required to paint the “No Dumping/Flows to San Franscisquito Creek” logo in blue color on a white background, adjacent to all onsite storm drain inlets. Stencils of the logo are available from the Public Works Environmental Compliance Division, which may be contacted at (650) 329-2598. A deposit may be required to secure the return of the stencil. Include the instruction to paint the logos on the construction grading and drainage plan. Similar medallions shall be installed near the catch basins that are proposed to be relocated. Provide notes on the plans to reference that medallions and stencils. 55. OIL/WATER SEPARATOR: Parking garage floor drains on interior levels shall be connected to an oil/water separator prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system. The oil/water separator shall be located within private property. 56. GREASE INTERCEPTOR: If a commercial kitchen is proposed requiring the installation of a grease interceptor, the grease separator shall be installed and located within private property. In no case shall the City of Palo Alto allow the right-of-way (ROW) to be used to satisfy this requirement. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT FINAL: 57. STORM WATER TREATMENT: At the time of installation of the required storm water treatment measures and prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, a third-party reviewer shall also submit to the City a certification for approval that the project’s permanent measures were constructed and installed in accordance to the approved permit drawings. 58. STORMWATER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: The applicant shall designate a party to maintain the control measures for the life of the improvements and must enter into a maintenance agreement with the City to guarantee the ongoing maintenance of the permanent C.3 storm water discharge compliance measures. The maintenance agreement shall be executed prior to the first building occupancy sign-off. The City will inspect the treatment measures yearly and charge an inspection fee. There is currently a $381 (FY 2015) C.3 plan check fee that will be collected upon submittal for a grading or building permit. 59. Contractor and/or Applicant shall prepare and submit an electronic (pdf) copy of the Off-Site Improvements As-Built set of plans to Public Works for the City’s records. The as-built set shall include all the improvements within the public road right-of-way and include items such as: shoring piles, tiebacks, public storm drain improvements, traffic signs, street trees, location of any vaults or boxes, and any other item that was installed as part of this project. 60. Contractor shall submit and obtain an Encroachment permit for the permanent structures (shoring and tiebacks) that were installed within the public road right-of-way. Fire Department 61. Residential sprinklers to be designed per NFPA 13. Fire sprinklers and fire alarm systems and standpipes required in accordance with NFPA 13, NFPA14, NFPA 24, NFPA 72 and State and local standards. Sprinkler, fire alarm and underground fire supply installations require separate submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau. 62. Sprinkler main drain must be coordinated with plumbing design so that 200 gpm can be flowed for annual main drain testing for 90 seconds without overflowing the collection sump, and the Utilities Department approved ejector pumps will be the maximum flow rate to sanitary sewer. 63. Applicant shall work with Utilities Department to provide acceptable backflow prevention configuration. 64. All floor levels in multi-story buildings must be served by an elevator capable of accommodating a 24 x 84 inch gurney without lifting or manipulating the gurney. 65. All welding or other hot work during construction shall be under a permit obtained from the Palo Alto Fire Department with proper notification and documentation of procedures followed and work conducted. 66. Low-E glass and underground parking areas can interfere with portable radios used by emergency responders. Please provide an RF Engineering analysis to determine if additional devices or equipment will be needed to maintain operability of emergency responder portable radios throughout 97% of the multi-family buildings in accordance with the Fire Code Appendix J as adopted by the City of Palo Alto. A written report to the Fire Marshal shall be provided prior to final inspection. Utilities Electrical Engineering GENERAL: 67. The applicant shall comply with all the Electric Utility Engineering Department service requirements noted during plan review. 68. The applicant shall be responsible for identification and location of all utilities, both public and private, within the work area. Prior to any excavation work at the site, the applicant shall contact Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-800-227-2600, at least 48 hours prior to beginning work. 69. The applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all existing utility services and/or meters including a signed affidavit of vacancy, on the form provided by the Building Inspection Division. Utilities will be disconnected or removed within 10 working days after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued after all utility services and/or meters have been disconnected and removed. THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE INCORPORATED IN SUBMITTALS FOR ELECTRIC SERVICE: 70. A completed Electric Load Sheet and a full set of plans must be included with all applications involving electrical work. The load sheet must be included with the preliminary submittal. 71. Industrial and large commercial customers must allow sufficient lead-time for Electric Utility Engineering and Operations (typically 8-12 weeks after advance engineering fees have been paid) to design and construct the electric service requested. 72. Only one electric service lateral is permitted per parcel. Utilities Rule & Regulation #18. 73. This project requires a padmount transformer. The location of the transformer shall be shown on the site plan and approved by the Utilities Department and the Architectural Review Board. Utilities Rule & Regulations #3 & #16. 74. The developer/owner shall provide space for installing padmount equipment (i.e. transformers, switches, and interrupters) and associated substructure as required by the City. 75. The customer shall install all electrical substructures (conduits, boxes and pads) required from the service point to the customer’s switchgear. The design and installation shall be according to the City standards and shown on plans. Utilities Rule & Regulations #16 & #18. 76. Location of the electric panel/switchboard shall be shown on the site plan and approved by the Architectural Review Board and Utilities Department. 77. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backflow preventers, and any other required equipment shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show that no conflict will occur between the utilities and landscape materials. In addition, all aboveground equipment shall be screened in a manner that is consistent with the building design and setback requirements. 78. For services larger than 1600 amps, the customer will be required to provide a transition cabinet as the interconnection point between the utility’s padmount transformer and the customer’s main switchgear. The cabinet design drawings must be submitted to the Electric Utility Engineering Department for review and approval. 79. For underground services, no more than four (4) 750 MCM conductors per phase can be connected to the transformer secondary terminals; otherwise, bus duct must be used for connections to padmount transformers. If customer installs a bus duct directly between the transformer secondary terminals and the main switchgear, the installation of a transition cabinet will not be required. 80. The customer is responsible for sizing the service conductors and other required equipment according to the National Electric Code requirements and the City standards. Utilities Rule & Regulation #18. 81. If the customer’s total load exceeds 2500 kVA, service shall be provided at the primary voltage of 12,470 volts and the customer shall provide the high voltage switchgear and transformers. 82. For primary services, the standard service protection is a padmount fault interrupter owned an maintained by the City, installed at the customer’s expense. The customer must provide and install the pad and associated substructure required for the fault interrupter. 83. Any additional facilities and services requested by the Applicant that are beyond what the utility deems standard facilities will be subject to Special Facilities charges. The Special Facilities charges include the cost of installing the additional facilities as well as the cost of ownership. Utilities Rule & Regulation #20. 84. Projects that require the extension of high voltage primary distribution lines or reinforcement of offsite electric facilities will be at the customer’s expense and must be coordinated with the Electric Utility. DURING CONSTRUCTION: 85. Contractors and developers shall obtain permit from the Department of Public Works before digging in the street right-of-way. This includes sidewalks, driveways and planter strips. 86. At least 48 hours prior to starting any excavation, the customer must call Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-800-227-2600 to have existing underground utilities located and marked. The areas to be check by USA shall be delineated with white paint. All USA markings shall be removed by the customer or contractor when construction is complete. 87. The customer is responsible for installing all on-site substructures (conduits, boxes and pads) required for the electric service. No more than 270 degrees of bends are allowed in a secondary conduit run. All conduits must be sized according to National Electric Code requirements and no 1/2 – inch size conduits are permitted. All off-site substructure work will be constructed by the City at the customer’s expense. Where mutually agreed upon by the City and the Applicant, all or part of the off-site substructure work may be constructed by the Applicant. 88. All primary electric conduits shall be concrete encased with the top of the encasement at the depth of 30 inches. No more than 180 degrees of bends are allowed in a primary conduit run. Conduit runs over 500 feet in length require additional pull boxes. 89. All new underground conduits and substructures shall be installed per City standards and shall be inspected by the Electrical Underground Inspector before backfilling. 90. The customer is responsible for installing all underground electric service conductors, bus duct, transition cabinets, and other required equipment. The installation shall meet the National Electric Code and the City Standards. 91. Meter and switchboard requirements shall be in accordance with Electric Utility Service Equipment Requirements Committee (EUSERC) drawings accepted by Utility and CPA standards for meter installations. 92. Shop/factory drawings for switchboards (400A and greater) and associated hardware must be submitted for review and approval prior to installing the switchgear to: Gopal Jagannath, P.E. Supervising Electric Project Engineer Utilities Engineering (Electrical) 1007 Elwell Court Palo Alto, CA 94303 93. Catalog cut sheets may not be substituted for factory drawing submittal. 94. All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before energizing. AFTER CONSTRUCTION & PRIOR TO FINALIZATION: 95. The customer shall provide as-built drawings showing the location of all switchboards, conduits (number and size), conductors (number and size), splice boxes, vaults and switch/transformer pads. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING OCCUPANCY PERMIT: 96. The applicant shall secure a Public Utilities Easement for facilities installed on private property for City use. 97. All required inspections have been completed and approved by both the Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector. 98. All Special Facilities contracts or other agreements need to be signed by the City and applicant. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: 99. The following conditions apply to three-phase service and any service over 400 amperes: a. A padmount transformer is required. b. The Utilities Director, or his/her designee, may authorize the installation of submersible or vault installed facilities if in their opinion, padmounted equipment would not be feasible or practical. c. Submersible or vault installed facilities shall be considered Special Facilities as described in Rule and Regulation 20, and all costs associated with the installation, including continuing ownership and maintenance, will be borne by the applicant (see Rule and Regulation 3 for details). d. The customer must provide adequate space for installation, or reimburse the Utility for additional costs to locate the transformer outside the property boundaries. All service equipment must be located above grade level unless otherwise approved by Electric Engineering. Utilities Water Gas Wastewater Department PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF DEMOLITION PERMIT: 100. Prior to demolition, the applicant shall submit the existing water/wastewater fixture unit loads (and building as-built plans to verify the existing loads) to determine the capacity fee credit for the existing load. If the applicant does not submit loads and plans they may not receive credit for the existing water/wastewater fixtures. 101. The applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all utility services and/or meters including a signed affidavit of vacancy. Utilities will be disconnected or removed within 10 working days after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued by the building inspection division after all utility services and/or meters have been disconnected and removed. FOR BUILDING PERMIT: 102. The applicant shall submit completed water-gas-wastewater service connection applications - load sheets for City of Palo Alto Utilities for each unit or place of business. The applicant must provide all the information requested for utility service demands (water in fixture units/g.p.m., gas in b.t.u.p.h, and sewer in fixture units/g.p.d.). The applicant shall provide the existing (prior) loads, the new loads, and the combined/total loads (the new loads plus any existing loads to remain). 103. The applicant shall submit improvement plans for utility construction. The plans must show the size and location of all underground utilities within the development and the public right of way including meters, backflow preventers, fire service requirements, sewer mains, sewer cleanouts, sewer lift stations and any other required utilities. 104. The applicant must show on the site plan the existence of any auxiliary water supply (i.e. water well, gray water, recycled water, rain catchment, water storage tank, etc). 105. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading the existing utility mains and/or services as necessary to handle anticipated peak loads. This responsibility includes all costs associated with the design and construction for the installation/upgrade of the utility mains and/or services. 106. The applicant’s engineer shall submit flow calculations and system capacity study showing that the on- site and off-site water and sanitary sewer mains and services will provide the domestic, irrigation, fire flows, and wastewater capacity needed to service the development and adjacent properties during anticipated peak floor demands. Field testing may be required to determine current flows and water pressures on existing water main. Calculations must be signed and stamped by a registered civil engineer. The applicant is required to perform, at his/her expense, a flow monitoring study of the existing sewer main to determine the remaining capacity. The report must include existing peak flows or depth of flow based on a minimum monitoring period of seven continuous days or as determined by the senior wastewater engineer. The study shall meet the requirements and the approval of the WGW engineering section. No downstream overloading of existing sewer main will be permitted. 107. For contractor installed water and wastewater mains or services, the applicant shall submit to the WGW engineering section of the Utilities Department four copies of the installation of public water, gas and wastewater utilities improvement plans (the portion to be owned and maintained by the City) in accordance with the utilities department design criteria. All utility work within the public right-of-way shall be clearly shown on the plans that are prepared, signed and stamped by a registered civil engineer. The contractor shall also submit a complete schedule of work, method of construction and the manufacture's literature on the materials to be used for approval by the utilities engineering section. The applicant's contractor will not be allowed to begin work until the improvement plan and other submittals have been approved by the water, gas and wastewater engineering section. After the work is complete but prior to sign off, the applicant shall provide record drawings (as-builts) of the contractor installed water and wastewater mains and services per City of Palo Alto Utilities’ record drawing procedures. For contractor installed services the contractor shall install 3M marker balls at each water or wastewater service tap to the main and at the City clean out for wastewater laterals. 108. An approved reduced pressure principle assembly (RPPA backflow preventer device) is required for all existing and new water connections from Palo Alto Utilities to comply with requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive. The RPPA shall be installed on the owner's property and directly behind the water meter within 5 feet of the property line. RPPA’s for domestic service shall be lead free. Show the location of the RPPA on the plans. 109. An approved reduced pressure detector assembly is required for the existing or new water connection for the fire system to comply with requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive (a double detector assembly may be allowed for existing fire sprinkler systems upon the CPAU’s approval). Reduced pressure detector assemblies shall be installed on the owner's property adjacent to the property line, within 5’ of the property line. Show the location of the reduced pressure detector assembly on the plans. 110. All backflow preventer devices shall be approved by the WGW engineering division. Inspection by the utilities cross connection inspector is required for the supply pipe between the meter and the assembly. 111. Existing wastewater laterals that are not plastic (ABS, PVC, or PE) shall be replaced at the applicant’s expense. 112. Existing wastewater main is 5.4” PE on Kipling Street. (sewer lateral to be 4”) 113. Existing water services (including fire services) that are not a currently standard material shall be replaced at the applicant’s expense. 114. The applicant shall pay the capacity fees and connection fees associated with new utility service/s or added demand on existing services. The approved relocation of services, meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the cost of the person/entity requesting the relocation. 115. Each unit or place of business shall have its own water and gas meter shown on the plans. Each parcel shall have its own water service, gas service and sewer lateral connection shown on the plans. 116. A separate water meter and backflow preventer is required to irrigate the approved landscape plan. Show the location of the irrigation meter on the plans. This meter shall be designated as an irrigation account and no other water service will be billed on the account. The irrigation and landscape plans submitted with the application for a grading or building permit shall conform to the City of Palo Alto water efficiency standards. 117. A new water service line installation for domestic usage is required. For service connection of 4-inch through 8-inch sizes, the applicant’s contractor must provide and install a concrete vault with meter reading lid covers for water meter and other required control equipment in accordance with the utilities standard detail. Show the location of the new water service and meter on the plans. 118. A new water service line installation for irrigation usage may require. Show the location of the new water service and meter on the plans. 119. A new water service line installation for fire system usage is required. Show the location of the new water service on the plans. The applicant shall provide to the Engineering Department a copy of the plans for fire system including all Fire Department’s requirements. Please see a fire/domestic combination service connection for your provide- see City of Palo Alto standard WD-11. 120. A new gas service line installation is required. Show the new gas meter location on the plans. The gas meter location must conform with utilities standard details. Gas meter to be installed above ground. 121. A new sewer lateral installation per lot is required. Show the location of the new sewer lateral on the plans. 122. All existing water and wastewater services that will not be reused shall be abandoned at the main per WGW utilities procedures. 123. Utility vaults, transformers, utility cabinets, concrete bases, or other structures cannot be placed over existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services. Maintain 1’ horizontal clear separation from the vault/cabinet/concrete base to existing utilities as found in the field. If there is a conflict with existing utilities, Cabinets/vaults/bases shall be relocated from the plan location as needed to meet field conditions. Trees may not be planted within 10 feet of existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services or meters. New water, gas or wastewater services/meters may not be installed within 10’ or existing trees. Maintain 10’ between new trees and new water, gas and wastewater services/mains/meters. 124. To install new gas service by directional boring, the applicant is required to have a sewer cleanout at the front of the building. This cleanout is required so the sewer lateral can be videoed for verification of no damage after the gas service is installed by directional boring. 125. All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto utility standards for water, gas & wastewater. 126. All WGW utilities work on University Avenue is 1.5 times the stated fee due to traffic; existing conditions require the work to be done outside of regular work hours. Zero Waste/ Solid Waste PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT 127. Provide a garbage and recycling chute for the residential unit with either an additional chute or a bin space for compostables on the residential floor. 128. SERVICE LEVELS: Without a restaurant: the enclosure should be sized for 3-yard garbage bin, 4-yard recycling bin, 1-yard compostables bin; with a restaurant: With a restaurant: 3-yard garbage bin, 4-yard recycling bin, 2-yard compostables bin. 129. TRASH DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING (PAMC 18.23.020): (A) Assure that development provides adequate and accessible interior areas or exterior enclosures for the storage of trash and recyclable materials in appropriate containers, and that trash disposal and recycling areas are located as far from abutting residences as is reasonably possible. (B) Requirements: (i) Trash disposal and recyclable areas shall be accessible to all residents or users of the property. (ii) Recycling facilities shall be located, sized, and designed to encourage and facilitate convenient use. (iii) Trash disposal and recyclable areas shall be screened from public view by masonry or other opaque and durable material, and shall be enclosed and covered. Gates or other controlled access shall be provided where feasible. Chain link enclosures are strongly discouraged. (iv) Trash disposal and recycling structures shall be architecturally compatible with the design of the project. (v) The design, construction and accessibility of recycling areas and enclosures shall be subject to approval by the architectural review board, in accordance with design guidelines adopted by that board and approved by the city council pursuant to Section 18.76.020. 130. RECYCLING STORAGE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS (PAMC 5.20.120): The design of any new, substantially remodeled, or expanded building or other facility shall provide for proper storage, handling, and accessibility which will accommodate the solid waste and recyclable materials loading anticipated and which will allow for the efficient and safe collection. The design shall comply with the applicable provisions of Sections 18.22.100, 18.24.100, 18.26.100, 18.32.080, 18.37.080, 18.41.080, 18.43.080, 18.45.080, 18.49.140, 18.55.080, 18.60.080, and 18.68.170 of Title 18 of this code. 131. SERVICE REQUIREMENTS: (a) Collection vehicle access (vertical clearance, street width and turnaround space) and street parking are common issues pertaining to new developments. Adequate space must be provided for vehicle access. (b) Weight limit for all drivable areas to be accessed by the solid waste vehicles (roads, driveways, pads) must be rated to 60,000 lbs. This includes areas where permeable pavement is used. (c) Containers must be within 25 feet of service area or charges will apply. (d) Carts and bins must be able to roll without obstacles or curbs to reach service areas "no jumping curbs”. 132. GARBAGE, RECYCLING, AND YARD WASTE/COMPOSTABLES CART/ BIN LOCATION AND SIZING: a. Office Building: The proposed commercial development must follow the requirements for recycling container space1. Project plans must show the placement of recycling containers, for example, within the details of the solid waste enclosures. Collection space should be provided for built-in recycling containers/storage on each floor/office or alcoves for the placement of recycling containers. i. Enclosure and access should be designed for equal access to all three waste streams – garbage, recycling, and compostables. ii. Collection cannot be performed in underground. Underground bins locations require a minimum of 77” of vertical clearance. Pull out charges will apply. In instances where push services are not available (e.g., hauler driver cannot push containers up or down ramps), the property owner will be responsible for placing solid waste containers in an accessible location for collection. iii. All service areas must have a clearance height of 20’ for bin service. iv. New enclosures should consider rubber bumpers to reduce ware and tear on walls. For questions regarding garbage, recycling, and compostables collection issues, contact Green Waste of Palo Alto (650) 493-4894. b. Restaurants and Food Service Establishments: Please contact Green Waste of Palo Alto (650) 493-4894 to maximize the collection of compostables in food preparation areas and customer areas. For more information about compostable food service products, please contact City of Palo Alto Zero Waste at (650) 496-5910. c. Multi-family Residential: The proposed multi-family development must follow the requirements for recycling container space2. All residential developments, where central garbage, recycling, and compostables containers will serve five or more dwelling units, must have space for the storage and collection of recyclables and compostables. This includes the provision of recycling chutes where garbage chutes are provided. Project plans must show the placement of recycling and compostables containers, for example, within the details of the solid waste enclosures. i. Enclosure and access should be designed for equal access to all three waste streams – garbage, recycling, and compostables. ii. Collection cannot be performed in underground. Underground bins locations require a minimum of 77” of vertical clearance. Pull out charges will apply. In instances where push services are not available (e.g., hauler driver cannot push containers up or down ramps), the property owner will be responsible for placing solid waste containers in an accessible location for collection. iii. All service areas must have a clearance height of 20’ for bin service. iv. New enclosures should consider rubber bumpers to reduce wear-and-tear on walls. For questions regarding garbage, recycling, and compostables collection issues, contact Green Waste of Palo Alto (650) 493-4894. 133. COVERED DUMPSTERS, RECYCLING AND TALLOW BIN AREAS (PAMC 16.09.075(q)(2)): 1 In accordance with the California Public Resources Code, Chapter 18, Articles 1 and 2 2 In accordance with the California Public Resources Code, Chapter 18, Articles 1 and 2 a. Newly constructed and remodeled Food Service Establishments (FSEs) shall include a covered area for all dumpsters, bins, carts or container used for the collection of trash, recycling, food scraps and waste cooking fats, oils and grease (FOG) or tallow. b. The area shall be designed and shown on plans to prevent water run-on to the area and runoff from the area. c. Drains that are installed within the enclosure for recycle and waste bins, dumpsters and tallow bins serving FSEs are optional. Any such drain installed shall be connected to a Grease Control Device (GCD). d. If tallow is to be stored outside then an adequately sized, segregated space for a tallow bin shall be included in the covered area. e. These requirements shall apply to remodeled or converted facilities to the extent that the portion of the facility being remodeled is related to the subject of the requirement. It is frequently to the FSE’s advantage to install the next size larger GCD to allow for more efficient grease discharge prevention and may allow for longer times between cleaning. There are many manufacturers of GCDs which are available in different shapes, sizes and materials (plastic, reinforced fiberglass, reinforced concrete and metal). The requirements will assist FSEs with FOG discharge prevention to the sanitary sewer and storm drain pollution prevention. The FSE at all times shall comply with the Sewer Use Ordinance of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. The ordinances include requirements for GCDs, GCD maintenance, drainage fixtures, record keeping and construction projects. 134. CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS (CDD) (PAMC 5.24.030): a. Covered projects shall comply with construction and demolition debris diversion rates and other requirements established in Chapter 16.14 (California Green Building Code). In addition, all debris generated by a covered project must haul 100 percent of the debris not salvaged for reuse to an approved facility as set forth in this chapter. b. Contact the City of Palo Alto’s Green Building Coordinator for assistance on how to recycle construction and demolition debris from the project, including information on where to conveniently recycle the material. Public Works Water Quality Control 135. DISCHARGE OF GROUNDWATER (PAMC 16.09.170, 16.09.040): Prior approval shall be obtained from the city engineer or designee to discharge water pumped from construction sites to the storm drain. The city engineer or designee may require gravity settling and filtration upon a determination that either or both would improve the water quality of the discharge. Contaminated ground water or water that exceeds state or federal requirements for discharge to navigable waters may not be discharged to the storm drain. Such water may be discharged to the sewer, provided that the discharge limits contained in Palo Alto Municipal Code (16.09.040(m)) are not exceeded and the approval of the superintendent is obtained prior to discharge. The City shall be compensated for any costs it incurs in authorizing such discharge, at the rate set forth in the Municipal Fee Schedule. 136. UNPOLLUTED WATER (PAMC 16.09.055): Unpolluted water shall not be discharged through direct or indirect connection to the sanitary sewer system (e.g. uncovered ramp to garage area). 137. COVERED PARKING (PAMC 16.09.180(b)(9)): If installed, drain plumbing for parking garage floor drains must be connected to an oil/water separator with a minimum capacity of 100 gallons, and to the sanitary sewer system. 138. DUMPSTERS FOR NEW AND REMODELED FACILITATIES (PAMC 16.09.180(b)(10)): New buildings and residential developments providing centralized solid waste collection, except for single-family and duplex residences, shall provide a covered area for a dumpster. The area shall be adequately sized for all waste streams and designed with grading or a berm system to prevent water runon and runoff from the area. 139. ARCHITECTURAL COPPER PAMC (16.09.180(b)(14)): On and after January 1, 2003, copper metal roofing, copper metal gutters, copper metal down spouts, and copper granule containing asphalt shingles shall not be permitted for use on any residential, commercial or industrial building for which a building permit is required. Copper flashing for use under tiles or slates and small copper ornaments are exempt from this prohibition. Replacement roofing, gutters and downspouts on historic structures are exempt, provided that the roofing material used shall be prepatinated at the factory. For the purposes of this exemption, the definition of "historic" shall be limited to structures designated as Category 1 or Category 2 buildings in the current edition of the Palo Alto Historical and Architectural Resources Report and Inventory. 140. LOADING DOCKS (PAMC 16.09.175(k) (2)): (i) Loading dock drains to the storm drain system may be allowed if equipped with a fail-safe valve or equivalent device that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during periods of loading dock operation. (ii) Where chemicals, hazardous materials, grease, oil, or waste products are handled or used within the loading dock area, a drain to the storm drain system shall not be allowed. A drain to the sanitary sewer system may be allowed if equipped with a fail- safe valve or equivalent device that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during periods of loading dock operation. The area in which the drain is located shall be covered or protected from rainwater run-on by berms and/or grading. Appropriate wastewater treatment approved by the Superintendent shall be provided for all rainwater contacting the loading dock site. 141. CONDENSATE FROM HVAC (PAMC 16.09.180(b)(5)): Condensate lines shall not be connected or allowed to drain to the storm drain system. 142. SILVER PROCESSING (e.g. photoprocessing retail) (PAMC 16.09.215): Facilities conducting silver processing (photographic or X-ray films) shall either submit a treatment application or waste hauler certification for all spent silver bearing solutions. 650-329-2421. 143. COPPER PIPING (PAMC 16.09.180(b)(b)): Copper, copper alloys, lead and lead alloys, including brass, shall not be used in sewer lines, connectors, or seals coming in contact with sewage except for domestic waste sink traps and short lengths of associated connecting pipes where alternate materials are not practical. The plans must specify that copper piping will not be used for wastewater plumbing. 144. MERCURY SWITCHES (PAMC 16.09.180(12)): Mercury switches shall not be installed in sewer or storm drain sumps. 145. COOLING SYSTEMS, POOLS, SPAS, FOUNTAINS, BOILERS AND HEAT EXCHANGERS (PAMC 16.09.205(a)): It shall be unlawful to discharge water from cooling systems, pools, spas, fountains boilers and heat exchangers to the storm drain system. 146. UNDESIGNATED RETAIL SPACE (PAMC 16.09): Newly constructed or improved buildings with all or a portion of the space with undesignated tenants or future use will need to meet all requirements that would have been applicable during design and construction. If such undesignated retail space becomes a food service facility the following requirements must be met, in addition to other applicable codes: Grease Control Device (GCD) Requirements, PAMC Section 16.09.075; Drainage Fixture Requirements, PAMC Section 16.09.075; Covered Dumpsters, Recycling and Tallow Bin Areas PAMC, 16.09.075(q)(2); Large Item Cleaning Sink, PAMC 16.09.075(m)(2)(B). PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: __________________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED: Those plans prepared by Jo Bellomo Associates titled “429 University Avenue”, consisting of 24 pages, dated October 26, 2016. 429 University Avenue Project Mitigation Monitoring Program 429 University Avenue Project Page 1 Mitigation Monitoring Program January 2015 INTRODUCTION Section 15097 of the Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that, whenever a public agency approves a project based on a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the public agency shall establish a mitigation monitoring or reporting program to ensure that all adopted mitigation measures are implemented. This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) is intended to satisfy this requirement of the CEQA Guidelines as it relates to the 429 University Avenue project. This MMP would be used by City staff and mitigation monitoring personnel to ensure compliance with mitigation measures during project implementation. Mitigation measures identified in this MMP were developed in the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project. As noted above, the intent of the MMP is to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of all adopted mitigation measures. The MMP will provide for monitoring of construction activities, as necessary, and in the field identification and resolution of environmental concerns. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The City of Palo Alto will coordinate monitoring activities and ensure appropriate documentation of mitigation measure implementation. The table below identifies each mitigation measure for the 429 University Avenue Project and the associated implementation, monitoring, timing and performance requirements. The MMP table presented on the following pages identifies: 1. the full text of each applicable mitigation measure; 2. the party or parties responsible for implementation and monitoring of each measure; 3. the timing of implementation of each mitigation measure including any ongoing monitoring requirements; and 4. performance criteria by which to ensure mitigation requirements have been met. Following completion of the monitoring and documentation process, the final monitoring results will recorded and incorporated into the project file maintained by the City’s Department of Planning and Community Environment. It is noted that the mitigation measure numbering reflects the numbering used in the Initial Study prepared for the 429 University Avenue Project (Dudek 2014). 429 University Avenue Project Mitigation Monitoring Program 429 University Avenue Project Page 2 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program January 2015 No mitigation measures are required for the following resources:  Aesthetics  Agricultural Resources  Air Quality  Geology, Soils, and Seismicity  Greenhouse Gas Emissions  Hydrology and Water Quality  Land Use and Planning  Mineral Resources  Population and Housing  Public Services  Recreation  Utilities and Service Systems Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility Timing Performance Evaluation Criteria BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Mitigation Measure BIO-1: The following measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to protected trees: • City of Palo Alto (City)-approved Modified Type III fencing shall be installed for the two street trees to be retained along University Avenue. City-approved tree protection signs shall be posted on all fencing. • Soil conditions for the four new trees to be planted along Kipling Street shall be improved by preparing a planting area at least 6 feet square for each tree and installing Silva Cells to reduce compaction. The Silva Cells shall be filled with proper soil amendments and growing medium as determined by the City Arborist. • Unless otherwise approved, each new tree shall be provided with 1,200 cubic feet of rootable soil area, utilizing Standard Drawing #604/513. Rootable soil is defined as compaction less than 90% over the area, not including sidewalk base areas. • Two bubbler drip irrigation units shall be installed for each new tree to adequately water the new planting area. • New sidewalk shall be installed such that the final planting space opening is at least 5 feet by 5 feet for each new tree. Applicant City of Palo Alto Urban Forestry Group/Planning Division Arborist  Prior to issuance of demolition, grading, and building permits  During demolition, excavation, and construction  Approved site plans reflect applicable conditions  Field inspections conducted to verify adherence to conditions 429 University Avenue Project Mitigation Monitoring Program 429 University Avenue Project Page 3 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program January 2015 Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility Timing Performance Evaluation Criteria • Kiva tree grates shall be used around each new tree. • Replacement tree size shall be a 36-inch box, properly structured nursery stock. • Based on growth habit and proven performance, Ginkgo biloba “Autumn Gold” is highly recommended for the replacement trees. Other tree species may be approved by the City Arborist. • All work within the Tree Protection Zone, including canopy pruning of protected trees, shall be supervised by a Certified Arborist approved by the City. CULTURAL RESOURCES Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Prior to commencement of site clearing and project grading, the project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to train construction personnel regarding how to recognize cultural resources (such as structural features, unusual amounts of bone or shell, artifacts, human remains, or architectural remains) that could be encountered during construction activities. If artifacts or unusual amounts of shell or bone or other items indicative of buried archaeological resources or human remains are encountered during earth disturbance associated with the proposed project, the on-site contractor shall immediately notify the City of Palo Alto (City) and the Native American Heritage Commission as appropriate. All soil-disturbing work shall be halted within 100 feet of the discovery until a qualified archaeologist, as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) and the City, completes a significance evaluation of the finds pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Any human remains unearthed shall be treated in accordance with California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, and California Public Resources Code, Sections 5097.94, 5097.98, and 5097.99, which include requirements to Applicant City of Palo Alto Prior to and during earth disturbance  Training materials provided to construction contractors  Field inspections conducted to verify compliance 429 University Avenue Project Mitigation Monitoring Program 429 University Avenue Project Page 4 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program January 2015 Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility Timing Performance Evaluation Criteria notify the Santa Clara County Medical Examiner’s office and consult with Native American representatives determined to be the Most Likely Descendants, as appointed by the Native American Heritage Commission. Identified cultural resources shall be recorded on State Department of Parks and Recreation Form 523 (archaeological sites). Mitigation measures prescribed by the Native American Heritage Commission, the Santa Clara County Medical Examiner’s office, and any Native American representatives determined to be the Most Likely Descendants and required by the City shall be undertaken before construction activities are resumed. If disturbance of a project area cultural resource cannot be avoided, a mitigation program, including measures set forth in the City’s Cultural Resources Management Program and in compliance with Sections 15064.5 and 15126.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, shall be implemented. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to building demolition, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City of Palo Alto that a survey of the existing buildings has been conducted by a qualified environmental specialist who meets the requirements of the current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulations for suspected lead-containing materials (LCMs), including lead-based paint/coatings; asbestos containing materials (ACMs); and the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Any demolition activities likely to disturb LCMs or ACMs shall be carried out by a contractor trained and qualified to conduct lead- or asbestos- related construction work. If found, LCMs and ACMs shall be disposed of in accordance with state and federal regulations, including the EPA’s Asbestos National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, the Cal-OSHA Construction Lead Standard (CCR Title 8, Section 1432.1), and California Department of Toxic Substances Control and EPA Applicant City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment Prior to issuance of demolition permit and during demolition Building survey report submitted LCMs and ACMs handled by qualified contractor and disposed of in accordance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Asbestos National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, the California Occupational Health and Safety’s 429 University Avenue Project Mitigation Monitoring Program 429 University Avenue Project Page 5 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program January 2015 Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility Timing Performance Evaluation Criteria requirements for disposal of hazardous waste. If PCBs are found, these materials shall be managed in accordance with the Metallic Discards Act of 1991 (California Public Resources Code, Sections 42160–42185) and other state and federal guidelines and regulations. Demolition plans and contract specifications shall incorporate any necessary abatement measures in compliance with the Metallic Discards Act, particularly Section 42175, Materials Requiring Special Handling, for the removal of mercury switches, PCB-containing ballasts, and refrigerants. Construction Lead Standard (CCR Title 8, Section 1432.1), and California Department of Toxic Substances Control and EPA requirements for disposal of hazardous waste. PCBs, mercury and other hazardous building materials handled by qualified contractor and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations as identified. NOISE Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Residential Uses: Window and exterior door assemblies with Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating up to 45 and upgraded exterior walls shall be used in the residential portion of the proposed building to achieve the City’s maximum instantaneous noise guideline for residential uses. The City of Palo Alto shall ensure that these standards are met through review of building plans as a condition of project approval. Commercial Uses: Window and exterior door assemblies for the commercial portions of the building shall have a minimum STC rating of 32 at the corner of University Avenue and Kipling Street, and a minimum STC of 28 at all other commercial Applicant City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment Prior to issuance of building permit Approved building plans shall include window sound transmission ratings and interior noise levels verification from a qualified acoustical consultant. 429 University Avenue Project Mitigation Monitoring Program 429 University Avenue Project Page 6 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program January 2015 Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility Timing Performance Evaluation Criteria locations within the proposed building to comply with the State of California CalGreen noise standards (maximum interior noise level of 50 dB during the peak hour of traffic). The City of Palo Alto shall ensure that these standards are met through review of building plans as a condition of project approval. Mitigation Measure NOI-2: The residential portion of the proposed building shall have a ventilation or air-conditioning system to provide a habitable interior environment when windows are closed. Applicant City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment Prior to issuance of building permit Approved building plans shall include details of the residential ventilation system. Mitigation Measure NOI-3: Noise levels from rooftop equipment shall be reduced to meet the City of Palo Alto Noise Ordinance requirements. An enclosure or other sound- attenuation measures at the exhaust fans shall be provided to reduce rooftop equipment noise is no greater than 8 dB above the existing ambient level at potential future neighboring buildings to meet the property plane noise limit. Use of quieter equipment than assumed in this analysis may support reduced mitigation, which shall be evaluated by a qualified acoustical consultant. Applicant City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment Prior to issuance of building permit Approved building plans shall include garage exhaust fan manufacturer’s information regarding equipment noise levels and noise attenuation details TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Mirrors shall be installed at the parking garage driveway to allow drivers to see when a pedestrian or vehicle is approaching in Lane 30. Applicant City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment Prior to issuance of building permit Approved building plans shall include parking garage mirrors Mitigation Measure-TRANS-2: Mirrors shall be installed at each turn within the parking garage to provide adequate sight distance. Applicant City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment Prior to issuance of building permit Approved building plans shall include parking garage mirrors 1 Date: Feb 27, 2017 Project Name: 429 University Avenue, Palo Alto, CA To: Hillary Gitelman, Jonathan Lait, Adam Petersen, Molly Stump, Albert Yang, James Keene, Ed Shikada _____________________________________________________________________________ In response to the recommended conditions of approval from the City Council Staff Report dated Feb 6, 2017, pages 7 and 8, Applicant cannot comply with conditions 2, 4 and 6 as stipulated and requests modifications to such recommended conditions to comply with California Building Code requirements for accessibility as well as for energy efficiency and the safety of occupants. Recommended Condition 1: Applicant shall submit detailed plans that demonstrate compliance with floor area and other applicable development standards. Response: •Applicant will submit detailed plans with area calculations. Recommended Condition 2: The fourth floor guardrails and planters shall be set back a minimum of five feet from the edge of the third floor roofline (all elevations), as modified by these conditions. Response: •Recessing the guardrails 5’ from the edge of the third floor roofline will create a 5’ wide strip where occupants may be tempted to jump over the guardrail to sit at the edge of the roofline or to place objects which may fall and cause damage to people and/or property. This becomes a potential liability to the Applicant and especially to the City that required this condition for approval. •The fourth floor is already set back with its guardrails 5’5” from University Avenue and Kipling Street, with 5’clearance in front of the elevator doors. Further setbacks will violate the 5’0” clear turning radius for accessibility as required by California Building Code and the Americans with Disabilities Act. •The proposed guardrails are of transparent glass and won’t be obvious to passersby. Recommended Condition 3: The ‘library’ shown on the third floor, floor plans, at the street corner, shall be removed. Response: •Removed library on the third floor. Following the library removal, the third floor building footprint is set back 20’0” from both University Avenue and Kipling Street. Condition 2a Condition 2b Condition 2c Below are the updated condition numbers 2 Recommended Condition 4: The third floor roofline above the removed ‘library’ area shall be setback to follow the third floor building footprint; reducing the building mass at the street corner. Response: •The roofline closely follows the third floor building footprint maintaining 3’0” overhang as now exists along University Avenue and Kipling Street. •The overhang is kept to a minimum required for shading, energy conservation and weather protection at South and East sides. •The architectural design would be compromised by having no continuity of overhang at this corner. •The resulting overhang will be at a large distance of 17’0” from the property line on both University Avenue and Kipling Street. The guardrails are 17’ 9” from the streets. Recommended Condition 5: A decorative wall design treatment, feature or element, shall be applied to the exterior walls immediately adjacent to the southern property line (project’s south elevation) starting at an elevation equivalent to the building height of the adjacent structure and extending to the roofline of the proposed building, subject to review by the Architectural Review Board. Response: •A decorative wall treatment on the West wall will be proposed to the ARB. •The West wall abutting the property line has been moved by a couple of inches at the elevation of the adjacent roof to allow for such decorative wall treatment. Recommended Condition 6: The elevator adjacent to Kipling Street, inclusive of any associated mechanical equipment, shall not exceed fifty feet (50') in height. Response: •There are technical limitations. The minimum required height for the least amount of overhead clearance elevator is 54’-6”. Please see attached letter from Otis elevator. •As per Palo Alto Municipal Code 18.40.090 Height Exceptions (attached) the height of the elevator equipment may exceed 15’ above the height limit in the district. Applicant requires 4’6” above the 50’ height limit as permitted by code. This minimal increase in height for the elevator will not be noticed from the street. Recommended Condition 7: The applicant shall return to the Architectural Review Board for review and recommendation to the Director of Planning and Community Environment for landscape details and plans for all proposed planting, including individual planters, the green wall, and landscaping near the rooftop elevator. Response: •Applicant will submit supplemental landscape details for proposed planting. Recommended Condition 8: The applicant shall return to the Architectural Review Board for review and recommendation to the Director of Planning and Community Environment of Condition 2d Condition 3a Condition 2e Condition 3b Condition 3c 4 5 6 7 Attachment C Environmental Assessment Hardcopies of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration are provided to the City Council. These documents are available to the public by visiting the Planning and Community Environmental Department on the 5th floor of City Hall at 250 Hamilton Avenue. These documents are available online at: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/planningprojects For a direct link, please use http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=2449&TargetID=319 Scroll to the bottom of this webpage for the most recent information. City of Palo Alto (ID # 7831) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Retail Preservation Ordinance (Second Reading) Title: SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Making Permanent Interim Urgency Ordinance 5330 (Limiting the Conversion of Ground Floor Retail and Retail Like Uses), With Some Modifications; Extending the Ground Floor Combining District to Certain Properties Located Downtown; Modifying the Definition of Retail; Adding Regulations to Improve Pedestrian Oriented Design Standards in the Downtown; and Related Changes. The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15308. The Planning and Transportation Commission Recommended Approval of the Proposed Ordinance (FIRST READING: February 13, 2017 PASSED: 6-3 Fine, Kniss, Tanaka no) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council adopt the attached Retail Preservation Ordinance on second reading (Attachment A). Background: On February 13, 2017, the Council held a public hearing and approved the draft Retail Preservation Ordinance on first reading, asking staff to return with modifications. For additional background information and analysis on the ordinance, please see the agenda packet for the February 13th meeting: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/55798. Discussion: Consistent with the Council’s motion at the February 13th hearing, staff made the following changes to the ordinance, as shown in double strikeout and double underline in Attachment A:  Removed laundry and dry cleaners as a permitted use when fronting University Avenue City of Palo Alto Page 2 or California Avenue in the GF- and R-combining districts, respectively.  Limited the size of the lobbies in the GF-combining district, subject to approval by the Director.  Revised the waiver process to provide review by the City Council: either on the consent calendar if a decision is made by the Director or as a hearing item.  Refined design standards in the GF- and R-combining districts to focus on transparency of windows and visual access to a minimum depth of 3 feet.  Removed automobile service stations and automotive services (which include gas stations and auto repair shops) as “retail-like uses” requiring protection under the ordinance.  Revised the distinction between fitness and exercise studios as personal services vs. commercial recreation (requiring a CUP), so that a floor area threshold up to 1,800 square feet would be considered a personal service.  Allowed private schools to replace retail or retail-like uses on properties in the RT-35 district, with frontage on Alma Street between Channing Avenue and Lincoln Avenues. The Council’s additional request to review late night use and activities in the Downtown is unrelated to this ordinance, but will be added to the Planning & Community Environment work program in the future. Timeline: The ordinance would be effective 31 days following the Council’s adoption on second reading. Attachments: Attachment A: Retail Preservation Ordinance (DOCX) Exhibit A Ground Floor Combining District (PDF) NOT YET APPROVED 1 November 23, 2015 Ordinance No. ____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Limiting the Conversion of Ground Floor Retail and “Retail Like” Uses Citywide The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. A. The City of Palo Alto has long been considered the birth place of Silicon Valley. With its proximity to Stanford University, its international reputation, its deep ties to technology firms, its highly rated public school system and its ample public parks, open space and community centers, Palo Alto continues to serve as a hub for technology based business. B. Palo Alto is considered one of Silicon Valley's most desirable office markets, leading to rapidly increasing rental rates for commercial property. In particular, average commercial rental rates have gone up significantly from 2013 to 2015. In 2013 the average monthly rental rate citywide for office was $4.57 per square foot. That rate increased to $5.12 in 2015. While retail rents have also increased during this period, retail rents are considerably lower than office rents. The average monthly rental rate for retail in 2013 was $4.21 and in 2015 was $4.88. C. These record high monthly rental rates for office and low vacancy rates have created financial incentives to replace current retail use with office use where such conversions are permitted by the City’s zoning ordinance. These economic pressures are more severe in the downtown and California Avenue commercial areas but exist throughout the City. In addition, these trends place particular pressure on small and medium-sized businesses. D. Based on these trends, on March 2, 2015, the Palo Alto City Council asked staff to consider whether zoning-based protections for ground floor retail uses need to be strengthened where they currently exist and expanded to areas of the City where they do not. E. This direction is consistent with the City’s existing Comprehensive Plan, which identifies the desirability of neighborhood serving retail (Policy L-16) and envisions inviting, pedestrian-scale “centers” with a mix of uses as focal points for neighborhoods (Goal L-4). Policy L-20 suggests that the City “encourage street frontages that contribute to retail vitality…” and Policy B-5 calls on the City to “maintain distinct business districts within Palo Alto as a means of retaining local services and diversifying the City’s economic base.” K. The City of Palo Alto enacted Urgency Interim Ordinance 5325 on May 11, 2015 to prevent the conversion of ground floor space to office or other non-retail uses, which was a trend in the City’s commercial districts. L. The urgency interim ordinance was extended through adoption of Ordinance 5330 on June 15, 2015, and is set to expire on April 30, 2017. 170124 ay/2017-01-23 2 January 23, 2017 M. The City’s land use data shows that there was a loss of approximately 70,000 square feet of retail-type uses in the period from 2008 until the urgency interim ordinance was adopted. This loss of retail-type uses coincided with an increase in commercial office rents, such that property owners had an economic incentive to convert ground floor retail spaces to office use where this was permitted by the City’s zoning regulations. N. The economic conditions that favor conversion of retail space to office space remain in place because office rents remain higher than retail rents. According to the most recent data available, in the third quarter of 2016, Palo Alto’s retail asking rates were higher than any other city in the South Bay. In tandem with these high retail lease rates, vacancy rates for retail spaces have remained low, averaging 2.6% over the first three quarters of 2016. Despite the strong demand for retail space, office lease rates in Palo Alto were 42% higher than retail rates, with similarly low vacancy rates. O. Since the urgency interim ordinance was adopted, the City has adopted permanent retail protections for the California Avenue business district, and has adopted an ordinance closing a loophole in PAMC Section 18.16.050 that was allowing the loss of retail space along El Camino Real. P. In anticipation of the expiration of the urgency interim ordinance (Ordinance 5330), and in order to provide protections for the entire City, the City Council desires to adopt permanent retail protections. SECTION 2. Section 18.04.030 of Chapter 18.04 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended to amend definitions 114 and 125 and to add definition 125.1 as follows: (114) “Personal service” means a use providing services of a personal convenience nature, and cleaning, repair or sales incidental thereto, including: (A) Beauty shops, nail salons, day spas, and barbershops; (B) Self-service laundry and cleaning services; laundry and cleaning pick-up stations where all cleaning or servicing for the particular station is done elsewhere; and laundry and cleaning stations where the cleaning or servicing for the particular station is done on site, utilizing equipment meeting any applicable Bay Area Air Quality Management District requirements, so long as no cleaning for any other station is done on the same site, provided that the amount of hazardous materials stored does not at any time exceed the threshold which would require a permit under Title 17 (Hazardous Materials Storage) of this code; (C) Repair and fitting of clothes, shoes, and personal accessories; (D) Quick printing and copying services where printing or copying for the particular service is done on site, so long as no quick printing or copying for any off-site printing or copying service is done on the same site; (E) Internet and other consumer electronics services; 170124 ay/2017-01-23 3 January 23, 2017 (F) Film, data and video processing shops, including shops where processing for the particular shop is done on site, so long as no processing for any other shop is done on the same site; and (G) Art, dance or music studios intended for an individual or small group of persons in a class (see “commercial recreation” for other activities). (H) Fitness and exercise studios, or similar uses, of 1,800 square feet or fewer intended for an individual or small group of 15 or fewer students/customers at one time (see “commercial recreation” for other activities). (125) “Retail service” means a use generally open to the public during typical business hours and predominantly engaged in providing retail sale, rental, service, processing, or repair of items primarily intended for consumer or household use, including but not limited to the following: groceries, meat, vegetables, dairy products, baked goods, candy, and other food products; liquor and bottled goods, household cleaning and maintenance products; drugs, cards, and stationery, notions, books, tobacco products, cosmetics, and specialty items; flowers, plants, hobby materials, toys, household pets and supplies, and handcrafted items; apparel, jewelry, fabrics, and like items; cameras, photography services, household electronic equipment, records, sporting equipment, kitchen utensils, home furnishing and appliances, art supplies and framing, arts and antiques, paint and wallpaper, carpeting and floor covering, interior decorating services, office supplies, musical instruments, hardware and homeware, and garden supplies; bicycles; mopeds and automotive parts and accessories (excluding service and installation); cookie shops, ice cream stores and delicatessens. (A) “Extensive retail service,” as used with respect to parking requirements, means a retail sales use having more than seventy-five percent of the gross floor area used for display, sales, and related storage of bulky commodities, including household furniture and appliances, lumber and building materials, carpeting and floor covering, air conditioning and heating equipment, and similar goods, which uses have demonstrably low parking demand generation per square foot of gross floor area. (B) “Intensive retail service” as used with respect to parking requirements, means any retail service use not defined as extensive retail service. (125.1) “Retail-Like Use” means a use generally open to the public during typical business hours and predominantly engaged in providing services closely related to retail services, including but not limited to: (A) Eating and drinking services, as defined in Section 18.04.030 (47); (B) Hotels, as defined in Section 18.04.030 (73); (C) Personal services, as defined in Section 18.04.030 (114); (D) Theaters; (E) Travel agencies; (F) Commercial recreation, as defined in Section 18.04.030 (33); 170124 ay/2017-01-23 4 January 23, 2017 (G) Commercial nurseries; (H) Auto dealerships, as defined in Section 18.04.030 (12.5); (I) Day Care Centers, as defined in Section 18.04.030 (42); and (J) Automobile Service Stations, as defined in Section 18.04.030(13); and (K) Automotive Services, as defined in Section 18.04.030 (14). SECTION 3. Chapter 18.30(A) of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended to amend section 18.30(A).040 and to add section 18.30(A).055: 18.30(A).040 Permitted Uses Except to the extent a conditional use permit is required pursuant to Section 18.30(A).050, the following uses shall be permitted in an R district: (a) Eating and drinking services, except drive-in and take-out services. (b) Personal services, not including beauty shops, nail salons, and barbershops except the following on California Avenue: beauty shops; nail salons; barbershops; and laundry and cleaning services as defined in section 18.04.030(114)(B). (c) Retail services. (d) All other uses permitted in the underlying commercial district, provided they are not located on a ground floor. * * * 18.30(A).055 Design Standards The following design standards shall apply in the R combining district: (a) Exterior windows on the ground floor shall use transparent glazing to the extent feasible. Low-e glass or minimal tinting to achieve sun control is permitted, so long as the glazing appears transparent when viewed from the ground level. Opaque or reflective glazing is prohibited on the ground floor for ground floor exterior windows in the R combining district. (b) Window coverings are not permitted on the ground floor during typical business hours. Where operations preclude transparency (e.g., theaters) or where privacy requires window coverings, sidewalk-facing frontage shall include items of visual interest including displays of merchandise or artwork; visual access shall be provided to a minimum depth of 3 feet. SECTION 4. Chapter 18.30(C) of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.30(C).010 Specific Purpose 170124 ay/2017-01-23 5 January 23, 2017 The ground floor combining district is intended to provide design guidelines and modify the uses allowed in the CD commercial downtown districts and subdistricts to allow only retail, eating and drinking and other service-oriented commercial development uses on the ground floor promote active, pedestrian-oriented uses, with a high level of transparency and visual interest at the ground level. For the purposes of this chapter, "ground floor" means the first floor which is above grade. Where the ground floor combining district is combined with the CD a commercial district, the regulations established by this chapter shall apply in lieu of the uses normally allowed in the CD underlying district. Except for the regulations relating to uses set forth in this chapter, all other regulations shall be those of the applicable underlying CD district. 18.30(C).020 Permitted Uses (a) The following uses shall be permitted in the GF combining district, subject to restrictions in section 18.40.160: (1) Eating and drinking; (2) Hotels; (3) Personal services, except for parcels with frontage on University Avenue, where uses defined in 18.04.030(114) (B), (G), and (H) are not permitted; (4) Retail services; (5) Theaters; (6) Travel agencies; (7) Entrance, lobby or reception areas serving non-ground floor uses; (8)(7) All other uses permitted in the underlying district, provided such uses are not on the ground floor. (b) Elimination or conversion of basement space currently in Retail or Retail-Like use or related support purposes is prohibited. (b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), not more than twenty-five percent of the ground floor area not fronting on a street may be occupied by a use permitted in the applicable underlying CD district. (c) Entrance, lobby, or reception areas serving non-ground floor uses may be located on the ground floor to the extent reasonably necessary, provided they do not interfere with the ground floor use(s), and subject to the approval of the Director. 18.30(C).030 Conditional Uses (a) The following uses may be conditionally allowed on the ground floor in the GF ground floor combining district, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accord with Chapter 18.76 (Permits and Approvals) and with the additional finding required by subsection (b), subject to restrictions in section 18.40.160: 170124 ay/2017-01-23 6 January 23, 2017 (1) Business or trade school; (2) Commercial recreation; (3) Day care; (4) Financial services, except drive in services; (5) General business service; (6) All other uses conditionally permitted in the applicable underlying CD district, provided such uses are not on the ground floor. (b) The director may grant a conditional use permit under this section only if he or she makes the following findings in addition to the findings required by Chapter 18.76 (Permits and Approvals): (1) The location, access or design of the ground floor space of the existing building housing the proposed use, creates exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved that do not apply generally to property in the same district. (2) The proposed use will not be detrimental to the retail environment or the pedestrian-oriented design objectives of the GF combining district. (c) Any use conditionally permitted pursuant to this section shall be effective only during the existence of the building that created the exceptional circumstance upon which the finding set forth in subsection (c) was made. 18.30(C).035 Design Standards Where the GF combining district is combined with the CD-C subdistrict, the following design standards shall apply: (a) Exterior windows on the ground floor shall use transparent glazing to the extent feasible. Low-e glass or minimal tinting to achieve sun control is permitted, so long as the glazing appears transparent when viewed from the ground level. Opaque or reflective glazing is prohibited on the ground floor for ground floor exterior windows in the GF combining district. (b) At least 70 percent of any sidewalk-facing frontage shall have transparent window/door openings between 2.5 and 10 feet above grade. (b) Window coverings are not permitted on the ground floor during typical business hours. Where operations preclude transparency (e.g., theaters) or where privacy requires window coverings, sidewalk-facing frontage shall include items of visual interest including displays of merchandise or artwork; visual access shall be provided to a minimum depth of 3 feet. 18.30(C).040 Annual Monitoring of Ground Floor Retail Use 170124 ay/2017-01-23 7 January 23, 2017 A downtown retail vacancy rate and use survey shall be prepared annually in September of each year, and a report shall be prepared conveying that information to the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council prior to the end of the year. The purpose of the survey is to assess changes in retail use in the downtown zones. The vacancy rate shall address all areas zoned CD-C or GF in downtown. SECTION 5. Sections 18.85.010 through 18.85.060 of Chapter 18.85 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, which establish the Retail Preservation Interim Ordinance, and which expire on April 30, 2017, are hereby deleted in their entirety. SECTION 6. Section 18.40.160 of Chapter 18.40 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows: 18.40.160 Retail Preservation (a) Conversion of Retail and Retail-Like Uses Prohibited. (1) Any ground floor Retail or Retail-Like use permitted or operating as of March 2, 2015 may be replaced only by another Retail or Retail-Like use, as permitted in the applicable district. (A) A ground floor Retail or Retail-Like use in the RT-35 district on properties with frontage on Alma Street between Channing Avenue and Lincoln Avenue may additionally be replaced by a Private Educational Facility use, provided that such use shall not be thereafter replaced by an Office use. (2) The phrase ‘use permitted or operating’ as used in this section means: (A) A lawfully established use conducting business, including legal non- conforming uses (B) An established use conducting business without required city approvals, but is a permitted or conditionally permitted use in district (C) For parcels vacant on March 2, 2015, the last use that was lawfully established, or established without required permits, and permitted or conditionally permitted in the district. (b) Non-conforming uses. (1) The requirements imposed by subsection (a) shall not apply to Retail or Retail- like uses that are no longer permitted or conditionally permitted in the applicable district. (2) Nothing in this section shall modify the provisions of Chapter 18.70 regarding the expansion, change, discontinuance, or termination of a non-conforming use. (c) Waivers and Adjustments. 170124 ay/2017-01-23 8 January 23, 2017 (1) Grounds. The following shall be grounds for a request for waiver or adjustment of the requirements contained in this section: (A) Economic Hardship. An applicant may request that the requirements of this section be adjusted or waived based on a showing that applying the requirements of this section would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property; or (B) Alternative Viable Active Use. Except in the GF or R combining districts, an applicant may request that the requirements of this Section 18.40.160 be adjusted or waived based on a showing that: the a permitted retail or retail-like use is not viable; the proposed use will support the purposes of the zoning district and Comprehensive Plan land use designation; and the proposed use will encourage active pedestrian-oriented activity and connections. (2) Documentation. The applicant shall bear the burden of presenting substantial evidence to support a waiver or modification request under this Section and shall set forth in detail the factual and legal basis for the claim, including all supporting technical documentation. Evidence in support of a waiver under subsection (c)(1)(B) must demonstrate the viability of existing and future uses on the site, based on both the site characteristics and the surrounding uses; specifically whether a substitute use could be designed and/or conditioned to contribute to the goals and purposes of the zoning district. Examples of such evidence include: (A) A 10-year history of the site's occupancy and reasons for respective tenants vacating the site; (B) A map that indicates all the existing surrounding uses, both residential and non-residential, within one City-block; include the corresponding zone district on the map; (3) Any request under this section shall be submitted to the Planning Director together with any supporting documentation. The Planning Director, in his or her sole discretion, may act on a request for waiver or refer the matter to the City Council. (A) A decision by the Planning Director shall be placed on the may be appealed to the City Council’s consent calendar within 45 days. by written form in the manner prescribed by the Planning Director. (B) Removal of the recommendation from the consent calendar shall require three votes, and shall result in a new public hearing before the 170124 ay/2017-01-23 9 January 23, 2017 City Council, following which the City Council shall take action on the waiver request. (C) The decision of the Council is final. (d) Reconstruction. Any ground floor Retail use existing on or after March 2, 2015 may be demolished and rebuilt provided that the portion of square footage used as Retail use on or after March 2, 2015 is not reduced except that Retail square footage may be reduced by the minimum amount needed to provide access to any new upper floor and/or lower level. (e) Applicability to Current Requirements. Nothing in this section shall alter requirements of site-specific Planned Community zoning ordinances or adopted conditions of approval. Nothing in the section shall be construed to waive the requirement for a conditional use permit or other entitlement where such requirements currently exist. SECTION 7. Section 18.13.030 of Chapter 18.13 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.13.030 Land Uses Table 1 specifies the permitted and conditionally permitted land uses in the multiple- family residence districts. Table 1 Multiple Family Residential Uses [P = Permitted Use • CUP = Conditional Use Permit Required] RM- 15 RM- 30 RM- 40 Subject to Regulations in: ACCESSORY AND SUPPORT USES Accessory Facilities and uses customarily incidental to permitted uses P P P Chapter 18.40 Home Occupations, when accessory to permitted residential uses P P P Chapter 18.42 Horticulture, Gardening, and Growing of food products for consumption by occupants of a site P P P Surface Parking Facilities located on abandoned railroad rights-of- way CUP CUP EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS, AND ASSEMBLY USES Churches and Religious Institutions CUP CUP CUP Private Clubs, Lodges, or Fraternal Organizations, excluding any such facility operated as a business for profit CUP Private Educational Facilities CUP CUP CUP 170124 ay/2017-01-23 10 January 23, 2017 PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC USES Community Centers CUP CUP CUP Utility Facilities essential to provision of utility services but excluding construction or storage yards, maintenance facilities, or corporation yards. CUP CUP CUP RECREATION USES Neighborhood Recreational Centers CUP CUP CUP RESIDENTIAL USES Single-Family P (1) P (1) P (2) Two-Family P (1) P (1) P (1) Multiple-Family P P P Village Residential P (3) (3) 18.13.050 Mobile Homes P P P Residential Care Homes P P P SERVICE AND RETAIL USES Convalescent Facilities CUP Day Care Centers CUP CUP P 18.40.160 Small Family Day Care Homes P P P Large Family Day Care Homes P P P Small Adult Day Care Homes P P P Large Adult Day Care Homes CUP CUP CUP Eating and Drinking Services, except drive-in and take-out services CUP CUP 18.13.040(f), 18.40.160 Personal Services and Retail Services of a neighborhood-serving nature CUP CUP 18.13.040(f), 18.40.160 TEMPORARY USES Temporary Uses, subject to regulations in Chapter 18.42 CUP CUP CUP 18.42.050 P = Permitted Use CUP = Conditional Use Permit Required (1) Permitted use only on lots less than 8,500 square feet in size. (2) Permitted use only on lots less than 6,000 square feet in size. (3) Permitted use only if lot is substandard in size, e.g., less than 8,500 square feet or less than 70 feet in width, or at the perimeter of a site in excess of one acre where used as a transition to low-density residential area. SECTION 8. Section 18.16.040 of Chapter 18.16 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.16.040 Land Uses The uses of land allowed by this chapter in each commercial zoning district are identified in the following tables. Land uses that are not listed on the tables are not allowed, except where otherwise noted. Where the last column on the following tables ("Subject to 170124 ay/2017-01-23 11 January 23, 2017 Regulations in") includes a section number, specific regulations in the referenced section also apply to the use; however, provisions in other sections may apply as well. (a) Commercial Zones and Land Uses Permitted and conditionally permitted land uses for each commercial zone are shown in Table 1: TABLE 1 CD PERMITTED AND CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES P = Permitted Use CUP = Conditional Use Permit Required LAND USE CN (4) CC, CC(2) CS (4) Subject to Regulations In: ACCESSORY AND SUPPORT USES Accessory facilities and activities customarily associated with or essential to permitted uses, and operated incidental to the principal use. P P p 18.42 Drive-in services or take-out services associated with permitted uses(3) CUP CUP CUP 18.42 Tire, battery, and automotive service facilities, when operated incidental to a permitted retail service or shopping center having a gross floor area of more than 30,000 square feet. CUP 18.42, 18.40.160 EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS, AND ASSEMBLY USES Business and Trade Schools P P Churches and Religious Institutions P P P Private Educational Facilities CUP P P Private Clubs, Lodges, or Fraternal Organizations CUP P P MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING USES Recycling Centers CUP CUP CUP Warehousing and Distribution CUP OFFICE USES Administrative Office Services P 18.16.050 Medical Offices CUP CUP CUP 18.16.050 Professional and General Business Offices P P P 18.16.050 PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC USES Utility Facilities essential to provision of utility services but excluding construction or storage yards, maintenance facilities, or corporation yards. CUP CUP CUP 170124 ay/2017-01-23 12 January 23, 2017 RECREATION USES Commercial Recreation CUP CUP CUP 18.40.160 Outdoor Recreation Services CUP CUP CUP RESIDENTIAL USES Multiple-Family P(1) P(1) P(1) 18.16.060(b) Home Occupations P P P Residential Care Homes P P P RETAIL USES Eating and Drinking Services, excluding drive-in and take-out services P P P 18.40.160 Retail Services, excluding liquor stores P P P 18.40.160 Liquor stores CUP P P 18.40.160 Shopping Centers P 18.16.060(e), 18.40.160 SERVICE USES Ambulance Services CUP CUP CUP Animal Care, excluding boarding and kennels P P P Boarding and Kennels CUP Automobile Service Stations CUP CUP CUP 18.30(G), 18.40.160 Automotive Services CUP 18.40.160 Convalescent Facilities CUP P P Day Care Centers P P P 18.40.160 Small Family Day Care Homes P P P Large Family Day Care Homes P P P Small Adult Day Care Homes P P P Large Adult Day Care Homes CUP P P Banks and Financial Services V CUP P(2) P(2) General Business Services CUP P Hotels P P 18.16.060(d), 18.40.160 Mortuaries CUP P P Neighborhood Business Services P 18.16.060(f) Personal Services P P P 18.16.060(f), 18.40.160 Reverse Vending Machines P P P TEMPORARY USES Farmer's Markets CUP CUP CUP 170124 ay/2017-01-23 13 January 23, 2017 Temporary Parking Facilities provided that such facilities shall remain no more than five years. CUP CUP CUP TRANSPORTATION USES Parking as a principal use CUP CUP Transportation Terminals CUP CUP P = Permitted Use CUP = Conditional Use Permit Required (1) Residential is only permitted as part of a mixed use development, pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.16.060(b), or on sites designated as Housing Opportunity Sites in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan, pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.16.060(c). (2) Except drive-in services. (3) So long as drive up facilities, excluding car washes, provide full access to pedestrians and bicyclists. A maximum of two such services shall be permitted within 1,000 feet, and each use shall not be less than 150 feet from one another. (4) For properties in the CN and CS zone districts, businesses that operate or have associated activities at any time between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. require a conditional use permit. (b) Late Night Use and Activities The following regulations restrict businesses that operate or have associated activities at any time between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., where such site abuts or is located within 50 feet of residentially zoned properties. (1) Such businesses shall be operated in a manner to protect residential properties from excessive noise, odors, lighting or other nuisances from any sources during those hours. (2) For properties located in the CN or CS zone districts, businesses that operate or have associated activities at any time between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. shall be required to obtain a conditional use permit. The director may apply conditions of approval as are deemed necessary to assure that the operations or activities are compatible with the nearby residentially zoned property. (c) CN District: Special Use Requirements in the Charleston and Midtown Shopping Centers The following regulations shall apply to areas of Charleston Center and the Midtown Shopping Center as defined in Section 18.16.030. Table 2 shows the uses permitted and conditionally permitted on the ground floor of the applicable areas of the Charleston Center and Midtown Shopping Centers. Permitted and conditional uses specified in subsection (a) of this section shall only apply to the ground floor of the areas of the Charleston and Midtown Shopping Centers as listed in Table 2. Uses lawfully existing on January 16, 2001 may be continued as non-conforming uses but may only be replaced with uses permitted or conditionally permitted under this subsection. TABLE 2 CHARLESTON AND MIDTOWN SHOPPING CENTERS GROUND FLOOR USES P = Permitted Use CUP = Conditional Use Permit Required X = Prohibited Use LAND USES Charleston Shopping Center Midtown Shopping Center Subject to Regulations in: 170124 ay/2017-01-23 14 January 23, 2017 ACCESSORY AND SUPPORT USES Accessory facilities and uses customarily incidental to permitted uses. P P EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS, AND ASSEMBLY USES Churches and Religious Institutions CUP CUP Private Educational Facilities CUP CUP MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING USES Recycling Centers CUP CUP OFFICE USES Neighborhood-serving offices that do not exceed 2,500 square feet in floor area. P 18.16.050 Neighborhood-serving offices exceeding 2,500 square feet in floor area. CUP 18.16.050 Administrative office uses and general business office uses (other than neighborhood-serving travel agencies and insurance agencies) other than those legally in existence on January 16,2001 X X 18.16.050 Medical offices not exceeding 2,500 square feet in area, professional offices, travel agencies, and insurance agencies CUP 18.16.050 PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC USES Utility Facilities essential to provision of utility services but excluding construction or storage yards, maintenance facilities, or corporation yards. CUP CUP RECREATION USES Commercial Recreation CUP CUP 18.40.160 Outdoor Recreation Services CUP CUP Private Clubs, Lodges, or Fraternal Organizations CUP CUP RESIDENTIAL USES Residential uses of any nature X X RETAIL USES Eating and Drinking Services, excluding drive-in and take-out services P P 18.40.160 Retail Services, excluding liquor stores P P 18.40.160 Liquor stores CUP CUP 18.40.160 SERVICE USES 170124 ay/2017-01-23 15 January 23, 2017 Ambulance Services CUP CUP Animal Care, excluding boarding and kennels P P Automobile Service Stations CUP CUP 18.30(G), 18.40.160 Convalescent Facilities CUP CUP Day Care Centers P P 18.40.160 Financial Services CUP CUP Mortuaries CUP CUP Neighborhood Business Services P P Personal Services P P 18.40.160 Reverse Vending Machines P P TEMPORARY USES Farmers' Markets CUP CUP Temporary Parking Facilities, provided that such facilities shall remain no more than five years. CUP CUP P = Permitted Use CUP = Conditional Use Permit Required X = Prohibited Use (d) Charleston Shopping Center: Additional Use Restrictions (1) Any office use first occupying space at the Center on or after January 16, 2001, shall obtain a written determination from the director of planning and community environment that it qualifies as a neighborhood serving use, as defined in this chapter, before occupying its premises. The applicant shall submit such information as the director shall reasonably require in order to make the determination, and the director shall issue the determination within 30 days of receiving a complete application. Failure to submit the required information shall be grounds for determining that a business is not neighborhood-serving. (2) No more than 7,850 square feet of total floor area at the Center shall be occupied by office uses at any time. (3) Prior to approving a conditional use permit for neighborhood-serving offices larger than 2,500 square feet in total floor area, the city shall find that the proposed use will be neighborhood-serving, that it will be conducted in a manner that will enhance and strengthen the Center as a neighborhood resource, and that it will not diminish the retail strength of the center. (e) Midtown Shopping Center: Additional Use Restrictions (1) An existing ground floor office may be replaced with another office if (a) the new tenant or owner will continue the existing business or practice; or (b) a conditional use permit is issued for the new office use. (2) No conditional use permit shall be issued for any new office use on the ground floor unless, in addition to the findings required for a conditional use permit as specified in Section 18.76.010, the city 170124 ay/2017-01-23 16 January 23, 2017 finds that the proposed use will be neighborhood serving, that it will be conducted in a manner that will enhance and strengthen the Midtown Shopping District as a neighborhood resource, and that it will not diminish the retail strength of the District. (3) For properties at 711, 719, and 721 Colorado Avenue, and 689 Bryson Avenue, buildings not fronting on Middlefield Avenue, designed and used for office purposes, and not well suited to other uses are exempt from the provisions of this subsection (b). SECTION 9. Section 18.18.050 of Chapter 18.18 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.18.050 Land Uses The uses of land allowed by this chapter in each commercial zoning district are identified in the following table. Land uses that are not listed on the tables are not allowed, except where otherwise noted. Where the last column on the following tables ("Subject to Regulations in") includes a section number, specific regulations in the referenced section also apply to the use; however, provisions in other sections may apply as well. Permitted and conditionally permitted land uses for the CD district are shown in Table 1: Table 1 CD Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses P Permitted Use • CUP Conditional Use Permit Required CD-C CD-S CD- N Subject to regulations in Chapter: ACCESSORY USES Accessory facilities and activities associated with or essential to permitted uses, and operated incidental to the principal use P P P Drive-in or Take-out Services associated with permitted uses (2) CUP CUP CUP Tire, battery, and automotive service facilities, when operated incidental to a permitted retail service or shopping center having a gross floor area of more than 30,000 square feet CUP 18.40.160 EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS, AND ASSEMBLY USES Business and Trade Schools P P Churches and Religious Institutions P P P Private Educational Facilities P P CUP Private Clubs, Lodges, or Fraternal Organizations P P CUP MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING USES Recycling Centers CUP CUP CUP Warehousing and Distribution CUP 170124 ay/2017-01-23 17 January 23, 2017 OFFICE USES Administrative Office Services P 18.18.060(f) Medical, Professional, and General Business Offices P P P 18.18.060(f) PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC FACILITY USES Utility Facilities essential to provision of utility services but excluding construction or storage yards, maintenance facilities, or corporation yards CUP CUP RECREATION USES Commercial Recreation CUP CUP CUP 18.40.160 Outdoor Recreation Services CUP CUP CUP RESIDENTIAL USES Multiple-Family P (1) P (1) P (1) 18.18.060(b) Home Occupations P P P Residential Care Homes P P P RETAIL USES Eating and Drinking Services, except drive-in or take-out services P P P 18.18.060(g), 18.40.160 Retail Services, excluding liquor stores P P P 18.18.060(g), 18.40.160 Shopping Centers P 18.18.060(g), 18.40.160 Liquor Stores P P CUP 18.40.160 SERVICE USES Animal Care, excluding boarding and kennels P P P Ambulance Services CUP CUP CUP 18.30(G) Automobile Service Stations CUP CUP CUP 18.40.160 Automobile Services CUP 18.40.160 Convalescent Facilities P P CUP Day Care Centers P P P 18.40.160 Small Family Day Care Homes P P P Large Family Day Care Homes P P P Small Adult Day Care Homes P P P Large Adult Day Care Homes Financial Services, except drive-up services P P CUP General Business Services CUP P P Hotels P P P 18.18.060(d), 18.40.160 Mortuaries P P CUP 170124 ay/2017-01-23 18 January 23, 2017 Personal Services P P P 18.18.060(g), 18.40.160 Reverse Vending Machines P P P TRANSPORTATION USES Parking as a principal use CUP CUP Passenger Transportation Terminals CUP TEMPORARY USES Indoor Farmers’ Markets CUP CUP CUP Temporary Parking Facilities, provided that such facilities shall remain no more than five years CUP CUP CUP P Permitted Use CUP Conditional Use Permit Required (1) Residential is only permitted as part of a mixed use development, pursuant to the provisions of Section18.18.060(b), or on sites designated as Housing Opportunity Sites in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan, pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.18.060(c). (2) Drive-up facilities, excluding car washes, provide full access to pedestrians and bicyclists. A maximum of two such services shall be permitted within 1,000 feet and each use shall not be less than 150 ft from one another. SECTION 10. Section 18.20.030 of Chapter 18.20 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.20.030 Land Uses (a) Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Land Uses Table 1 lists the land uses permitted or conditionally permitted in the industrial and manufacturing districts. Table 1 Industrial/Manufacturing District Land Uses [P = Permitted Use CUP = Conditional Use Permit Required] MOR ROLM ROLM(E) RP RP(5) GM Subject to regulations in Chapter: ACCESSORY AND SUPPORT USES Accessory facilities and activities customarily associated with or essential to permitted uses, and operated incidental to the principal use. P P P P Chs. 18.40, 18.42 Automatic Teller Machines P P P P 18.20.030(d) Home Occupations, when accessory to permitted residential uses. P P P P Chs. 18.40, 18.42 EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS, AND ASSEMBLY USES 170124 ay/2017-01-23 19 January 23, 2017 Business and Trade Schools P Religious Institutions P P P Colleges and Universities P P P Private Clubs, Lodges, or Fraternal Organizations CUP CUP CUP CUP Private Schools (K-12) CUP CUP CUP CUP HEALTH CARE SERVICES Ambulance Services CUP Convalescent Facilities CUP CUP CUP CUP 18.23.100( B) Medical Office P CUP CUP Medical Research P P P 18.20.030(c) Medical Support Retail P 18.20.030(b) Medical Support Services P 18.20.030(b) MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING USES Manufacturing P P P 18.23.100( B) Recycling Centers CUP CUP CUP Research and Development CUP P P P 18.23.100( B) Warehousing and Distribution P P P OFFICE USES Administrative Office Services P P CUP Financial Services CUP CUP Professional and General Business Office P P PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC USES Service and Equipment Yards P Utility Facilities CUP Utility Facilities essential to provision of utility services but excluding construction/storage yards, maintenance facilities, or corporation yards CUP CUP CUP RECREATION USES Commercial Recreation CUP CUP CUP 18.40.160 Neighborhood Recreational Centers CUP RESIDENTIAL USES Single-Family Not permitted 18.20.040(b) Two-Family Not permitted Multiple-Family CUP CUP CUP Residential Care Homes P CUP CUP CUP 18.23.100( B) RETAIL USES Eating and Drinking Services, excluding drive-in and CUP CUP CUP 18.40.160 170124 ay/2017-01-23 20 January 23, 2017 take-out services Retail Services CUP CUP CUP 18.40.160 SERVICE USES Animal Care, excluding boarding and kennels P Boarding and Kennels CUP Day Care Centers P CUP CUP CUP 18.23.100( B), 18.40.160 Emergency Shelters for the Homeless P (ROLM(E) 18.20.030(d) Family Day Care Homes Small Family Day Care P CUP CUP CUP 18.23.100( B) Large Family Day Care P CUP CUP CUP 18.23.100( B) General Business Services P Lodging Hotels providing not more than 10% of rooms with kitchens CUP 18.40.160 Mortuaries and Funeral Homes P Personal Services CUP CUP CUP 18.40.160 Vehicle Services Automobile Service Stations, subject to site and design review in accord with the provisions of Chapter 18.30(G) CUP CUP 18.40.160 Automotive Services CUP 18.40.160 Off-site new vehicle storage for auto dealerships located in Palo Alto CUP CUP TEMPORARY USES Temporary Parking Facilities, provided that such facilities shall remain no more than five years CUP CUP CUP CUP TRANSPORTATION USES Passenger Transportation Terminals CUP (b) Limitations on Medical Support Service and Medical Support Retail Uses in the Medical Office and Medical Research (MOR) Zone (1) The intent of this limitation is to restrict medical support service and medical support retail uses in the Medical Office and Medical Research (MOR) zone in order to preserve and facilitate space for medical offices and medical research facilities. (2) Floor area devoted to medical support services and medical support retail uses in the Medical Office and Medical Research (MOR) zoning district shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the total gross floor area within the district. (3) The director may require a report from the property owner or applicant whenever application is made to the city to develop new space for medical support service or medical support retail uses or to convert existing space to such uses. The report shall identify the gross floor area of buildings on each site within the zoning district and the gross floor area of medical support service and medical support retail uses for each site. The director may, from time to time, establish procedures and standards implementing this Section 18.20.030(b). (c) Automatic Teller Machines 170124 ay/2017-01-23 21 January 23, 2017 (1) Automatic teller machines may be allowed as an accessory use in the MOR, ROLM, ROLM(E), RP, RP(5), and GM districts when incidental to a primary use on the site and when accessible only from the interior of a building. (2) Automatic teller machines may be allowed as a permitted use in the MOR, ROLM, ROLM(E), RP, RP(5), and GM districts when incidental to a primary use on the site and when accessible from the exterior of a building. Staff level Architectural Review is required prior to issuance of a building permit. (d) Emergency Shelters for the Homeless Emergency shelters for the homeless may be allowed as a permitted use in the ROLM(E) district on properties located east of Highway 101, subject to the following performance and design standards. Performance and Design Standards for Emergency Shelters for the Homeless. An emergency shelter for the homeless shall conform to all site development standards and performance criteria of the ROLM(E) zone district except as modified by the following performance and design standards: (1) The construction of and/or renovation of a building for use as an emergency shelter shall conform to all applicable building and fire code standards. (2) There shall be provided one parking space for each three (3) beds in the emergency shelter. (3) Shelters shall have designated smoking areas that are not visible from the street and which are in compliance with all other laws and regulations. (4) There shall be no space for outdoor congregating in front of the building adjacent to the street and no outdoor public telephones. (5) There shall be a refuse area screened from view. (6) Maximum number of persons/beds. The emergency shelter for the homeless shall contain no more than 40 beds. (7) Size and location of exterior and interior on-site waiting and client intake areas. Shelters shall provide 10 square feet of interior waiting and client intake space per bed. In addition, there shall be two office areas provided for shelter staff. Waiting and intake areas may be used for other purposes as needed during operations of the shelter. (8) On-site management. On-site management and on-site security shall be provided during hours when the emergency shelter is in operation. (9) The emergency shelter provider shall submit an operations plan that addresses the standards for operation contained in the Palo Alto Quality Assurance Standards for Emergency Shelters for the Homeless. (10) Distance to other facilities. The shelter must be more than 300 feet from any other shelters for the homeless. (11) Length of stay. Temporary shelter shall be available to residents for no more than 60 days. Extensions up to a total stay of 180 days may be provided if no alternative housing is available. (12) Outdoor lighting shall be sufficient to provide illumination and clear visibility to all outdoor areas, with minimal shadows or light leaving the property. The lighting shall be stationary, and directed away from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way. 170124 ay/2017-01-23 22 January 23, 2017 SECTION 11. Section 5.020 of the South of Forest Area Coordinated Area Plan, Phase II (SOFA II CAP) is hereby amended to read as follows: 5.020 RT Districts - Land Uses (a) Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses Table 1 shows the uses permitted or conditionally permitted in the RT-35 and RT-50 districts. Table 1: RT District Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses RT-35 RT-50 Also see regulations in Section: ACCESSORY AND SUPPORT USES Accessory uses to the primary use P EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS, AND ASSEMBLY USES Private educational facilities P 18.40.160 Private clubs, lodges, or fraternal organizations P Religious institutions P OFFICE USES Medical, professional, and general business offices P See restrictions on size and location in subsections (b) and (c) PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC USES Utility facilities CUP RECREATION USES Commercial recreation CUP RESIDENTIAL USES Home occupations P Lodging (including bed and breakfast facilities) P Multiple-family uses, including SRO housing P Residential care homes P Two-family uses P RETAIL USES Retail services, excluding liquor stores P 18.40.160 170124 ay/2017-01-23 23 January 23, 2017 RT-35 RT-50 Also see regulations in Section: SERVICE USES Automobile service stations, subject to site and design review as specified in Chapter 18.82 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code CUP(1) 18.40.160 Automotive services, including tire services CUP(1) 18.40.160 Convalescent facilities P Day care centers P 18.40.160 Day care homes, small adult P Day care homes, large adult P Day care homes, small family P Day care homes, large family P Eating and drinking facilities, except drive-in services P 18.40.160 Financial services P General business services P Personal services P 18.40.160 Reverse vending machines P Warehousing and Distribution CUP TEMPORARY USES Temporary parking facilities for up to five years CUP Temporary uses, subject to regulations in Chapter 18.90 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code CUP TRANSPORTATION USES Parking as a principal use CUP Transportation terminals CUP(1) (1) New uses of this nature are only permitted in that area bounded by High Street on the east, Alma street on the west, Forest Avenue on the north, and Addison Avenue on the south. (b) Office Uses (1) No new gross square footage of a medical, professional or general business or administrative office use shall be allowed, once the gross square footage of such office uses, or any combination of such uses, on a site has reached five thousand gross square feet. (2) No conversion of gross square footage from any other use to a medical, professional or general business or administrative office use shall be allowed once the gross square footage of such office uses, or any combination of such uses, on a site has reached five thousand gross square feet. (3) Subdivision of a parcel shall not increase the square footage of allowed office uses. (4) In the case of a lot merger, the resulting parcel is subject to the five-thousand-gross-square-foot limit set forth in subsections one and two. (c) Protection of Specific Uses (1) For sites in the Homer/Emerson Corridor (as defined in Appendix C-1) located in the RT-35 or RT-50 districts, medical, professional, and general business offices 170124 ay/2017-01-23 24 January 23, 2017 may not be located on the ground floor of a building unless such offices: (A) have been continuously in existence in that space since March 19, 2001, and, as of that date, were neither non-conforming nor in the process of being amortized pursuant to PAMC Chapter 18.95; (B) occupy a space that was not occupied by retail services, eating and drinking services, personal services, or automotive services on March 19, 2001 or thereafter; (C) occupy a space that was vacant on March 19, 2001; (D) are located in new or remodeled ground floor areas built on or after March 19, 2001 if the ground floor area devoted to retail services, eating and drinking services, personal services, and automobile services does not decrease; or (E) are located in commercial space constructed under a building permit issued in reliance on Section 8 of Ordinance 4730 (which defines commercial space for which an ARB approval had been granted prior to March 19, 2001 as “space not occupied by retail, personal services, eating and drinking services, housing, or automotive services”). (2) For all sites outside of the Homer/Emerson Corridor, in the RT-35 or RT-50 districts, housing on the ground floor may not be replaced by office uses. (3) For all sites outside of the Homer/Emerson Corridor, in the RT-35 or RT-50 districts, housing on the ground floor may not be replaced by office uses. SECTION 12. The Zoning Map adopted pursuant to Section 18.08.040 of Chapter 18.08 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: The Ground Floor (GF) combining district shall be extended to additionally include: 125, 124, 116, and 102 University Ave., 525, 529, 542 and 550 High St., 539 and 535 Alma St., 115, 150, 156,158, and 164 Hamilton Ave. The revised boundaries of the (GF) combining district are shown on the map labeled Exhibit “A,” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 13. This Ordinance supersedes Ordinance Nos. 5325 and 5330, and any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance. Additionally, this Ordinance shall supersede any conflicting provisions of the SOFA II Coordinated Area Plan. SECTION 14. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this ordinance, or the application to any person or circumstances, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 15. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its adoption and shall not apply to any project where a discretionary permit or entitlement application, other than a “use and occupancy permit,” was submitted to the City before March 2, 2015. Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to affect a vested right existing before its effective date. SECTION 16. CEQA. The City Council finds that this Ordinance falls under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemption found in Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15061(b)(3) and 15301 because it is designed to preserve the status quo. 170124 ay/2017-01-23 25 January 23, 2017 INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: ______________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ City Manager ______________________________ Senior Deputy City Attorney ____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment 934-944 927 932 233 281 933-937 943 327 1001 942 469 475 744459 832 801 427 - 4 5 3 920 912 362 370 900 838 846 47 1459 835-855 460 815 840 836 834 845 400 803 928930931933 835-837 831-833 451 453 802800 810-816 818-820 828-830 817-819 825 567-569559 563 521- 529 531- 539 541- 547 556 596 904 926 561 - 5 6 7 569 84 527 - 5 3 3 54 3 551 510520 558 - 5 6 0 903 825 837 581575 940 934 813-823 501- 509 511- 519 539541 543 515 - 5 1 7 809811 42 0 1001 1011 3 365 101037637 0 1020 1022 34 5 331 329 1061 1033 1027 1017-1023 980960 990 34 2 - 3 5 2 354 - 3 6 2 326 1019 1027 1035-1037 405 409 427 1050 426 - 4 3 0 432 - 4 3 8 1055 1033 1043 46 7 1042 1036 1018 1000448 452 450 451 43 9 944 471 483 948 952959 947 925 915 933935 425 - 4 4 3 451 449 463 - 4 6 5 936-940 458 460 44 0428426 1028-1030 5365261001 1011-1015 1021 525 540 542 483 904 912 468 918 926 537 965-971505 - 5 0 7 519 - 5 2 1 939-945 931-935 923-925 518 - 520 59585 1048 1044 556 1026 1022 580574 56 6 53 9 552 548546 544 9999 136 610 116 - 1 2 2 15 0 535 529 525 542 516 140 102 116124 163145 566 55616 7 528 643 635 635 645-685 660-666 620 180 164 15 8 15 6 624628632 636640 644 617621 151 -165 171-195 203 642640 636 200 15 1 115 125 13 5 514 101 440 444 436 432 427 425 117119 630 616 208 228220 240 575 530-534536540 552 177 156 201209215 22 5 595 229231 611-623 180 508 500 625-631 170172174 542544 538-542 536534 552548546 541-547 230 - 2 3 8 734 723 721 702-730 220 - 2 4 4 744 701 731 755757 771 200 160 728-732 762-776 740-746 250 275 270 255 741 265 724 730 651 221 - 225 227 668 707 205201203 451449 209 219 221 233 235 450460 470 442444 400 420 430 411 425 429 185 16 5 181 412 250 420 245 17 1 - 169 441-445 435-439 346344 333335 342344 431 460 450 235 530 220220B 222 24 0 514 278274270250 545 540 251 485 255 271 281 30 0 310 30 1 581 259 - 267 533535537 261267 518-526 532 520-526 530-536 271 281 252 27 0 240 - 2 4 8 202-216 228226 234238 244242 210-216 228-234223-229 209215 247-259 240 232230 311-317 251 360 344 326 340 337339323317 400 420 332330314 353 355 367 305 347 265 272 - 2 7 8 418 319 321-341 328330 300-310 431 401 366 436 426 369 335 319 390 301 315 375 307-311 325 330 3321&23301-3 324 326 316318 373-377 416-424 361 314 338 340 560 345 321325315 529 285 555 650 636 628 385365375 380 345 664 325 650-654 661 635 300 690 675 555541-549 533535-539 318320322324326 352 425 439-441 435 429 425415 - 41940 5 40 3 453461 383 460 502 510 526 520 540 499467459439 425 555 400 436 - 452 456 379 370 - 3 7 4 376 380 - 3 8 2 38 4 - 3 9 6 550-552 364 360 431 440-444 423 499 475 421-423 431-433 432428 460 - 476 450 635 446 430 400 745 720 706 385 744 734 724-730 720 712 704360 351 315 737 332 300 653-681 683685 51 2 501 619 609 605 51 8 482486 49 6 610 630 455 400 653-687 543-545 532 534 542 54 4 550 552 554556 558 560 562 564 470 313 33 4 333 325 326 342 303301229 336308310312316318 311 331 315 319 317 321 335 426 - 4 2 8 427 - 4 3 1 183 359 357 341 343 228 220 35 6 - 3 6 0 347 - 3 6 7 35 1 35 7 369 - 3 7 9 360 258-296 193 173 169 159 449 Unit s 1 - 4 419 350 210 204 176 36 5 375 381 181-187 302-316 379 310 320 328 332 340 437 412 311A-B404 313 325 327 333 407401 385 411 452 378 -390360 - 1 A - 1 C 360 - 2 A - 2 C 360 - 3 A - 3 C 360 - 4 A - 4 C 360 - 5 A - 5 C 360 - 6 A 344-348 418 420 482 328 456 321 325 330 204 218 236 240 250-252 477 475467457453 249 235 225 221 201 46 0 275 505 - 509 239-243 209-213 210-214 513 - 5 1 9 460 474 472 228-230 130 136-144 150 465 164 166 46644 6 453 176 545 548 151 134 552 135-137 141-143 100457 - 4 5 9 471 - 479 483 - 485 465 - 4 6 7 459 - 4 6 1 432 47 0 - 4 7 2 565555535531 174170 525507505189 185 179 160164 152 144 171A 171B 535 55 8 201 516512 520 209 215 223 231 521 580 239-245 530 - 5 4 0 54 4 - 5 5 4 212-216 218-222 175 168 160 150 181 177 169 145 580 110 590 151155 190 194192577575 333 335-337 351 457451 465 463 489 - 499 360 530 480 420 430 480 463451 443 437 411 405 419 405 401 441 480 - 498 347 351 355 359 525 430 473 332-342 425 415 400570568556550 543 327 321 315 305 343 515 525 551 555 328 309-311 518 - 5 2 8 536 - 5 4 0 552 - 5 5 4 558 - 5 6 2 573 591 - 5 9 9 557 - 5 7 1 330-332 318-320 406-418 417 542548 568 52 4 550 500 - 5 2 8 578564550546540530 531-535 541 505 525 537 555 565 571 530 520 440-446 579567 600 555 581 420-438 437 56 6 224 228 244 57 9 57 5 565559 2 604 576566 34 22 22 2 2 2 2 505 610-616 678676 674 672 642 636-638 567 555 711 701705 725 525 759 730 718 704 734 738-740 760 746-750 71 8 89 850 530 609 77 60 1 18 1028 1036 1044 1052 1013 1021 1029 1037 1047 1057 10041000 1006 1020 1024 1030 1040 1048 2511091 1085 1035 1027 1023 1017 1001 1060 1043 15 1090 1080 1040 1028 10531055 623 13 7 145 700 780 790 744 111 150 753 100 825 805 33 51 75 63 841 44 675 4941 711 799 703 100 101 139 654 625 1019 1027AB 1035 1052 1044 1061 101010 1045 1028 1020 16 0 1001 1005 1009 1015 1027 1037 1010 1024 1004 930 975 945 929 931 948 181 940 960 14 5 900 955 999 875 853 925 81 855 901-907 909 87 98 10381036 917921 925 735 849 707 847 842 828 820 248 230-232 212 825 829833 839 800 812818 882165 831 801 815809 801 841 791153 718 774 761795 745 201 209 834836 845 895 926 190 934 942 948 20 3 209 219 225 929 200 240 904 910 926 270 935 904 909909A 101 109 25 217 222 148 171 421 130 312 318 324 317 301 186 192 323 329 15 1 325 329 334 131129 101 301 235 258 212 163 115 291 247 131141 145 150 210 201 207 164 202 158 180 165 147143 125 149 101 150 170172165167169171 101-119 121 123 129 139 235 251249 252 247 244250 177 220 261 251 - 257205 245 231 225 213 205170 172 206 234240 183 251 270 241 - 247 215-237 210-216 124124A 132 144 152 147 221 - 243 275 220 246 250 260 166 162 130 129 160 154 116 112 180 - 180 A 171 219 219 235 262 202 245 254252250 151 159 203 215 221 313 - 3 1 7 318 220-224 238 319 -323 311 - 317 339 327 - 335 197 185 177 170 451 422 422A 42 9 437 121 151 187-197 309 167-169165 135143149155 30 2310 314 320 161 171 101 115110 120 354 344 334 364 160-164 126 134 150 168181179 542 - 5 5 0 531-539 532 759 223-239 905 911-917 907 188190 251-293 202 206 208 210 212 216 220 1008 159 275 539 201 400 27 168 865 857 302 324 340 795 848 918 903903A 408412 440 483 A - F 435 751 735 745 532 210 727 733 335 328 330 345 214 350 800 806 441 441 A 230 302 306 308 312316 301 303 305 307 309 325 251 807 821 829 801 818-824 420 424 430 832A 832 842A 842 852A 852 862A 862 872A 872351 A351 355 A 355 359 A 359 36 3 A 363 36 7 A 367 425 911 943 951 918 936 940 944 271253241 301 319 919A919 935 949 928 936 940-946 353 264 367361 310 10051010 1020 423425 457 - 4 6 7 469 - 4 7 1 47 3 - 4 8 1 454 729 733-743 734-740 724-732 936 824826828 920 949 943941 715 95 445 324 328 545547549 590 425 447 827 565585595 904 315 507 561 706 536 200 100 280-290 150 158 162164 276 516 698 161159157 777 132 127 180 528 120 247 372 524 548550 538 152 207 345 33 6 515 658 227 27 29 539 115 550 321 558 965 140 350 808 915 461 435433 945 1012 421 727 218 255 206 2 1032 10351037 453 167 739 260 840 650 642 351 451 551 375 530 643 415 12 700 55 802 99 8987 901 560564568572576580584588592594 906908 910912914 916918920 922924 548 423668 901 305-313 423 405 352354 611 320322 346 323 470 471 48 4 115 528 426 26 4 430 1001 508 756-760 940 930 544546 51 7 549 454 - 4 5 8 211213 151 160 257 433 - 4 5 7 482 330 349 117 401 539 440 691 755 67 31 2 202 651 443445 447 716 218 398 998 262 335 218 640-646 506 119121 120 149 327 469 469 261 263 201 303 401 403 254 401 91 40 101 150 819 301 725 595 705 363 541 321 319 600 146 411-419229 355365 111 121 548 597 143 127 602604 502504506 432434436 HIGHSTREET RA M O N A S T R E E T EMERSONSTREET QUARRYROAD EM E R S O N S T R E E T HOMERAVENUE ELCAMINOREAL L L ELCA MINO RE AL BR Y A N T S T R E E T PALO ALT O AVEN U PALO ALTO AVENUE HAWTHORNE AVENUE EMERSONSTREET RA M O N A S T R E E T EMERSONSTREET HAWTHORNE AVENUE HIGHSTREET EVERETTAVENUEEVERETTAVENUE HIGHSTREET AL M A S T R E E T AL M A S T R E E T ALMASTREET LYTTONAVENUE ELCAMINOREAL QUARRYROAD ALMASTREET EMERSON STREET RA M O N A S T R E E T LYTTONAVENUE UNIVERSITYAVENUE RAMONASTREET BRYANTSTREET HI G H S T R E E T EMERSONSTREET ALMA STREET EM E R S O N S T R E E T HIG H S T R E E T HIG H S T R E E T HAMILTONAVENUE HAMILTONAVENUE EMERSONSTREET HAMILTONAVENUE GILMANSTREET WAVERLEYSTREET BR Y A N T S T R E E T FORESTAVENUEFORESTAVENUE BRYANTSTREET RAMONASTREET RA M O N A S T R E E T BRYANTSTREET FLORENCESTREET KIPLINGSTREET LYTTON AVENUE WA V E R L E Y S T R E E T WA V E R L E Y S T R E E T EVERETT AVENUEEVERETTAVENUE BR Y A N T S T R E E T WA V E R L E Y S T R E E T HAWTHORNEAVENUE RA M O N A S T R E E T BRYANT STREET LYTTON AVENUE UNIVERSITYAVENUE CO W P E R S T R E E T KIP L I N G S T R E E T UNIVERSITYAVENUE UNIVERSITYAVENUE COWPERSTREET WAVERLEY STREET HAMILTONAVENUE RUTHVENAVENUE REET TASSOSTREET RUTHVEN AVENUE WEBSTERSTREET HAWT CO W P E R S T R E E T COWPERSTREET WAVERLEYSTREET HAWTHORNEAVENUE HAWTHORNEAVENUE KIPLINGSTREET EVERETTAVENUE COWPERSTREET WEBSTERSTREET EVE WEBSTERSTREET WEBSTERSTREET LYTTONAVENUE TA S S O S T R E E T SCOTTSTREET ADDISONAVENUE BRYANTSTREET BRYANTSTREET ADDISONAVENUE HAMILTONAVENUE CO W P E R S T R E E T FORESTAVENUE FORESTAVENUE WAVERLEYSTREET BR Y A N T S T R E E T HOMERAVENUE WAVERLEY STREET CHANNINGAVENUE RAMONASTREET RAMONASTREET WEBSTERSTREET WEBSTERSTREET CO W P E R S T R E E T HOMERAVENUE HOMERAVENUE COWPERSTREET KIPLINGSTREET CHANNINGAVENUEWAVERLEYSTREET ADDISONAVENUE LY WE B S T E R S T R E E T WAVERLEYSTREET WE B S T E R S T R E E T ADDISONAVENUE COWPER STREET WE B S T E R S T R E E T WE B S T E R S T R E E T CHANNINGAVENUE C CO W P E R S T R E E T U N I V ER S I T Y CIRCLE EVERETTCOURT LA N E 3 9 LA N E B E A S T LA N E 7 E A S T LA N E 5 E A S T LA N E 6 E A S T LANE20EAST LANE30LANE20WEST LANE21 MI T C H E L L L A N E LANE33 LA N E 1 5 E A S T BRYANTCOURT PAULSENLANE LA N E 1 2 W E S T LA N E 1 1 W E S T CE N T E N N I A L W A L K LA N E D E A S T LA N E D W E S T PEARLANE DOWNINGLANE LAN E56 ELCAMINOREAL PALO AVENUE SHOPPING CENTERWAY PISTACHEPLACE PE N I N S U L A C O R R I D O R J O I N T P O W E R S B O A R D NIN S U L A C O R R I D O R J O I N T P O W E R S B O A R D P ALM D RIV E PALOROA D EMERSONSTREET EMERSON STREET HIGHSTREET HIGHSTREET HIGHSTREET ALMASTREET ALMA STREET AL M A S T R E E T ALMASTREET AL M A S T R E E T FORESTAVENUE CHANNINGAVENUE HOMERAVENUE ADDISONAVENUE ELCAMINOREAL ELCAMINOREAL ELCAMIN OREA L ELCAMINOREAL ELCAMINOREAL ELCAMINOREAL EMBARCADERO R OAD WELLSAVENUE URBANLANE URBANLANE ENCINA A VENUE ENCINAAVENUE MEDICAL FOUNDATION WAY LA N E 7 W E S T LANE8WEST LANEAWEST LANEBWEST CHANNINGAVENUE Th i s m a p i s a p r o d u c t o f t h e Ci t y o f P a l o A l t o G I S Th i s d o c u m e n t i s a g r a p h i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o n l y o f b e s t a v a i l a b l e s o u r c e s . Le g e n d Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n S t a t i o n Un i v e r s i t y A v e n u e / D o w n t o w n B u s i n e s s D i s t r i c t - C o m m e r c i a l C e n t e r Ex i s t i n g G r o u n d F l o o r ( G F ) C o m b i n i n g D i s t r i c t Z o n e d P a r c e l s Pr o p o s e d G r o u n d F l o o r ( G F ) C o m b i n i n g D i s t r i c t Z o n e d P a r c e l s SO F A I I C A P '0 5 5 '0 Exhibit AProposed Ground Floor Combining District Additionsrev. 20161206 CITY O F PALOALTO IN C O R PO RATED CALIFOR N IA P a l o A l t o T h e C i t y o f APRIL 16 1894 Th e C i t y o f P a l o A l t o a s s u m e s n o r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a n y e r r o r s . © 1 9 8 9 t o 2 0 1 6 C i t y o f P a l o A l t o RR i v e r a , 2 0 1 6 - 1 2 - 0 8 0 9 : 4 8 : 0 0 ( \ \ c c - m a p s \ g i s $ \ g i s \ a d m i n \ P e r s o n a l \ R R i v e r a . m d b ) City of Palo Alto (ID # 7801) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: TEFRA Hearing for the Channing House to Issue Bonds Title: TEFRA HEARING: Regarding Conduit Financing for the Channing House Project Located at 850 Webster Street, Palo Alto, and Approving the Issuance of Revenue Bonds by the California Municipal Finance Authority for the Purpose of Financing and Refinancing the Acquisition, Construction, Equipping and Furnishing of Improvements to Channing House From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services RECOMMENDATION 1) Conduct a public hearing under the requirements of the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1983 (TEFRA) and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Code); and 2) Adopt a resolution (Attachment A) approving the issuance of the bonds by the California Municipal Finance Authority (CMFA) for the benefit of Channing House (Borrower). BACKGROUND Channing House (the “Borrower”), a California nonprofit public benefit corporation and an organization described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”), has requested that the CMFA participate in the issuance of one or more series of revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $110,000,000 (the “Bonds”) for the purpose of (i) refunding all or a portion of the outstanding ABAG Finance Authority for Nonprofit Corporations Insured Revenue Bonds (Channing House), Series 2010 (the “Prior Bonds”), the proceeds of which were used to finance and refinance certain costs related to the acquisition, construction, equipping and furnishing of improvements to the Borrower’s continuing care retirement community located generally at and in the vicinity of 850 Webster Street, Palo Alto, California 94301; and (ii) financing the acquisition, construction, equipping and furnishing of improvements at the Borrower’s continuing care retirement community located generally at and in the vicinity of 850 Webster Street, Palo Alto, California 94301 (collectively, the “Project”). City of Palo Alto Page 2 In order for all or a portion of the bonds to qualify as tax-exempt bonds, the City of Palo Alto must conduct a public hearing (TEFRA Hearing), providing the members of the community an opportunity to speak in favor of or against the use of tax-exempt bonds for the financing of the project. Prior to the hearing, reasonable notice must be provided to the members of the community. Following the close of the TEFRA hearing, an “applicable elected representative” of the governmental unit hosting the proposed project must provide its approval of the issuance of the bonds for the financing of the project. DISCUSSION Since the facilities to be financed with the proceeds of the CMFA’s debt are located within the jurisdiction of the City of Palo Alto, the City has been asked to conduct a TEFRA hearing and adopt a resolution (Attachment A) that approves both the issuance of bonds by the CMFA for the benefit of Channing House. As cited in the published notice of February XX, 2017, the public hearing is simply an opportunity for all interested persons to speak or to submit written comments concerning the proposal to issue the debt and the nature or location of the facility to be financed; however, there is no formal obligation on the part of the borrower or the Council to respond to any specific comments made during the hearing or submitted in writing. The bonds are intended to (i) refund all or a portion of the outstanding Prior Bonds in an amount not to exceed $65,0000,000, the proceeds of which were used to finance and refinance certain costs related to the acquisition, construction, equipping and furnishing of improvements to the Borrower’s continuing care retirement community located generally at and in the vicinity of 850 Webster Street, Palo Alto, California 94301; and (ii) finance the acquisition, construction, equipping and furnishing of improvements The Project located generally at and in the vicinity of 850 Webster Street, Palo Alto, California 94301 in an amount not to exceed $45,000,000. The Project is or will be owned and operated by the Borrower. The CMFA is a joint exercise of powers authority that the City became a member of on April 14, 2008. The Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement provides that the CMFA is a public entity, separate and apart from each member executing such agreement. The debts, liabilities and obligations of the CMFA do not constitute debts, liabilities or obligations of the members executing such agreement. The bonds to be issued by the CMFA for the project will be the sole responsibility of the borrower, and the City of Palo Alto will have no financial, legal, moral obligation, liability or responsibility for the project or the repayment of the bonds for the financing of the project. All financing documents with respect to the issuance of the bonds will contain clear disclaimers that the bonds are not obligations of the City of Palo Alto or the State of California but are to be paid for solely from funds provided by the borrower. The City is in no way exposed to any financial liability by reason of its membership in the CMFA. In addition, participation by the City in the CMFA does not impact the City’s appropriations limits and will not constitute any type of indebtedness by the City. Outside of holding the TEFRA City of Palo Alto Page 3 hearing, adopting the required resolution, no other participation or activity of the City or the City Council with respect to the issuance of the bonds will be required. Based on the benefits of the project to the Palo Alto community and the lack of any financial obligations on the part of the City, staff recommends that Council approve the attached resolution. RESOURCE IMPACT As stated, the City will incur no financial obligation from approval of the recommendations. Channing House is requesting authority to issue up to $110 million in bonds through the CMFA. The City will receive a fee for its services when the bonds are issued. POLICY IMPLICATIONS Actions recommended in this report are consistent with Council’s prior actions in supporting non-profit financings under the TEFRA (e.g., recently approving tax-exempt financing through the California Municipal Finance Authority for the Stevenson House project, Report ID # 5655). ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Action on this item does not constitute a project under Section 21065 of the Public Resources Code. Attachments:  Attachment A: TEFRA Resolution for Channing House Attachment A 170209 ms 0140176 Resolution No. _______ Resolution of the City Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving the Issuance of California Municipal Finance Authority Insured Revenue Bonds in an Aggregate Principal Amount Not To Exceed $110,000,000 for the Purpose of Financing and Refinancing the Acquisition, Construction, Equipping and Furnishing of Improvements to Channing House and Certain Other Matters Relating Thereto R E C I T A L S A. Channing House (the “Borrower”), a California nonprofit public benefit corporation and an organization described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”), has requested that the California Municipal Finance Authority (the “Authority”) participate in the issuance of one or more series of revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $110,000,000 (the “Bonds”) for the purpose of (i) refunding all or a portion of the outstanding ABAG Finance Authority for Nonprofit Corporations Insured Revenue Bonds (Channing House), Series 2010 (the “Prior Bonds”), the proceeds of which were used to finance and refinance certain costs related to the acquisition, construction, equipping and furnishing of improvements to the Borrower’s continuing care retirement community located generally at and in the vicinity of 850 Webster Street, Palo Alto, California 94301; and (ii) financing the acquisition, construction, equipping and furnishing of improvements at the Borrower’s continuing care retirement community located generally at and in the vicinity of 850 Webster Street, Palo Alto, California 94301 (collectively, the “Project”). B. Pursuant to Section 147(f) of the Code, the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority must be approved by the City of Palo Alto (the “City”) because the Project is located within the territorial limits of the City. C. The City Council of the City (the “City Council”) is the elected legislative body of the City and is one of the “applicable elected representatives” required to approve the issuance of the Bonds under Section 147(f) of the Code. D. The Authority has requested that the City Council approve the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority in order to satisfy the public approval requirement of Section 147(f) of the Code and the requirements of Section 4 of the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement Relating to the California Municipal Finance Authority, dated as of January 1, 2004 (the “Agreement”), among certain local agencies, including the City. E. Pursuant to Section 147(f) of the Code, the City Council has, following notice duly given, held a public hearing regarding the issuance of the Bonds, and now desires to approve the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The foregoing resolutions are true and correct. Attachment A 170209 ms 0140176 SECTION 2. The City Council hereby approves the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority. It is the purpose and intent of the City Council that this resolution constitute approval of the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority, for the purposes of (a) Section 147(f) of the Code by the applicable elected representative of the governmental unit having jurisdiction over the area in which the Project is to be located, in accordance with said Section 147(f) and (b) Section 4 of the Agreement. SECTION 3. The officers of the City are hereby authorized and directed, jointly and severally, to do any and all things and to execute and deliver any and all documents which they deem necessary or advisable in order to carry out, give effect to and comply with the terms and intent of this resolution and the financing transaction approved hereby. SECTION 4. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: City Attorney City Manager or Designee Director of Administrative Services [SEAL] OHSUSA:766422019 City of Palo Alto (ID # 7697) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Comp Plan: Draft Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Report Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Update: Public Hearing on the Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Report & Revised Fiscal Study; Council Discussion & Direction to Staff Regarding a Preferred Planning Scenario; and Council Discussion & Direction to Staff Regarding the Organization of the Comprehensive Plan From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Conduct a public hearing on the February 10, 2017 Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the purpose of obtaining public and Councilmember comments consistent with the notice provided in Attachment A as well as further comments on the February 2016 Draft EIR; 2. Discuss and provide comments on the revised draft fiscal study (Attachment C) that has been prepared to accompany the Supplement to the Draft EIR; 3. Identify a “preferred scenario” for the Final EIR. Based on the City Council’s January 30, 2017 direction regarding the Land Use & Community Design Element, it appears that Council is inclined to include the following components. Staff seeks confirmation or supplemental direction in each of these areas: A. Estimated housing and population growth would be between Scenario 4 (4,420 dwelling units) and Scenario 6 (6,000 dwelling units). This is based on Council’s January 30, 2017 direction to: City of Palo Alto Page 2 i. remove housing sites on San Antonio and replace with increased densities downtown and near Cal Ave. (similar to Scenarios 3, 4, and 5); ii. add housing sites on the El Camino Real frontage of the Research Park and at the Stanford Shopping Center providing adequate parking is maintained (similar to Scenarios 4 and 6); iii. consider the addition of housing (and a hotel and conference center) elsewhere in the Stanford Research Park and near SUMC (similar to Scenario 6) iv. Include policies to support retail/residential mixed use and pursue conversion of some non-residential FAR to residential FAR (similar to Scenarios 3, 4, 5, and 6); v. Include policies to encourage a mix of housing types including smaller units and units to preserve housing that is affordable and minimize displacement of existing residents (similar to Scenarios 2, 3, 5, and 6). B. Estimated non-residential square footage would be up to 3M square feet similar to Scenario 2. This is based on Council’s January 30, 2017 direction to perpetuate the “cap” on non-residential development in existing Policy L-8 with some updates. (1.3M square feet has already been approved at SUMC and the remaining 1.7M square feet under the existing “cap” would apply to office/R&D citywide except in the SUMC area.) C. Estimated employment growth would be between Scenario 2 (9,850) and Scenario 3 (12,755). This reflects the Council’s January 30, 2017 direction to perpetuate the interim annual limit on office/R&D square footage via an ordinance that exempts the Stanford Research Park. (Scenario 2 includes a City-wide annual limit, Scenario 3 includes an annual limit that applies to a smaller subset of the City than suggested by the Council, and the amount of new employment is determined by the economic “climate” as well as the amount of new building space.) D. Transportation investments would include the following, as well as complementary investments in transit, transportation demand management, and parking supply/management: (These are based on the January 30, 2017 Draft Transportation Element.) i. Small improvements within existing rights-of-way to provide for traffic calming or relatively small increases in roadway capacity by adding turn lanes or making other intersection adjustments; ii. Full grade separations for automobiles, pedestrians, and bicyclists at Caltrain crossings; Retrofit/improvements to existing grade separated Caltrain crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists at California Avenue and University Avenue; City of Palo Alto Page 3 iii. Construction of new pedestrian and bicycle grade separated crossing of Caltrain in South Palo Alto and in North Palo Alto; iv. Pedestrian and bicycle improvements derived from the 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan as amended over time; v. The US 101/Adobe Creek bicycle and pedestrian bridge; vi. El Camino Real intersection and pedestrian safety/streetscape improvements; vii. Downtown mobility and safety improvements; viii. Geng Road extension to Laura Lane; and ix. Middlefield Road corridor improvements. E. Additional zoning code amendments and policies advancing sustainability measures would include the following key items, which are derived from the Council’s discussion on January 30, 2017 and on Scenarios 5 and 6: i. Increase hotel FAR from 2.0 to 3.0 downtown and 2.5 elsewhere in the City ii. Reduce allowable FAR in the CC-2 from 2.0 to 1.5 iii. Maintain the 50 foot height limit in the zoning ordinance iv. Make greater use of coordinated area plans as a planning tool v. Adoption of the SCAP goal of a 80% reduction in GHG emissions by 2030 and alignment of the Comp Plan Update with SCAP principles vi. Inclusion of Comp Plan policies and programs supportive of SCAP strategies vii. Protecting and enhancing the urban forest as natural infrastructure 4. Clarify and provide additional direction regarding the placement of programs in the Comprehensive Plan Update. Specifically, select either A or B: A. If the Council would like to include the programs in a separate section, direct staff to: i. Identify that section as the “Implementation Plan” so that it can be adopted as part of the plan (staff recommends this term rather than “appendix”); ii. Organize the implementation programs by goal and policy number to maintain linkages with other sections of the plan; iii. Eliminate redundancies and consolidate implementation programs where feasible; iv. Identify the relative priority (for example, short term, medium term, long term) and level of effort/cost (low, medium, or high) associated with each program; v. Identify a subset of the programs that are legally required or that implement EIR mitigation measures and convert them to policies in the Comprehensive Plan elements; and City of Palo Alto Page 4 vi. Develop introductory text for the Implementation Plan for later review and adjustment by the City Council clearly describing how the Comprehensive Plan will be implemented, the role of the implementation programs, and how priorities may be adjusted over the life of the plan. B. If the Council would like to retain some of the programs in each of the elements as well as in the Implementation Plan, provide further detail and direct staff to undertake all of the above with the possible exception of item (v). Executive Summary As the City Council is aware, on February 5, 2016 the City published a Draft EIR (referred to as the “February 2016 Draft EIR”) that analyzed four high-level scenarios at an equal level of detail in order to assess potential impacts of the Comprehensive Plan Update. A related fiscal study was also prepared. The City Council subsequently directed City staff to analyze two additional scenarios in order to broaden the range of potential outcomes and provide additional information to inform the planning process. These additional scenarios are described and analyzed as Scenario 5 and Scenario 6 in a Supplement to the Draft EIR, published on February 10, 2017 and which can be found at the following link: (http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/eir/). The Executive Summary in Chapter One provides an overview and the matrix in Attachment B summarizes quantitative conclusions of the analysis. A revised fiscal study is also available and can be found in Attachment C and at this link: http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/wp- content/uploads/2017/02/CompPlanFiscalStudySupplement_2.16.17_FINAL.pdf. The Supplement to the Draft EIR focuses on the new analysis pertaining to Scenarios 5 and 6 and does not reproduce all of the information from the February 2016 Draft EIR. The Supplement to the Draft EIR includes information from the February 2016 Draft EIR where the information has been revised or where it is crucial to understanding the analysis of Scenarios 5 and 6. Comments on the February 2016 Draft EIR are also being accepted during the circulation period for the Supplement. The primary purpose of this evening’s meeting is to conduct a public hearing to solicit public comments regarding the Supplement to the Draft EIR, the associated fiscal study, and the February 2016 Draft EIR. Written comments are also being accepted until the close of business on March 31, 2017. All substantive comments received, whether at the public hearing or in writing, including the comments received on the February 2016 Draft EIR, will be responded to in the Final EIR rather than at the public hearing this evening. The other purposes of this evening’s meeting are: City of Palo Alto Page 5  To provide for discussion and direction to staff regarding the City Council’s preferred scenario for inclusion in the Final EIR, and  To follow-up on the City Council’s January 30, 2017 discussion regarding the organization of implementation programs in the Comprehensive Plan Update and receive additional direction. Later in this report, staff has provided further discussion regarding these two issues for the Council’s consideration. Also, a transcript from the February 21, 2017 meeting of the Comprehensive Plan Update Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) regarding the placement of programs in the Plan is provided as Attachment E. The Council’s motion from January 30, 2017 is provided as Attachment F. Background The 1998-2010 Palo Alto Comp Plan contains the City’s official policies on land use and community design, transportation, housing, the natural environment, business and economics, community services, and governance. The Comp Plan provides the basis for the City’s development regulations and the foundation for its capital improvement program. An update of the Comp Plan was initiated by the City Council in 2006. In 2014, the Council received the Planning & Transportation Commission’s (PTC’s) suggested revisions and endorsed a new framework for the planning process to include broad community engagement, discussion, and analysis of alternative futures, cumulative impacts, and mitigation strategies. A community “summit” was held in mid-2015, and a Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) was formed to make recommendations to the City Council on policies and programs for inclusion in the update. Since 2014, the City Council has provided guidance on the vision and goals for each element of the Comp Plan Update, and the CAC has completed its review and recommendations regarding all of the chapters or “elements” of the plan. The City Council is now in the process of reviewing the CAC’s work, and providing their input on plan revisions to city staff and consultants. A final Comprehensive Plan Update cannot be adopted until the City complies with CEQA, which is a State law that requires California agencies to identify the significant environmental impacts of their actions and describe feasible measures that can be taken to avoid or mitigate those impacts. An EIR is used to evaluate a proposed project’s potential impacts on the environment, and recommend mitigation measures or alternatives to reduce or eliminate those impacts. The City has prepared what is referred to as a “program-level” EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15168), which assesses the potential cumulative impacts of development that may occur during the life City of Palo Alto Page 6 of the plan, considers potential alternatives, and identifies mitigation measures that should be adopted to reduce or avoid significant impacts. This is the same level of environmental analysis that was prepared for the existing 1998-2010 Palo Alto Comp Plan. February 2016 Draft EIR The February 2016 Draft EIR prepared for the Comprehensive Plan Update examined four planning alternatives or “scenarios” at an equal level of detail to allow the public and the Council to assess a variety of land use and infrastructure options. The scenarios collectively present a range of possible outcomes to inform a final decision about the future of Palo Alto. In all likelihood, the final Comprehensive Plan Update will not be identical to any one of the EIR scenarios, but will be a hybrid. The four scenarios analyzed in the February 2016 Draft EIR are:  Scenario 1 is the “business as usual” scenario and shows the results if the City continued to operate under the existing 1998-2010 Comp Plan with no changes to goals, policies, and programs. Any new housing built would be constructed under existing zoning and no innovations in housing or new approaches to address the high cost of housing would be explored. No new growth management measures are anticipated, and any transit or traffic improvements would come from the existing infrastructure plan for the City.  Scenario 2 would slow the pace of job growth when compared with Scenario 1 by moderating the pace of office/research and development (R&D) development throughout the city. Scenario 2 would also ensure that the modest amount of housing growth expected under Scenario 1 would be built out as small units and other housing types appropriate for seniors and the Palo Alto workforce. Transportation investments in this scenario would include implementation of the County’s expressway plan.  Scenario 3 would implement a growth management regime similar to the interim annual limit on office/R&D adopted by the City Council in 2015 for the fastest changing areas of the city and would eliminate housing sites along San Antonio and South El Camino. In place of these housing sites, Scenario 3 would increase housing densities on sites Downtown, near California Avenue, and in other locations in the city close to transit and services. Policies, regulations, and incentives would be designed to ensure smaller units for working professional and senior populations. Transportation investments would include grade separating the Caltrain crossings at Meadow and Charleston by placing the railroad tracks in a trench.  Scenario 4 assumes the most growth in housing and employment evaluated in the February 2016 Draft EIR, consistent with 2013 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) projections. Potential policies and regulations would be enacted to advance sustainability objectives. Transportation investments would include grade separating the Caltrain crossings at Meadow and Charleston by placing the railroad tracks in a City of Palo Alto Page 7 trench, and incorporating mix flow bus rapid transit on El Camino Real (with curbside stations and queue jumping for transit vehicles). Housing sites along San Antonio and South El Camino Real would be eliminated and replaced with higher densities elsewhere as well as new housing sites along the El Camino frontage of the Stanford Research Park and the Stanford Shopping Center. The Supplement to the Draft EIR: Scenarios 5 & 6 During two City Council meetings in early 2016 (January 19 and February 22), City Council members indicated their desire to analyze an additional scenario in a supplement to the Draft EIR, and on May 16, 2016 the City Council provided basic parameters of two new scenarios (Scenarios 5 and 6).  Scenario 5 involves 10 percent fewer jobs than Scenario 2 (previously the lowest job scenario), and the same number of housing units as Scenario 3. This scenario is intended to test the efficacy of mitigation and sustainability measures when applied to relatively slow growth over the 15 year planning period. Scenario 5 would test strategies designed to slow the pace of job growth and would replace or supplement the current citywide “cap” on new non-residential square footage in “monitored areas” with a permanent citywide annual limit on office and R&D development. This scenario would also discourage new multi-family housing along San Antonio Avenue and portions of south El Camino Real and San Antonio Avenue, removing housing sites in these areas, and would instead adopt policies and zoning regulations to increase residential densities Downtown, in the California Avenue area, and in other transit-rich areas. This scenario assumes that Caltrain would be grade separated at all crossings.  Scenario 6 would also involve 10 percent fewer jobs than Scenario 2, and roughly 36 percent more housing than Scenario 4. This new scenario is intended to test policies and programs to accelerate the production of housing over the 15 year planning period, while using a performance-based approach to address the impacts of growth. As under Scenario 4, this scenario would include mechanisms to stimulate additional multi-family housing on sites Downtown, the Fry’s Electronics vicinity, and on portions of the Stanford Research Park and Shopping Center fronting on El Camino Real. It would also include consideration of housing sites elsewhere in the Stanford Research Park and in the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) vicinity. Like Scenario 5, Scenario 6 assumes that Caltrain would be grade separated at all crossings. The Supplement to the Draft EIR: Contents The Supplement to the Draft EIR is organized into the chapters identified in Table 1 below. Table 1. Organization of the February 2017 Supplement to the Draft EIR City of Palo Alto Page 8 Section Purpose/Contents Additional Notes Chapter 1: Executive Summary Summarizes the scenarios analyzed in the February 2016 Draft EIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR Table 1-3 presents the environmental impacts and mitigation for all six scenarios and identifies the level of significance of impacts before and after mitigation. Chapter 2: Introduction Provides an overview of the Supplement to the Draft EIR document Chapter 3: Project Description Describes Scenarios 5 and 6 Chapter 4: Environmental Evaluation Analyses impacts in 14 sub-chapters corresponding to the environmental resource categories in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines The Air Quality, Green House Gas (GHG), Noise, and Transportation sections include an expanded discussion of the effectiveness of proposed mitigation measures. Chapter 5: Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Lists the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Plan, as identified in Chapter 4. Chapter 6: Alternatives to the Proposed Project Discusses the “no build” alternative as required by CEQA and its relationship to the “business as usual” alternative represented by Scenario 1. This chapter also explains how the six scenarios represent a reasonable range of options, and describes a potential hybrid. Chapter 7: CEQA- Mandated Sections Discusses growth inducement, cumulative impacts, unavoidable significant effects, and significant irreversible changes as a result of the proposed Plan. This chapter also identifies environmental issues “scoped out” pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15128. Chapter 8: Organizations and Persons Consulted Lists the people and organizations that were contacted during the preparation of the Supplement to the Draft EIR. NOTES: (1) Where changes to the February 2016 Draft EIR have been made, they are shown in strikethrough and underline. (2) Technical appendices are provided to support the analyses in Chapter 4. Source: Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment, February 2017 The Supplement to the Draft EIR: Revisions to the February 2016 Draft EIR As noted above, Chapter 4 contains strikethrough and underline formatting that indicates revisions to the environmental setting and mitigation measures of the February 2016 Draft EIR. Tables and figures that appeared in the February 2016 Draft EIR have the same number as in the February 2016 Draft EIR. Where new tables and figures have been added in the Supplement to the Draft EIR, they have sequential lettering. Revisions to the February 2016 Draft EIR were generally made for the following reasons:  Revisions to the environmental setting (i.e. existing conditions and regulatory framework) information were made to reflect public comments received on the City of Palo Alto Page 9 February 2016 Draft EIR. Other revisions to the environmental setting were made to incorporate key changes to the environmental setting since the February 2016 Draft EIR was published. For example, the Hydrology and Water Quality chapter includes updates regarding the City’s groundwater dewatering policies, and the Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change chapter includes new text describing the Draft 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update, which the California Air Resources Board released on January 20, 2017. Although these changes are not required under CEQA, since the “baseline” for the EIR is the Notice of Preparation publication date of May 30, 2014, the City included such updates to provide a thorough depiction of the current regulatory framework pertaining to key issues of community concern.  Revisions to impacts and mitigation measures were made to reflect public comments received on the February 2016 Draft EIR and to reflect the status of the Comp Plan Update. Many of the mitigation measures that previously prescribed specific policy wording have now been re-written so that they identify the most important policy topics that must be addressed by the Comp Plan Update in order to lessen or avoid potential environmental impacts. This will allow the City to more easily review the Comp Plan Update as it is being drafted to ensure that it meets the intent of mitigation measures. The goal of the revisions to the mitigation measures is to preserve their effectiveness, but allow the City the flexibility to refine the wording of policies in the Comp Plan Update to address the environmental impacts.  In two places (Impacts GHG-2 and GHG-3) impacts that were previously identified as significant and unavoidable are now considered less than significant. Impact GHG-2 is now less than significant without mitigation, and Impact GHG-3 is a significant impact that is can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Regarding Impact GHG-2, the February 2016 Draft EIR identified a 2050 GHG estimated efficiency target even though the horizon year for the Plan is 2030 and there is no legislative mandate for a GHG reduction plan to achieve the 2050 goal. The analysis for Impact GHG-2 has been revised in the Supplement to the Draft EIR to analyze consistency with the plans that have been adopted and legislative targets in place at the horizon year of the Comp Plan, and to reflect that the City has approved the draft Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) framework since the February 2016 Draft EIR. Regarding Impact GHG-3, the analysis has been revised to acknowledge that, through Mitigation Measure GHG-3, the City’s response to the impacts of climate change for new development would provide a strong framework for climate change resiliency and would reduce impacts to the extent feasible. City of Palo Alto Page 10  The February 2016 Draft EIR found that Impact referred to as “POP-4” would be less than significant and would therefore not require mitigation. However, the February 2016 Draft EIR included mitigation measures to acknowledge the City’s efforts to address the existing imbalance of employed residents to jobs. Under CEQA, mitigation measures are not required for less than significant impacts and the introduction of Scenarios 5 and 6 provide an alternate way to address this issue. As a result, Mitigation Measures POP-4a and POP-4b have been removed in the Supplement to the Draft EIR. Revised Fiscal Study Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) documented the existing fiscal and economic conditions and analyzed the potential fiscal impacts attributable to the alternative land use scenarios considered in the Comprehensive Plan Update process. Their initial analysis was presented to the City’s Finance Committee on March 15, 2016 and has now been revised to reflect the Committee’s comments and the addition of Scenario 5 and Scenario 6. As previously, the Revised Fiscal Impact Analysis Report in Attachment C details the methodology employed for the analysis, study caveats, analytical approach and key assumptions, and key findings and conclusions, not all of which are repeated here. In summary, the fiscal analysis assesses the effect of future residential and non-residential (employment supporting) development on the City of Palo Alto General Fund from 2015 through 2030. The analysis focuses specifically on the effect that population and employment growth will have on the City’s $171.1 million 2015 Adopted General Fund Operating Expenditure Budget.1 The Fiscal Impact Model developed for this effort assesses revenue and cost effects attributable to growth on a revenue-line-item and department-by- department cost basis. The model holds current operations factors constant, including tax rates, organizational structures, and governance policies. While these and other factors will change over time, this analytical approach seeks to isolate the fiscal impact attributable to residents, workers, and visitors, as well as fiscal impacts attributable to specific land use categories. The analysis presents year 2030 results in constant 2015 dollars. The fiscal analysis forecasts the net impact (i.e., revenues less costs) for each of the Comprehensive Plan scenarios. The attribution of revenues and costs to specific types of growth provides useful information on alternative paths of growth for the City. The study finds that the growth envisioned in all six Comprehensive Plan scenarios likely will generate net revenue for the City of Palo Alto General Fund. These fiscal effects reflect annual per- capita fiscal net benefits of about $240 to $320 per net new person (including new residents and workers), with each new resident generating about $340 to $360 and each new employee generating about $190 to $280. 1 The General Fund is a subcomponent of the City’s total Fiscal Year 2015 expenditure budget of $470.3 million. City of Palo Alto Page 11 Accordingly, this analysis finds that the most significant growth scenarios (Scenario 4 and Scenario 6) will generate the greatest financial gain for the General Fund. It is important to recognize that despite being positive, the net fiscal impacts calculated by this analysis are quite modest relative to the total City General Fund budget. The greatest net fiscal impact identified, $7.4 million under Scenario 4, represents about four percent of the Fiscal Year 2015 General Fund expenditure budget. Also, the analysis finds that the expected fiscal benefit of a new resident in Palo Alto is greater than the expected fiscal benefit of a new employee in the City even though the new resident generates a higher marginal cost burden compared to local workers. Our consultants will be available at the March 20 th hearing to provide an overview of their study and answer questions about the analysis and conclusions if desired. Discussion The Comp Plan Update EIR differs from most EIRs in that it assesses multiple scenarios at an equal level of detail. The scenarios are intended to illustrate potential impacts of policy decisions that will have to be made as the Comprehensive Plan Update planning process is completed. By using this approach, the EIR is intended to advance and inform the planning process, and not to dictate what its outcome will be. As anticipated, the City Council’s direction on January 30, 2017 suggests that their “preferred scenario” is not identical to any of those analyzed in the EIR, but is a hybrid of several. Also, the Council’s direction on January 30, 2017 raised an organizational question about implementation programs in the Comprehensive Plan that requires further clarification. Both of these issues are discussed further below. Preferred Scenario Identifying a preferred scenario at this point in the planning process will allow preparation of a Final EIR that describes the preferred scenario and explains how the impacts of that preferred scenario (and the Comp Plan Update itself) falls within the range of impacts associated with Scenarios 1-6. The preferred scenario that will be described in the Final EIR will not require any more detail than the other scenarios and similar to them, will consist of primary characteristics and a list of key policies. The primary characteristics will include the growth in housing, population, jobs, and non-residential square footage anticipated over the life of the plan, as well as the list of transportation investments identified for implementation. Attachment D is a summary of the EIR scenarios and the housing-related policies, zoning code amendments, and infrastructure investments that staff believes can be used to represent the preferred scenario based on the City Council’s January 30, 2017 direction. Primary characteristics are discussed below: Housing & Population. The Council’s direction on January 30, 2017 was to remove housing sites along San Antonio Ave. and replace them with higher densities in downtown and near City of Palo Alto Page 12 California Avenue. The Council also wished to include the potential for mixed use (housing, hotel, conference center) in the Research Park, housing at the Stanford Shopping Center, and in the SUMC vicinity. With this direction, the preferred scenario would have more housing sites than Scenario 4 (with 4,420 dwelling units) but less than Scenario 6 (with 6,000 dwelling units). Non-Residential Square Footage. The Council’s direction on January 30, 2017 was to perpetuate the “cap” on non-residential development in Comprehensive Plan Policy L-8 as a cap on net new office/R&D square footage, exempting only the SUMC area that was removed from the cap in 2011. 1.3M square feet has already been approved at the SUMC and 1.7M remains under the existing cap. This suggests that the Council’s preferred scenario could yield up to three million square feet, similar to EIR Scenario 2.2 Jobs. The Council’s direction on January 30, 2017 was to perpetuate the interim annual limit on office/R&D development on a city-wide basis, exempting the Stanford Research Park. The annual limit was one of the primary determinants used to define the amount of new employment in each scenario, since it has proved effective at discouraging new development. (Another factor was the proposal in some scenarios to regulate employment densities via a conditional use permit.) Scenario 2, with 9,850 jobs and Scenarios 5 & 6 with 8,868 jobs were assumed to have a citywide annual limit (with no exemptions). Scenario 3, with 12,755 jobs, was assumed to have an annual limit focused on the same subset of the City as the interim limit. Based on the Council’s direction, the preferred scenario would fall somewhere between these numbers. (It’s important to remember that new jobs occur in existing building space as well as new building space, so the relationship between new square footage and new jobs is not proportional.) Transportation Investments. The Council did not have time to review the list of proposed transportation investments included in the revised draft Transportation Element on January 30, 2017. If the Council agrees with staff’s recommendation in that document, the transportation investments in the preferred scenario would include a blend of those in Scenarios 5 and 6, specifically:  Small improvements within existing rights-of-way to provide for traffic calming or relatively small increases in roadway capacity by adding turn lanes or making other intersection adjustments; 2 Transitioning from a cap on all new non-residential square footage to a cap on new office/R&D square footage would mean that some non-residential square footage (e.g. a new warehouse or new retail space) would not count towards the cap. However the change in methodology would also mean that any existing space that is converted from one use to another (e.g. warehouse or retail to office/R&D) would count towards the cap. City of Palo Alto Page 13  Full grade separations for automobiles, pedestrians, and bicyclists at Caltrain crossings; Retrofit/improvements to existing grade separated Caltrain crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists at California Avenue and University Avenue;  Construction of new pedestrian and bicycle grade separated crossing of Caltrain in South Palo Alto and in North Palo Alto;  Pedestrian and bicycle improvements derived from the 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan as amended over time;  The US 101/Adobe Creek bicycle and pedestrian bridge;  El Camino Real intersection and pedestrian safety/streetscape improvements;  Downtown mobility and safety improvements;  Geng Road extension to Laura Lane; and  Middlefield Road corridor improvements. Please see Attachment D for more discussion of the preferred scenario and the components that staff believes reflect the Council’s guidance. We would appreciate the Council’s feedback on this material and whether it reflects their preferred scenario. If adjustments are required, please specify. Organization of the Comprehensive Plan Update: Implementation Programs Palo Alto’s current Comprehensive Plan includes implementation programs in each element (266 total not counting the Housing Element programs) and repeats those programs in a separate chapter called the Implementation Plan. While only approximately 15% of the discrete implementation programs (i.e. excluding ongoing programs) from the 1989 plan have been completed, this organizational structure is familiar to users of the current Comp Plan and the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) developed its recommendations with the assumption that this structure would be perpetuated. Thus, there were some concerns when the City Council voted to move all of the implementation programs (other than those required by State law) to an “appendix” on January 30, 2017. A copy of the Council’s motion is included as Attachment F. The CAC had an extended discussion of this issue on February 21, 2017, and a transcript of their meeting is attached as Attachment E. In short, a majority of those present at the meeting wished the Council to reconsider their direction and stated that they would have approached their work on the Comp Plan elements differently if the programs were going to be presented solely in a separate section. This evening’s discussion is intended to clarify the Council’s preferred approach. Currently, the CAC’s recommended elements contain a total of approximately 410 programs (not counting the Housing Element programs). The CAC will focus on the Implementation Plan at their March 21st meeting, and will be asked to provide recommendations for prioritization and streamlining to City of Palo Alto Page 14 the City Council. California Government Code Section 65301 states clearly that the required contents of a local agency’s general plan can be organized in any way (“The General Plan may be adopted in any format deemed appropriate or convenient by the legislative body.”) Also, while implementation measures are anticipated in some elements of the plan, the law’s focus is on the agency’s policy framework, requiring local plans and their separate “elements and parts” to “comprise an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the adopting agency” (Government Code Section 65300.5). The elements required to be included in a general plan are identified in California Government Code Section 65302. In some cases, the statute references “action programs” and “implementation measures” that must be incorporated before the general plan can be deemed sufficiently complete. For example, the statute states that the City must identify and annually review areas that are subject to flooding (CGC 65302(a)). The noise element must include implementation measures that address existing and foreseeable noise problems, if any (CGC 65302(f)(4). The plan must also “contain an action program consisting of specific programs which the legislative body intends to pursue in implementing its open-space plan” (CGC 65564). Each of these requirements has been reviewed by our consultants and has been or will be reflected in the draft elements reviewed by the City Council and must be included in the final Comprehensive Plan With this background in mind, the City Council has two options: 1. Place the implementation programs in the Implementation Plan section of the document only, but retain a numbering system that allows them to be associated with specific plan goals and policies. With this approach, staff would recommend that programs required by state law or as EIR mitigation measures be re-drafted as policies and included in the elements so the Comp Plan’s compliance with State law is very clear. This alternative should also involve editing the programs to clarify them and reduce the total number. 2. Revert to the original structure of the plan, and include implementation programs both within the elements and within the Implementation Plan section. In this alternative, the programs should be edited to clarify them and reduce the total number. A majority of the CAC was not supportive of the first option when it was discussed in broad terms at their meeting on February 21st and some members expressed concerns that the policies would be less effective or understandable if they were separated from the implementation programs. The majority also expressed concerns that a separate Implementation Plan chapter would not have its deserved status as a legal part of the Comprehensive Plan (a concern which could be addressed in the adopting resolution). Staff City of Palo Alto Page 15 believes that either option can be made to work and can comply with all legal requirements. Also, in both cases, it will be possible to preserve all of the hard work that has gone into developing program language, and to clearly communicate the constraints on implementing all of the programs and the need to prioritize and reevaluate priorities over time. Policy Implications The Comprehesive Plan is the City’s “constitution” when it comes to land use and development issues, including transportation and the protection of the environment. The Comprehensive Plan Update is expected to perpeuate the overall vision and values of the current plan, while updating some of its goals, policies, and implementation programs. Resource Impact The Comprehensive Plan Update has been a time consuming and costly project for the City. Current contracts are sufficient to complete the project provided in accordance with the current schedule, which envisions completion of the CAC process in May and adoption of an updated plan by the end of the year. Timeline/Next Steps The Supplement to the Draft EIR is available online on the project website at: (http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/eir/). Members of the public are invited to provide oral comments at this evening’s meeting, or at a public hearing being conducted by the PTC on March 29, 2017. Written comments are also being accepted until the close of business on March 31, 2017. All substantive comments received during the comment period will be responded to in a Final EIR, which is also expected to describe the City Council’s “preferred scenario” based on the Council’s input this evening. The Final EIR must be completed and certified before the City Council can consider approval of the Comprehensive Plan Update. Upcoming City Council discussions and actions are tentatively scheduled as follows: Table 2. Schedule of Upcoming City Council Discussions & Requested Actions Date* Topics/Actions Requested March 20, 2017 Hearing on the Supplement to the Draft EIR, discussion of the Revised Fiscal Study, the Preferred Scenario, and Organization of Comp Plan Programs May 1, 2017 Review of the Revised Draft Land Use & Transportation Elements May 15, 2017 Review of the Draft Natural Environment, Safety, and Business/Economics Elements recommended by the Citizens City of Palo Alto Page 16 Date* Topics/Actions Requested Advisory Council (CAC) June 5, 2017 CAC resolution of thanks June 12, 2017 Review of draft Introductory Materials/Governance; referral to the Planning & Transportation Commission (PTC) Oct/Nov/Dec 2017 Receipt of the PTC recommendation and review of a complete draft document; certification of the Final EIR; and adoption of the Comp Plan Update subject to re-review and a report from the PTC per PAMC Section 19.04.080. *All dates subject to change. Environmental Review A program level EIR is being prepared for the Comprehensive Plan Update, as summarized in this staff report. Public comments are currently being accepted on the February 2016 Draft EIR and the February 10, 2017 Supplement to the Draft EIR. Attachments:  Attachment A: Notice of Availability of the Supplement to the Draft EIR for the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update (PDF)  Attachment B: Matrix of Impacts with Scenarios 1-6 February 2017 (PDF)  Attachment C: CompPlanFiscalStudyRevised_2.16.17 (PDF)  Attachment D: Preferred EIR Scenario Summary March 2017 (DOCX)  Attachment E: Transcript of CAC February 21 2017 meeting (DOCX)  Attachment F: City Council 01-30-17 Action Minutes (DOCX)  Attachment G: Letters From the Public (PDF) NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY AND COMPLETION (NOTICE OF INTENT) OF A SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE (SCH#2014052101) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts of the following project: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE LEAD AGENCY: City of Palo Alto, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Project Description: The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan is the City's governing document for land use and development decisions. The City is undertaking a Comprehensive Plan Update in order to establish a shared vision for the future of the community through to the year 2030. The Project will update Plan goals, policies, programs, narrative, maps and diagrams. Given the long-term horizon of the proposed Plan and the permitting, planning and development actions that are related both geographically and as logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions for implementation, a draft EIR has been prepared as a program EIR, pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines. A Draft Program EIR was published on February 5, 2016 for a 90-day comment period that was subsequently extended to 124 days (ending June 8, 2016). The Program EIR analyzed four planning scenarios at an equal level of detail within the body of the Draft EIR, thereby illuminating potential environmental impacts of a range of alternatives designed to address the proposed Plan objectives. Scenario 1 is a “Business as Usual” scenario and assumes the proposed Plan would not be adopted, and change and development in Palo Alto through 2030 would occur under the existing Comp Plan. Scenarios 2, 3, and 4 each include different strategies related to the pace of non-residential development and job growth, the placement of housing sites and densities, desired transportation investments, and sustainability measures. In early 2016, the City Council directed City staff to analyze two additional scenarios to broaden the range of potential outcomes and provide additional information to inform the planning process. This Supplement to the Draft EIR has been prepared to assess the two additional scenarios, called Scenarios 5 and 6. Scenario 5 would lower job growth below current projections and allow a modest increase in housing in an effort to improve the City’s jobs-to-employed-residents ratio. Scenario 6 would also lower job growth below current projection and allow robust increase in housing in an effort to address issues of housing affordability and supply in the City and improve the City’s jobs-to-employed-residents ratio. Probable Environmental Effects of the Project: The EIR will evaluate potentially significant environmental impacts associated with the adoption and implementation of the Comprehensive Plan Update, consistent with the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed project will have potentially significant environmental effects with regard to Aesthetics, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change, Land Use, Public Services and Recreation, Transportation and Traffic, Noise, Utilities and Service Systems, Cultural Resources, and Hydrology and Water Quality. CEQA requires this notice to disclose whether any listed toxic sites are present at the project location. This is a citywide project, and there are sites within the city that are contained in the Cortese List of toxic sites. The Draft EIR is on file and may be reviewed at the Palo Alto Planning Division, 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor, during business hours. The EIR will also be available for review on the City’s project website-- http://www.paloaltocompplan.org, and at the following public libraries: Rinconada Library, 1213 Newell Rd., Palo Alto, CA 94303, and Palo Alto Downtown Library, 270 Forest Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94301. The public review for this Supplement to the Draft EIR begins on February 10, 2017 and ends on March 31, 2017. If you wish to provide written comments on the Supplement or the Draft EIR, please submit these to Elena Lee, Department of Planning and Community Environment, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301, or Elena.Lee@CityofPaloAlto.org, no later than March 31, 2017, at 5:00 p.m. During the public review period, both the Planning & Transportation Commission and the City Council will hold public meetings to take public testimony on the Draft EIR. The public meetings are tentatively scheduled for March 20, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. (City Council) and March 29, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. (Planning & Transportation Commission). Both meetings will occur in the Council Chambers, 1st Floor City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue and all persons may appear and be heard at these meetings. Substantive public comments received at these meetings and in writing will be responded to in a Final EIR before there is any decision to adopt The Comprehensive Plan Update. Members of the public are also encouraged to attend meetings of the Citizens Advisory Committee to offer their comments and suggestions regarding the development of policy language for the updated plan. Visit PaloAltoCompPlan.org for more information. If any person challenges this item in court, that person may be limited to raising only those issues the person or someone else raised at the public hearings described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered at, or prior to, the public hearings. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, those requiring accommodation for these meetings should notify the City of Palo Alto 24 hours prior to the meetings at (650) 329-2496. HILLARY GITELMAN, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT West Homestead Road AlmaStreet JuniperoSerraBoulevard E m ba rcader o R oad StevensCreekBoulevard Ar astra d ero Road Arastradero R oad Rainbow Drive Fremont Avenue South Stelling Road SanAntonioRoad South de Anza Boulevard QuarryRoad Bubb Road Belleville Way El Ca mino Real Oregon Expressway FoothillExpressway £¤101 SAN FRANCISCO BAY |ÿ82 Stanford Menlo Park East Palo Alto Mountain View Los Altos Los Altos Hills %&'(280 %&'(280 Ü Ü Baylands Preserve Ü Atascadero Preserve Foothills Park Los Trancos Open Space Preserve Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Ü Ü Ü Ü Stanford Station Palo Alto Station UniversityAvenue California Avenue Station Middlefield Road CITY OF PALO ALTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT EIR FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION AND CONTEXT Source: The Planning Center | DC&E, 2013; The City of Palo Alto, 2013. 012Miles PROJECT LOCATION SAN FRANCISCO BAY %&'(280 |ÿ92 |ÿ84 %&'(280 £¤101 Oakland San Jose San Francisco Los Altos Menlo Park Mountain View Cal Train Stations City Boundary Sphere of Influence Creeks Public Conservation Land California Avenue Concept Plan Area East Meadow Circle Concept Plan Area %&'(880 %&'(580 %&'(680 SanFrancisquitoCreek Adobe Cr e ek AtascaderoCreek Matad e ro Cr e e k BarronCreek Comprehensive Plan Update 2014‐2030 Draft EIR Scenarios:  Key Characteristics & Impacts * (1 of 2) Key Characteristics/Impacts 2014 Existing Conditions [01]Scenario 1 Scenario 2Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 [02]Scenario 6 February 2016  DEIR Page  (Scenarios 1‐4) February 2017  Supplement to the  Draft EIR  (Scenarios 5‐6)**  “Business as Usual” “Slowing Growth” "Housing Tested I""Sustainability  Tested I" "Sustainability  Tested II" "Housing Tested  II"Page Reference Page Reference** City Population 65,685 72,285 72,285 74,120 76,140 74,120 79,765 3‐24,33,38 & 44 3‐19, 3‐23 City & Sphere of Influence (SOI) Population 80,805 90,210 90,210 92,045 94,065 92,045 97,690 3‐24,33,38 & 44 3‐19, 3‐23 City Housing Units [03]28,545 31,265 31,265 32,090 32,965 32,090 34,545 3‐24,33,38 & 44 3‐19, 3‐23 City & SOI Housing Units [04]33,070 36,950 36,950 37,780 38,650 37,780 40,235 3‐24,33,38 & 44 3‐19, 3‐23 City Jobs [05]95,460 110,940 105,310 108,215 110,940 104,325 104,325 3‐24,33,38 & 44 3‐19, 3‐23 City & SOI Jobs 100,830 116,700 111,070 113,975 116,700 110,085 110,085 3‐24,33,38 & 44 3‐19, 3‐23 City Employed Residents [06]31,165 34,697 34,697 35,578 36,547 35,578 38,287 4‐11.29 4.11‐16 City & SOI Employed Residents [07]36,004 40,595 40,595 41,420 42,329 44,182 46,891 4‐11.29 4.11‐16 City Jobs/Employed Residents Ratio 3.06 3.20 3.04 3.03 3.04 2.93 2.72 4‐11.29 4.11‐16 City & SOI Jobs/Employed Residents Ratio 2.80 2.87 2.74 2.75 2.76 2.49 2.35 4‐11.29 4.11‐16 Key Characteristics/Impacts (NET CHANGE)Scenario 1 ∆  (NET CHANGE) Scenario 2∆  (NET CHANGE) Scenario 3 ∆  (NET CHANGE) Scenario 4 ∆  (NET CHANGE) Scenario 5∆ (NET CHANGE) Scenario 6∆ (NET CHANGE) February 2016  DEIR Page  (Scenarios 1‐4) February 2017  Supplement to the  Draft EIR  (Scenarios 5‐6)** City Population 6,600 6,600 8,435 10,455 8,435 14,080 3‐19 3‐19, 3‐23 City & SOI Population 9,405 9,405 11,240 13,260 11,240 16,885 3‐19 3‐19, 3‐23 City Housing Units [03]2,720 2,720 3,545 4,420 3,545 6,000 3‐19 3‐19, 3‐23 City & SOI Housing Units [04]3,880 3,880 4,710 5,580 4,710 7,165 3‐19 3‐19, 3‐23 City Jobs [05]15,480 9,850 12,755 15,480 8,865 8,865 3‐19 3‐19, 3‐23 City & SOI Jobs 15,870 10,240 13,145 15,870 9,255 9,255 3‐19 3‐19, 3‐23 Estimated Net New Non‐Residential Square  Footage in Policy L‐8 "Monitored Areas"   2014‐2030 (millions sq ft)  [08] ~1.7 ~1.7 ~1.9 ~2.4 ~1.1 ~1.1 Estimated Net New Non‐Residential Square  Footage Entire City 2014‐2030 (millions sq ft) [09] ~3.3 ~3.0 ~3.5 ~4.0 ~2.4 ~2.4 3‐19 3‐11 Transportation Impacts 2014 Existing Conditions Scenario 1 Scenario 2Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5Scenario 6 February 2016  DEIR Page  (Scenarios 1‐4) February 2017  Supplement to the  Draft EIR  (Scenarios 5‐6)** City Total Motor Vehicle Trips 432,122 479,198 467,567 475,362 463,255 444,204 457,633 4.13‐47 4.13‐23 City & SOI Total Motor Vehicle Trips 499,013 549,691 538,480 545,826 533,336 514,665 527,293 4.13‐45 4.13‐19 City Total Average Trip Length (miles) 12.31 12.41 12.28 12.31 12.50 12.41 12.37 4.13‐47 4.13‐23 City & SOI Total Average Trip Length (miles) 12.81 12.94 12.81 12.83 13.00 12.92 12.88 4.13‐45 4.13‐19 City Total Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) 5,320,931 5,947,158 5,741,373 5,853,201 5,788,497 5,511,446 5,663,040 4.13‐49 4.13‐23 City & SOI Total Vehicle Miles Travelled  (VMT)6,391,293 7,110,437 6,897,508 7,000,886 6,932,573 6,651,773 6,792,095 4.13‐49 4.13‐19 City VMT Per Capita 33.0 32.5 32.3 32.1 30.9 30.9 30.8 4.13‐49 4.13‐25 City & SOI VMT Per Capita 34.8 35.2 34.0 34.4 33.9 34.3 33.6 34.0 32.9 32.9 32.7 Updated in  Supplement 4.13‐22 City Mode Share for Palo Alto Daily Person  Trips (%) ‐ Drive Alone 61.5% 59.9% 60.0% 59.7% 58.5% 58.9% 58.5%4.13‐50 4.13‐26 City Mode Share for Palo Alto Daily Person  Trips (%) ‐ Shared Ride 22.7% 22.2% 22.3% 22.2% 21.9% 21.9% 22.0%4.13‐50 4.13‐26 City Mode Share for Palo Alto Daily Person  Trips (%) ‐ Transit 5.1% 6.8% 6.6% 6.8% 7.8% 7.6% 7.8%4.13‐50 4.13‐26 City Mode Share for Palo Alto Daily Person  Trips (%) ‐ Bike 2.8% 3.1% 3.1% 3.1% 3.2% 3.2% 3.2%4.13‐50 4.13‐26 City Mode Share for Palo Alto Daily Person  Trips (%) ‐ Walk 7.9% 8.1% 8.1% 8.2% 8.6% 8.4% 8.6%4.13‐50 4.13‐26 2013 Scenario 1 Scenario 2Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5Scenario 6 February 2016  DEIR Page  (Scenarios 1‐4) February 2017  Supplement to the  Draft EIR  (Scenarios 5‐6)** Daily Transit Boardings To, From and Within  Palo Alto (Including, BART, Caltrain, VTA,  Shuttles, etc.) 44,053 62,177 57,287 61,013 70,045 64,375 66,315 4.13‐69 4.13‐47 Comprehensive Plan Update 2014‐2030 Draft EIR Scenarios:  Key Characteristics & Impacts * (2 of 2) Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD)  Impacts  [10] Existing Conditions  Enrollments  2013‐2014/2014‐2015  (Capacity) Scenario 1 Scenario 2Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5Scenario 6 February 2016  DEIR Page  (Scenarios 1‐4) February 2017  Supplement to the  Draft EIR  (Scenarios 5‐6)**  “Business as Usual” “Slowing Growth” "Housing Tested" Sustainability Tested "Sustainability Tested  II""Housing Tested II" Page Reference Page Reference** Net Elementary School Students Enrollment  Increase 5,784 / 5,677 (6,227)388 893 388 893 471 1,083 558 1,283 1,083 1,648 Existing: 4.12‐4;  Scenarios:  Updated in  Supplement 4.12‐4 to 4.12‐7 Net Middle School Students Enrollment  Increase 2,720 / 2,932 (2,950)155 466 155 466 188 565 223 670 565 860 Existing: 4.12‐4;  Scenarios:  Updated in  Supplement 4.12‐4 to 4.12‐7 Net High School Students Enrollment  Increase 3,848 / 3,840 (4,600)155 582 155 582 188 707 188 837 707 1,075 Existing: 4.12‐4;  Scenarios:  Updated in  Supplement 4.12‐4 to 4.12‐7 Net Total School Students Enrollment  Increase 12,352 / 12,449 (13,777)698 1,941 698 1,941 847 2,355 1,004 2,790 2,355 3,583 Existing: 4.12‐4;  Scenarios:  Updated in  Supplement 4.12‐4 to 4.12‐7 Parkland Needed [11]2014 Existing Conditions Scenario 1 Scenario 2Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5Scenario 6 February 2016  DEIR Page  (Scenarios 1‐4) February 2017  Supplement to the  Draft EIR  (Scenarios 5‐6)** Acres of Parkland Needed by Scenario (ac)   @  4 acres per 1,000 new residents 4,384.4 89.3 26.4 26.4 33.7 41.8 33.8 56.3 Updated in  Supplement 4.12‐20 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Impacts 2014 Existing Conditions Scenario 1 Scenario 2Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5Scenario 6 February 2016  DEIR Page  (Scenarios 1‐4) February 2017  Supplement to the  Draft EIR  (Scenarios 5‐6)** City GHG Emissions (MtCO2e/Year)519,517 520,184 419,914 420,046 416,058 424,733 419,533 428,669 421,842 431,749 404,111 421,952 Updated in  Supplement 4.6‐11, 4.6‐12 City & SOI GHG Emissions (MtCO2e/Year)600,207 601,783 494,458 494,636 485,707 485,133 489,074 488,841 491,095 491,737 463,299 481,379 Updated in  Supplement 4.6‐11, 4.6‐12 Utilities Impacts 2014 Existing Conditions  (Baseline)Scenario 1 Scenario 2Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5Scenario 6 February 2016  DEIR Page  (Scenarios 1‐4) February 2017  Supplement to the  Draft EIR  (Scenarios 5‐6)** City & SOI Water Demand ‐ Gallons Per Day  (GPD)4,230,635,205 4,485,942,577 4,485,531,107 4,485,877,531 4,486,224,321 4,485,593,230 4,486,005,796 4.14‐23 4.14‐3 City & SOI Increase in Solid Waste Generation  over 2014 Baseline (tons/yr)51,265 13,240 10,851 13,382 15,953 11,607 15,315 4.14‐73 4.14‐27 City & SOI Total Electricty Increase over 2014  Baseline (kWh)1,017,067,516 152,818,068 106,148,597 134,778,309 162,135,150 102,532,440 115,987,402 4.14‐96 4.14‐35 City & SOI Natural Gas Increase over 2014  Baseline (therms)31,729,420 4,493,949 3,419,165 4,286,982 5,135,532 3,544,370 4,470,891 4.14‐23 4.14‐36 NOTES *  ALL IMPACTS REPORTED ARE PRIOR TO ANY MITIGATION 01) 2014 in most cases.   02)  City Council would like to develop a scenario that improves the City’s ratio between jobs/employed residents.  This new scenario can also include additional housing proposed in the SOI by Stanford University 03)  2014 Housing Units (HU) ‐2010 Decennial Censsus baseline plus HU's built between 2010 ‐2014 based on building permit activity 3a.  Scenario 1 2030 HU forecast based on  Palo Alto long term average units produced per year and known pipeline projects. 04)  2014 HU for Sphere of Influence (SOI) ‐2010 Decennial Censsus baseline plus Stanford General Use Permit (GUP) Annual Report to Santa Clara County on Housing built for years 2010 ‐2014  4a.  Scenario 1 2030 HU forecast for SOI assumes full buildout of Stanford GUP by 2030. 05)  2014 Existing  jobs derived from ABAG Projections 2013  Jobs forecast interpolated from years 2010‐2015.  2030 Jo bs forecast for Scenarios 1 & 4 derived from ABAG Projections 2013 .  06)  2014 Employed Residents for City derived from US Census , ACS 3‐year estimates 2011‐2013 6a.  To determine the number of employed residents in the scenarios, PlaceWorks assumed that 48 percent of the 2030 (city Limit) population would be employed which is  the same percentage of employed residents to total  population as is found in the ABAG 2030 Projections. 07)   2014  Employed Residents for City & SOI derived from ABAG Projections 2013 interpolation between 2015‐2010 7a.   To determine the number of employed residents in the scenarios, Placeworks assumed that 45 percent of the 2030 (City Limit + SOI) population would be employed which is the same percentage of employed residents   to total   population as is found in the ABAG 2030 Projections. 08)  Only Scenarios 3 & 4 assume surpassing the 3.2 million Policy L‐8 limit.  “Monitored Areas” are identified on Map L‐6 and referenced in Policy L‐8.  There are also land uses within "Monitored Areas" that are exempt from the 3.2 million Policy L‐8 limits.   09)  Estimated Net new non‐residential square feet forecast for entire City. 9a.  Scenario 1 ‐Includes 1.7 million sq ft in "monitored areas" remaining in 3.2 million limit in Policy L‐8, 1.3 million sq ft of approved SMC expansion plus ~300k sq ft of non‐res devt in other "non‐monitored" areas. 9b.  Scenario 2 ‐Includes 1.7 million sq ft in "monitored areas" remaining in 3.2 million limit in Policy L‐8 & 1.3 million sq ft of approved SMC expansion.   9c.  Scenario 3 ‐Includes 1.7 million sq ft in "monitored areas" remaining in 3.2 million limit in Policy L‐8, 1.3 million sq ft of approved SMC expansion , plus ~200k sq ft of non‐res devt above 3.2 m limit in Policy L‐8 and ~300k of additional non‐res devt in other "non‐monitored" areas. Less job density type of non‐res devt.   9d.  Scenario 4 ‐Includes 1.7 million sq ft in "monitored areas" remaining in 3.2 million limit in Policy L‐8, 1.3 million sq ft of approved SMC expansion, plus ~700k  sq ft of non‐res devt above 3.2 m limit in Policy L‐8 and ~300k of additional non‐res devt in other "non‐monitored" areas . Less job density type of non‐res devt.   10)  Generattion rates are consistent with "moderate" generation rates used in 2014 PAUSD Enrollment Projections prepared by Decision Insite.  PAUSD uses "moderate" generation rates that are typical of students enrollmed from existing developments of similar product type.  This analysis also assumes that all new housing would be multi‐ family housing. 11)  Neighborhood and District Parks only.  Calculated @ 4 acres per 1,000 new residents.   **  The Supplemental Draft Environmental Impart Report (SDEIR) is scheduled for publication on February 10, 2017.  Some figures or data points  for Scenarios 1‐4 on the original EIR published on February 2016 may have been updated.  The page numbers referenced on the SDEIR may have changed prior to final publication .   March 2017 Page 1 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update Summary of the EIR Scenarios & the “Preferred Scenario” for Description in the Final EIR This document summarizes the planning scenarios included in the Draft Environmental Impact Report and the Supplement to the Draft EIR on the City’s Comprehensive Plan Update, and staff’s recommendations for a “preferred scenario” for description in the Final EIR. Staff’s recommendations are based on Council’s input on the Land Use & Community Design Element as well as other elements they have reviewed. Given that the Council has not completed their review, corrections and adjustments to the recommendations below are anticipated! Brief Description of the Six Scenarios 1. “Business As Usual” – the “business as usual” scenario shows the results if the City continued to operate under the existing Comprehensive Plan with no changes to goals, policies and programs. Any new housing built would be constructed under existing zoning and no innovations in housing or new approaches to address the high cost of housing would be explored. No new growth management measures are anticipated, and any transit or traffic improvements would come from the existing infrastructure plan for the City. This scenario uses a local forecast of housing growth based on the City’s past performance (a long term average of about 150-160 new dwelling units per year), and ABAG’s 2013 projection of job growth. 2. Scenario Two, or the “Growth Slowed” Scenario, would slow the pace of job growth when compared with Scenario One by moderating the pace of office/R&D development throughout the city. Scenario Two would also ensure that the modest amount of housing growth expected under Scenario One would be built-out as small units and other housing types appropriate for seniors and the Palo Alto workforce. Transportation investments in this scenario would include implementation of the County’s expressway plan. 3. Scenario Three, or the “Housing Tested I” Scenario, would implement a growth management regime similar to the interim annual limit on office/R&D adopted by the City Council in 2015 for the fastest changing areas of the City and would eliminate housing sites along San Antonio and South El Camino. In place of these housing sites, Scenario 3 would increase housing densities on other housing sites Downtown, near California Avenue, and in other locations in the City close to transit and services. Policies, regulations, and incentives would be designed to ensure smaller units for the working professional and senior populations of the City. Transportation investments would include grade separating the Caltrain crossings at Meadow and Charleston by placing the railroad tracks in a trench. March 2017 Page 2 4. Scenario Four, or the “Sustainability Tested I” Scenario, assumes the most growth in housing and employment, consistent with ABAG projections. Rather than moderating the pace of development, this scenario would seek to limit the impacts of development. Housing sites along San Antonio and South El Camino would be eliminated and replaced by both increased densities on other housing sites and by the addition of new sites along the El Camino Real frontage of the Stanford Research Park and the Stanford Shopping Center. Potential policies and regulations would be enacted to advance sustainability objectives, including free transit passes for residents in transit-served areas, achieving LEED platinum certification for new development, maximizing local solar energy production, foregoing new natural gas hookups, and utilizing drought- tolerant landscaping. Transportation investments would include grade separating the Caltrain crossings at Meadow and Charleston by placing the railroad tracks in a trench, and incorporating mix flow bus rapid transit on El Camino Real (with curbside stations and queue jumping for transit vehicles). 5. Scenario Five, or the “Sustainability Tested II” Scenario, would implement a growth management program to limit the pace of office/R&D development and convert some commercial development potential (Floor Area Ratio or FAR) to residential FAR in Downtown and the California Avenue area. Scenario 5 would eliminate housing sites along San Antonio and South El Camino and in place of these sites, would increase housing densities on sites Downtown and in the California Avenue area close to transit and services. Policies, regulations, and incentives would be designed to ensure smaller units for the working professional and senior populations of the City. Potential policies and regulations would be enacted to advance sustainability objectives, including free transit passes for residents in transit-served areas, achieving LEED platinum certification for new development, maximizing local solar energy production, foregoing new natural gas hookups, and utilizing drought-tolerant landscaping. Transportation investments would include grade separating the Caltrain crossings. 6. Scenario Six, or the “Housing Tested II” Scenario, would also implement a growth management program to limit the pace of office/R&D development and would convert some commercial development potential (Floor Area Ratio or FAR) to residential FAR in Downtown, the California Avenue area, and along the El Camino Real corridor. Scenario Six would not eliminate housing sites along San Antonio and South El Camino and would both increase housing densities in other areas of the City close to transit and services, and add new housing sites along the El Camino Real frontage of the Stanford Research Park and the Stanford Shopping Center. Additional housing sites in the Research Park could also be considered. Policies, regulations, and incentives would be designed to ensure smaller units for the working professional and senior populations of the City. Potential policies and regulations would be enacted to advance sustainability objectives, including free transit passes for residents in transit-served areas, achieving LEED platinum certification for new development, maximizing local solar energy production, foregoing new natural gas hookups, and utilizing drought-tolerant landscaping. Transportation investments would include grade separating the Caltrain crossings and March 2017 Page 3 incorporating mix flow bus rapid transit on El Camino Real (with curbside stations and queue jumping for transit vehicles). Under all scenarios, some changes to the City’s zoning ordinance are anticipated to implement the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan Update. Table 1, 2, and 3 describe the basic characteristics of the scenarios, including some of the principal policy changes that will influence the amount of growth that occurs, and explain how the preferred scenario would relate to the other scenarios based on the Council direction received to date. Table 1. Summary of EIR Scenarios: Population & Housing Scenario Net Change 2015-2030 (City of Palo Alto Only) Notes Population Housing (DU) 1. Business as Usual 6,600 2,720 Assumes no change in housing sites or policies (historic growth rate) 2. Slowing Growth 6,600 2,720 Assumes no change in site; adds policies to favor small units 3. Housing Tested I 8,435 3,545 Assumes elimination of San Antonio sites & increased densities downtown/Cal Ave 4. Sustainability Tested I 10,455 4,420 Same as Scenario 3 but also adds additional sites along El Camino 5. Sustainability Tested II 8435 3,546 Same as Scenario 3 6. Housing Tested II 13,737 6,000 Keeps sites on San Antonio, increases densities downtown/Cal Ave, adds sites along El Camino and considers sites elsewhere in the Research Park and near SUMC Draft Preferred Scenario 10,455- 13,737 4,420- 6,000 The Preferred Scenario would fall between Scenarios 4 and 6 because it assumes elimination of San Antonio sites & increased densities; adds policies to favor small units; adds sites along El Camino and considers new sites elsewhere in the Research Park and near SUMC Source: Palo Alto Department of Planning & Community Environment, March 2017 March 2017 Page 4 Table 2. Summary of EIR Scenarios: Non-Residential Square Footage & Jobs Scenario Net Change 2015-2030 (City of Palo Alto Only) Notes Non-Res Sq. Ft.1 Jobs 1. Business as Usual 3.3M 15,480 Assumes cap in Policy L-8 is not a constraint and job growth continues per ABAG Projections 2013 . 2. Slowing Growth 3.0M 9,850 Assumes cap in Policy L-8 is a constraint and the interim annual limit on office/R&D is extended citywide 3. Housing Tested I 3.5M 12,755 Assumes cap in Policy L-8 is increased and the interim annual limit on office/R&D continues to apply to a subset of the City 4. Sustainability Tested I 4.0M 15,480 Assumes cap in Policy L-8 is eliminated and there is no annual limit on office/R&D 5. Sustainability Tested II 2.4M 8,868 Same as Scenario 2 with more constraints on job growth 6. Housing Tested II 2.4M 8,868 Same as Scenario 2 with more constraints on job growth Draft Preferred Scenario 3M 9,850-12,755 The Preferred Scenario would perpetuate and update the cap in Policy L-8 and would therefore result in square footage similar to Scenario 2. Job growth would be between Scenario 2 and 3 because the annual limit on office/R&D would be citywide minus the Research Park Notes: (1) The square footage shown for all Scenarios includes 1.3M square feet already approved at SUMC. Source: Palo Alto Department of Planning & Community Environment, March 2017 Table 3. Summary of EIR Scenarios: Jobs/Housing Balance Scenario Jobs/Housing Balance in 20301 1. Business as Usual Jobs/Employed Residents Ratio of 3.20 2. Slowing Growth Jobs/Employed Residents Ratio of 3.04 3. Housing Tested I Jobs/Employed Residents Ratio of 3.04 4. Sustainability Tested I Jobs/Employed Residents Ratio of 3.04 5. Sustainability Tested II Jobs/Employed Residents Ratio of 2.932 6. Housing Tested II Jobs/Employed Residents Ratio of 2.71 Draft Preferred Scenario Jobs/Employed Residents Ratio of 2.76 to 2.962 Notes: (1) The ratio of jobs to housing is expressed as the ratio of jobs to employed residents. The proportion of employed residents in 2030 is estimated at approximately 48% of total population based on ABAG Projections 2013. The ratio of jobs to employed residents in this column assumes a 2014 base of 65,685 people and 95,460 jobs. (2) Based on the population and jobs numbers identified in Tables 1 and 2. Source: Palo Alto Department of Planning & Community Environment, March 2017 March 2017 Page 5 The tables that follow describe other key policy and implementation-related characteristics of the six EIR scenarios and identify those characteristics staff believes the Council supports for inclusion in the “preferred scenario” based on Council direction on January 30, 2017 and earlier discussions with the Council, which are identified with an arrow in the right margin beside Tables 4, 5, and 6 below. Table 4. Summary of Housing-Related Policies & Zoning Changesa Summary of Housing Policies & Zoning Changes Scenarios 1 2 3 4 5 6 Maintain All Existing Housing Sites √ √ √ Eliminate Housing Sites on San Antonio and South El Camino √ √ √ Increase residential densities on sites in Downtown, the California Ave Area and along El Camino Real √ √ √ √ Add new housing sites to the El Camino frontage of the Research Park and the Shopping Center √ √ Consider additional sites near SUMC or in western portion of the Research Park √ Convert some commercial development potential (FAR) to residential FAR √ √ √ √ √ Reduce constraints on the addition of Accessory Dwelling Units √ √ √ √ √ Adopt policies to avoid the loss of existing housing and displacement √ √ √ √ √ Adopt regulations and potential incentives to create smaller units √ √ √ √ √ (a)This list is not a complete listing of possible policy and zoning changes, but includes major initiatives required to reach the housing projections of each scenario. There is some overlap between these and the zoning changes summarized later. Attributes of the Preferred Scenario are identified with arrows. Source: Palo Alto Department of Planning & Community Environment, March 2017 Table 5. Zoning Code Amendments for the EIR Scenarios Proposed Zoning Code Amendmentsa Scenarios 1 2 3 4 5a 6a Planned Community (PC) zoning district provisions would be reformed. √ √ √ √ √ √ Strategies to preserve retail would be enhanced for the city’s neighborhoods. √ √ √ √ √ √ Incentives would be considered for small lot consolidation along El Camino Real. √ √ √ √ √ √ A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) would be required for new office and R&D uses in order to regulate employment densities. √ √ √ An alternate mechanism would be explored for moderating employment densities, either through regulation or revenue collection. √ √ March 2017 Page 6 Proposed Zoning Code Amendmentsa Scenarios 1 2 3 4 5a 6a Allowable commercial densities would be reduced and replaced with residential densities. √ √ √ √ √ Reduce the allowable FAR in the CC-2 district from 2.0 to 1.5. √ Modest exceptions to the City’s 50-foot height limit would be permitted for projects with ground floor retail and residences above. √ √ √ Allowable residential densities would be increased downtown and near California Avenue, possibly by adding the PTODb zoning designation to downtown and streamlining the permitting process to allow for residential development in the PTOD zone with modified regulations. Another possibility would be to eliminate maximum dwelling unit densities and use minimum densities and FAR to encourage more, smaller units. √ √ √ √ Allowable residential densities would be increased on the El Camino Corridor, possibly by adding the PTODb zoning designation to pedestrian “nodes” along the corridor with modified regulations to encourage use of the designation. Another possibility would be to eliminate maximum dwelling unit densities and use minimum densities and FAR to encourage more, smaller units. √ √ Mitigation and sustainability measures would be adopted to minimize impacts of new market rate housing and new non-residential development by requiring mitigation, monitoring, and enforcement. √ √ Performance based zoning strategies would be adopted to minimize impacts of new market rate housing and new non-residential development. √ Coordinated area plans (or “precise plans”) would become a routine planning tool √ √ (a)The suggested zoning changes listed here do not include all of the sustainability measures or mitigation measures which could be applied to the scenarios. Attributes of the Preferred Scenario are identified with arrows. (b) The Pedestrian and Transit-Oriented Development (PTOD) combining zoning district is intended to allow higher density residential dwellings on commercial, industrial, and multi-family parcels within a walkable distance of Caltrain stations, while protecting low density residential parcels and parcels with historical resources. Source: Palo Alto Department of Planning & Community Environment, March 2017 March 2017 Page 7 Table 6. Infrastructure Investments for the EIR Scenarios Summary of Infrastructure Investmentsa Scenarios 1 2 3 4 5 6 New Public Safety Building √ √ √ √ √ √ Bicycle Bridge over US 101 √ √ √ √ √ √ Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan Implementation Projects √ √ √ √ √ √ Byxbee Park √ √ √ √ √ √ California Avenue Parking Garage √ √ √ √ √ √ Downtown Parking Garage √ √ √ √ √ √ Fire Stations √ √ √ √ √ √ Small improvements within existing rights-of-way to provide for traffic calming or relatively small increases in roadway capacity by adding turn lanes or making other intersection adjustments √ √ √ √ √ √ El Camino Real intersection and pedestrian safety/streetscape improvements √ √ √ √ √ √ Downtown mobility and safety improvements √ √ √ √ √ √ Middlefield Road corridor improvements √ √ √ √ √ √ Grade separations Option 1: trench below Charleston and Meadow; other improvements along the corridor. √ √ Grade separation Option 2: grade separate all grade crossings; other improvements along the corridor √ √ Geng Road extension to Laura Lane √ County Expressway Plan Implementation Option 1 (additional lane on Page Mill Road is not HOV) √ County Expressway Plan Implementation Option 2 (additional lane on Page Mill Road is for HOV) √ Bus Rapid Transit on El Camino Real in mixed-flow lanes with the addition of queue jumping and curbside stations. √ √ (a)This list is not a complete listing of the City’s infrastructure plan, but includes those investments highlighted in EIR Scenarios (b) The Preferred Scenario would include all of the listed investments with the HOV option on Page Mill Road and grade separations at all Caltrain crossings. Source: Palo Alto Department of Planning & Community Environment, March 2017 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 1 of 48 TUESDAY, February 21, 2017 Rinconada Library – Embarcadero Room 1213 Newell Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 5:30 PM TO 8:30 PM Call to Order: 5:30 P.M. 1 Co-Chair Garber: Alright folks. Let’s get started. Can I ask Staff to call roll? 2 Present: Garber, Filppu, Glanckopf, Hetterly, Hitchings, Keller, Kleinhaus, Levy, McDougall, 3 McNair, Moran, Nadim, Packer, Peschcke-Koedt, Summa, Uhrbrock, van Riesen 4 5 Absent: Sung, Titus, Uang, Nadim 6 7 Oral Communication: 8 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. We have three cards for oral communications. Peter Taskovich, if I am 9 pronouncing your name correctly, you’ll have three minutes. 10 Peter Taskovich: Hello, my name is Peter Taskovich. I’m a lifelong resident of Palo Alto and I just want to 11 talk briefly about the City’s Council decision (inaudible) aside from all programs from the new 12 Comprehensive Plan. This is simply put, a slap in the face of all of you on the Citizen’s Advisory 13 Community, who worked so diligently for many, many months debating, developing and approving 14 these programs. A Comprehensive Plan with only goals and policies but no programs is a toothless 15 document and simply portrays its name. A Comprehensive Plan without any stated programs to 16 implement at stated goals and policies can hardly be called Comprehensive at all. Sadly, it’s a bad joke 17 that unfortunately, a slim majority on our City Council appears to want to (inaudible) on the citizens of 18 Palo Alto. I, therefore, will support all efforts by the members of the Citizen Advisory Committee to 19 reinstate all the programs your committee has already approved back into the new Comprehensive Plan. 20 The programs along with the goals and policies are an essential part of a meaningful and well-crafted 21 Comprehensive Plan and they must be stored back into the Comprehensive Plan so we all can have an 22 updated Comprehensive Plan that all of us can be proud of. Thank you. 23 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Next is Rita Vrhel. Vrhel, Rita. 24 Rita Vrhel: Good evening. I won’t put it as eloquently as the first speaker, that was lovely. My feelings 25 are the same. I was there at the meeting and I just couldn’t believe how 7, 8- years of work including a 26 year and a half or so of your work, was just gutted. Some people have said in a fashioned maneuver that 27 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 2 of 48 was predetermined. I wouldn’t go that far because I don’t know but I know at the City Council retreat a 1 few days before the City Council meeting on 1/30, there was a discussion of transparency and the very 2 low and discouraging number of citizens who believe in the City Council. For the last 2-years, anyone 3 who complained to me about the City Council, I would say no, actually they will listen to you. You have 4 to show up. You have to tell them your concerns but they will listen. You know, I ‘m not sure that I can 5 say that anymore and in fact, I haven’t. I know that this Committee or I feel this Committee is deeply 6 divided on the issue of whether the 1/30 episode was appropriate and what the long term meaning of it 7 is. I’ve taken the time to listen to the 1/30 transcript over and over and over again and I have handed 8 out something to Dan, which I think you have, and its part of the transcript verbatim because the 1/30 9 transcript from the City will not be ready for probably another month or so. It’s my opinion that items 10 under H, which where the Land Use Element content based on Council Member’s Comments on 11 November 28th and it has all the letters under the land use; I didn’t give you that part. There was a vote 12 to discuss but then that vote was taken and transformed into a yes or no vote on the item. I have sent 13 this transcript to the City Attorney, to all Members of the City Council, to the City Manager, and to the 14 City Clerk and they have not gotten back to me yet but I, like the first speaker, would encourage anyone 15 on the CAC who believes that their efforts were short changed or anybody in the Community who is 16 listening who feels that a Comprehensive Plan has to have something in it beside the promise of items 17 coming up for later discussion. If items are going to be coming up for later discussion, I would encourage 18 everybody to press the City Council as to when they are going to be coming up and also, ask for a full 19 meeting that doesn’t start at 6 o’clock at night and go on – I mean, I left at 11:30 and I think they hadn’t 20 even started on transportation. Thank you for taking my comments seriously. 21 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you, Rita. Sheri Furman. 22 Sheri Furman: Good evening everyone on this rainy night. I’m Sheri Furman and a Co-Chair of Palo Alto 23 Neighborhoods and I’m speaking on behalf of our executive Committee as empowered by the 24 organization itself. I first want to say that we support the issues raised in recent letters we’ve received 25 from several of your fellow CAC Members and I really hope I am preaching to the choir here. First the 26 definition of Comprehensive: Complete, including all or nearly all elements or aspects of something. 27 Removing programs surely weakens the idea of a Comprehensive Plan. Decoupling programs from their 28 related policy and placing them outside the body of the element weakens the policies whose programs 29 are supposed to support. Policies indicate what is to be achieved and programs provide how. Without 30 the specifics of programs to inform decisions and measure impacts, policies are simply wish lists that can 31 be interpreted and implemented in any number of ways depending on who’s doing the interpretation. 32 Both residents and those doing business in the City will have no clear idea of what to expect. Finally, the 33 process. 5 people should not have the power to undo years of work with no discussion nor input from 34 you, the Staff and the public. The idea that programs will only move forward if a Council Member or 35 Staff suggests these should, is absurd. Staff is far too busy with the current issues (inaudible) and 36 program initiation should not be subject to the political make-up of the Council. The January 30th action 37 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 3 of 48 by the bare majority of the Council and the way it was done belies a commitment to an inclusive and 1 open City government. We urge you to do two things. First, discuss the pros and cons of removing 2 programs from the Land Use and Transportation Elements and placing them in an appendix or separate 3 document. Council and the public need to understand whether and why such a move is or is not a good 4 idea. Second, petition the Council to agendize and restore the programs to the Comp. Plan. Thank you. 5 Co-Chair Garber: Thanks, Sheri. Betty Jo Chang to be followed by Annette Ross. That’s our last speaker 6 unless somebody else would like to speak and if so, please hand in a card. 7 Betty Jo Chang: My name is Betty Jo. I fully support the open letter to the Council from CAC Members 8 requesting that the Council reconsider its high-handed and foolhardy action. Stripped implementation 9 programs from the Comp. Plan with neither consideration nor debate. A plan without programs can’t 10 even construct the paper that it’s written on, much less provide the guidance needed for our City to 11 navigate the challenges we face. The Council wholesaled its positions of these programs. Rejects out of 12 hand without public debate. Years of work from dedicated City Staff and citizen volunteers to develop a 13 proactive plan to address the issues of greatest importance to our citizens. The manner in which this 14 decision was made also dismisses the value of collaborative and consensus-driven government. This is a 15 democracy and we ought to stand up for it. I fear both Council and community will live to rue the day 16 when such cavalier disrespect for both democracy and its citizens, drives way those volunteers who do 17 so much to make this a community in which we wish to live. I know how much effort has gone into this 18 CAC work. I thank you all for your service and I value the quality of the work product you’ve produced. I 19 want and expect the Council to respect it as well. Thank you. 20 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Annette Ross and that’s the last card I have. 21 Annette Ross: Good evening. My name is Annette Ross and I’m here just as myself. I’m not representing 22 any particular group of people. My remarks concern what Council did on the Land Use Element at its 23 January 30th meeting. Even if you like the outcome, it was arrived at wrongly and that is critical. This CAC 24 was not formed as some sort of random good idea. Rather it’s formulation response precisely to the 25 public participation statutory requirement that is set forth in the State’s General Plan Guidelines. You all 26 did your job. By removing the programs and disallowing discussion on the action, Council not only undid 27 your work, it violated several provisions of the government code that apply to the General Plan. A 28 document that is regarded as a Constitution for land use development and as former Mayor Pat Burt 29 pointed out, what Council did was a tremendous departure from this City’s established approach to 30 thing – to such things, excuse me. It appears that our Mayor and those who supported him in this are 31 banking on residents not paying sustained attention to what goes on at City Hall. It also appears that 32 there is an absolute disregard for the opinions of those not aligned with the majority on Council. Rather 33 than engage and discussion for the purpose of identifying common ground and reaching a workable 34 compromise in areas where there are differences, as you all did, the Council majority made the 35 unprecedented move of unilaterally eliminating the very programs that provide substance and guidance 36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 4 of 48 to the City’s Comp. Plan. Council Member Wolbach encouraged this, saying it’s simples the document. 1 This is despite the fact that the law says that the plan must address building an [inaudible] and 2 population densities. Think about this, some documents work best when the details are clearly defined. 3 That’s what programs do for General Plans. Said differently, it is the programs that make such plans 4 comprehensive. Removing the programs from the Land Use Element is both wrong and short sited. 5 Council Members come and go. This Committee will disband. Plans endure, at least they should. That is 6 how we achieve consistency and smart planning. Without the programs, this City will develop according 7 to the whims of Staff and whoever holds the majority on City Council. This time around, you may be ok 8 with that. Next time, maybe not. We need to look no further than Washington for merit examples of 9 what happens when tides shift. I urge you to come together with a uniform voice and asked City Council 10 to reconsider their actions of January 30th. Thank you. 11 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. That’s the last card we have. Before we get started, I would like to 12 acknowledge a couple of folks. Doria Summa, who has joined us, who wasn’t here last time think but 13 congratulations on joining the PTC and now being our ex-officio member and representative of that. 14 Susan [Monk], I understand that you have been recently elected or appointed to the PTC, welcome and 15 former Mayor Pat Burt, thank you for joining us. 16 Staff Comments: 17 18 Co-Chair Garber: Staff, you have come comments to start us off? 19 Hillary Gitelman: I do. Thank you. First, for the Committee, I’m sure you noticed that Joanna and Elaine 20 are not here this evening. They are both on well-deserved vacations so Elena, Greg, Ashley and I are 21 here to fill in for them as best we can. I also just had one housekeeping item before we launch into the 22 discussion – the next discussion item on the Comp. Plan programs and organization and that related to 23 Brown Act Compliance. If you remember at the beginning of this process, we talked about the Brown 24 Act and we adopted some guild lines. One of the core principles of the Brown Act is that we must hold 25 meetings in public with proper notice and when members of the Committee post comments online or 26 contribute letters to the editor and all that, we start to run the risk of a non-noticed meeting. If – let me 27 just spell out how that would happen. It would happen if more than a quorum of this group were to 28 participate in the same forum and exchange ideas through that forum. It only becomes a problem when 29 it’s more than a quorum but it’s the first person who starts it and then the second person and third 30 person so everybody kind of has to be careful not to let this happen. It’s happened a few times because 31 passions are running high, I understand that but I’m asking for your forbearance for the remainder of 32 the CAC process. If you have important things to say, send them to Staff. We’ll distribute them in the 33 packet. We’ll talk about them here at the meeting but if you could please reframe from the media 34 conversation, which could turn into a noticed meeting. That’s the only housekeeping. Should I launch 35 into the first item? 36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 5 of 48 Co-Chair Keller: Just a clarifying question? If one person posts something and a majority of the 1 Committee read it, is that a violation? 2 Hillary Gitelman: That is not a violation. The violation happens when more than a quorum are 3 participating but we as a group agreed that we wouldn’t do this because it’s not fair for the first person 4 to get to use the public forum and then the 9th person doesn’t get to. I’m just reminding everybody of 5 the rules that we agreed on in the very beginning. 6 Co-Chair Keller: Ok because I thought that – I thought it one person post and even if everybody reads it, 7 that that’s a – it’s called a serial meeting. Anyway. 8 Hillary Gitelman: Should we move on? 9 Agenda Items: 10 1. Discussion: January 31, 2017 City Council Meeting 11 12 Co-Chair Garber: Yes, let’s go to agenda item number 1. Discussion of the January 31st – 30th actually, 13 2017 City Council meeting and Hillary I believe have come comments to open up this item. 14 Hillary Gitelman: I do, thank you. I hope everybody had a chance to read our short memo. It’s actually -- 15 the Staff memo actually touches on two items that we wanted the Committee to be aware of. One is the 16 availability of a supplement of the Draft EIR. Those of you that have been paying attention know we 17 published a Draft EIR that analyzed forced planning scenarios. The Council asked us to analysis an 18 additional two so that supplement is now available for those who wish to dig in deep on the details. 19 We’re in the public comment period so anybody who wants to can either submit oral comments at one 20 of the public hearing that’s coming up or written comments by the close of the comment period and 21 there’s a notice that I provided in your packet with the dates and deadlines for that. I have a quick 22 question? 23 Shani Kleinhaus: (Inaudible) 24 Hillary Gitelman: Yeah, it makes it clear in the notice that I provided. We’re excepting comments on the 25 supplement to the Draft and the original Draft. Anything you have, either come to one of the public 26 hearings or submit those comments in writing. 27 Don McDougall: (Inaudible) 28 Hillary Gitelman: Public comments on a public – that – no. You’ll submit those to Elaina and we will 29 collate them and it will be fine. Ok. The item de jure, getting beyond that issue was the Council’s 30 direction to Staff on January 30th and included in the packet a copy of the action minutes so you can kind 31 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 6 of 48 of read through the motion, amendment, vote, all of that stuff and in the memo, we also tried to 1 summarize in bullet points what the Council’s direction was. I’d be happy to answer any questions about 2 the specifics there but the direction to us that has gotten the most attention is the one about the 3 organization of the document and the suggestion and direction by a majority of the Council to place 4 programs in a separate document or an ‘appendix’ to the plan unless they are ‘legally required’. It was 5 clear to me that we would need – we as Staff would need to follow up with the Council to understand 6 what it is exactly they were asking after we had an opportunity to assess that questions of what is legally 7 required. We have been doing some thinking about this. We, of course, have been reading your 8 thoughts and getting input from you and from others on this question. I liked – I don’t know – I always 9 try and find the middle path so there’s a spectrum of possibilities here. One end of the spectrum is pull 10 all those puppies out of the plan, put them in a separate document, put it on the shelf and never look at 11 it again. The other end of the spectrum is leaving it exactly the way it is, with all the programs built into 12 the plan, exactly as the CAC has delivered to the Council. I think there’s a middle approach and we will 13 be exploring this approach and providing a recommendation to the Council on March 20th. That’s the 14 next time we have an opportunity to agendize with the Council a discussion of this issue. All of their 15 agendas are jammed packed so that’s the soonest we can get back to them. It’s the same day we’re 16 going to have the public hearing on the EIR that I just spoke about. It’s going to be a Comp. Plan 17 appaloosa of an evening. I’ll tell you just a little bit more about how we’re exploring this middle path and 18 I hope that we will enjoy your support by the time we define this. Basically, our thought is we can 19 achieve the objectives of the majority of the Council to be just a little – play with the organization of the 20 document and be a little explicit that we can’t possibly accomplish all of these programs but put them in 21 a format like the Implementation Plan in the current Comp. Plan. If you have seen the Implementation 22 Plan in the current Comp. Plan, it’s terrific. We would put the programs in that kind of format. Maintain 23 the linkage to the policies so they would maintain their numbers and their linkage and they would have 24 a relative priority in that setting. Now, we are going to need some help from the subcommittee of the 25 CAC in crafting just what that would look at and I understand that the Chairs have formed the 26 membership of that subcommittee and we have a meeting scheduled with them next week to start that 27 work. Our thought is that we will discuss with the subcommittee, then with the Council and then with 28 this full group at your next meeting on the 21st. This kind of middle approach where we have an 29 Implementation Plan in the Comprehensive Plan update. Includes all the policies that you’ve help to 30 develop with the changes that the Council has wanted. If you have been paying attention, they’ve added 31 some, they’ve subtracted some and that I’m expecting that your subcommittee is also going to want to 32 help us add and subtract a little because there’s a lot of redundancy in there. Once you see them all in 33 one place, you’ll see that we can do a little trimming. In that context, we would try and prioritize. Just a 34 little piece of background, this was going to go out in the report to the subcommittee later this week but 35 we looked at all the programs from the last Comp. Plan, there were 266 or something like that, and I say 36 that we can say definitively that we have accomplished about 15% of them. In the Comp. Plan update 37 that we’ve been working on. There are slightly more than 400 that we’ve proposed and I think it’s 38 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 7 of 48 unrealistic to think that we’re going to do more than 15% of those so we’re going to ask the 1 subcommittee and ultimately this group to help us develop a prioritize recommendation for the Council. 2 Then they can take our recommendation or not but we will at least discharge our responsibility, I think, 3 in suggesting to them what we think the relative priority of these things are and then to the extent that 4 all of you can help us also get rid of the redundancies, that would be great. I think it would be an easier 5 sell to the Council if we didn’t have 400+ of these programs; If we could get it down in number a little 6 bit. That’s a little bit about what I think we’re going to be doing with the subcommittee of the CAC and 7 where I hope we’re going to end up with this process. I think our goal as Staff and I think the Mayor 8 articulated this in the State of the City Address is to end up at the end of the day with a Comp. Plan that 9 very much perpetuates the values in the existing Comp. Plan and that is completely compliant with State 10 Law and with our historic practice. The programs have a role in that and I think – I hope the Staff 11 recommendation as we develop it will help achieve that and that the Council will accept our 12 recommendation. Always with some changes but in the majority, I hope they will accept it. I’d be happy 13 to answer questions. I know this group has been longing for an opportunity to discuss this issue and 14 potentially whether you want to take a position or just continue to come to the Council meetings to 15 offer your individual support or opposing. 16 Co-Chair Garber: Let’s entertain just clarify questions here because we’ll get an opportunity to all 17 express ourselves. Stephen and then Bonnie. 18 Stephen Levy: First of all –ok. One, will Staff be able to give the subcommittee and then the Council and 19 the Committee’s some idea of the relative workload involved in these items? I mean, priorities are 20 what’s important to the community but if we pick four items at that each takes you a year? 21 Hillary Gitelman: Very good question. What we’re shooting towards is a matrix or list of all the 22 programs with relative priority and relative level of effort. 23 Stephen Levy: Good. 24 Hillary Gitelman: We’re not going to get into detail but we’re going to say, one dollar sign, two-dollar 25 sign or three dollar signs. Just to try and at least, get out there what we think the relative level of effort 26 is. 27 Stephen Levy: The second question is will City Council weigh in on this question, I don’t know much 28 about, is what is required by law? I heard that raised. I don’t quite know what that means. 29 Hillary Gitelman: I think as Staff, we feel like that’s one of the pieces of information we’ll be providing 30 to the Council when we make a recommendation. 31 Stephen Levy: Not the subcommittee necessarily? Not enough time. 32 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 8 of 48 Hillary Gitelman: We can talk about that in the subcommittee as well. Happy to do that. I would just 1 say, several – the government code requires implementation measures, terminology is important, in a 2 couple of the elements and certain things. One of the speakers referred to land use densities and 3 intensities so there are certain requirements in the government code but the government code also says 4 you can organize your General Plan any way you want to so you can put it into different chapters. 5 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Bonnie and then Arthur and then Annette. Lisa, you also had a question? 6 Bonnie Packer: I watched the video that you gave us. The link to that portion of the City Council meeting 7 and at the end, the City Manager said something about how in essences, this is an interactive, ongoing 8 process. This is not a done deal. They were just looking at a draft and the whole Comprehensive Plan will 9 come back to City Council. How are we taking that information into context? My second question is do 10 you – does anybody have any feeling whether this would apply to the other element, the Community 11 Services Element? 12 Hillary Gitelman: Thank you. I mean, I think these are – the last question about whether this applies to 13 all the elements is something we’ll get clarification on, on the 20th. Hopefully, as I say, we’ll be able to 14 steer towards a middle path and whatever we decide will be for all the elements. We won’t treat one 15 different than the others. We’ll see. In terms of the City Council, they’re going to have additional 16 opportunities to weigh on this stuff and I thought the comment by the City Manager was right on. At this 17 point, what we’re trying to do is give the Council the first look at all of your work products so the CAC 18 had worked hard on these things. We want the Council to take the first look. Prepare some revision 19 before it gets transmitted to the PTC for their work and their recommendation. Then what the PTC does, 20 goes back to the Council and it’s not until that point that they finally have to adopt the actual final 21 language. There’s still a long way to go. 22 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Just before we go on, I will acknowledge, Judy [Klineburge] having joined 23 us; the previous Mayor. Annette and then Lisa and then Jen. 24 Annette Glanckopf: Maybe you just clarified it but I understand what you’ve said about this concept of 25 meeting them halfway and putting together an appendix with programs, priorities and relative effort but 26 I’m still very concerned about how the programs actually get implemented because specifically, and I 27 also transcribed the entire Section H, when – you just repeated almost exactly what Mayor Scharff said. 28 He asked for that but he said – so I’m concerned about how stuff moves forward just because it’s an 29 Implementation Plan and we have all the stuff listed because there’s still not linking back. He said, the 30 way I understand this would work is that there would be an implementation section where all the 31 programs would be but they wouldn’t actually mean that we would do them. Staff would have to come 32 forward and say, now we’re going to implement programs such and such or we should implement a 33 program such and such or Council Members could write a colleague’s memo or whatever, at which point 34 there would the implementation of that that would move forward. Staff wouldn’t have to spend the 35 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 9 of 48 time on it and move forward on if there was no push from either a Council Member or from Council or 1 Staff driven. There would be no move to forward that. Again, I’m really concerned. We can do all this 2 work, we can prioritize if it were – the programs were in place, that would be part of the vision that we 3 could all refer to. Now, they’re just going to be stuck away and even though there’ll be a list of priorities 4 etc. I still am very unclear – to me, this is really the nut, besides the process, on actually how things will 5 be brought forward. Is it going to be cherry picking where some Council Members says gee, I really like 6 these three priorities or it is going to be Staff that has to take the time and effort to say these are our 7 top priorities? Maybe you could clarify that? 8 Hillary Gitelman: Yeah, really good question. First, let me clarify, I think that we’re developing a 9 recommendation in which the programs would not be in an appendix. I think that is a word that is kind 10 of loaded and diminishes the importance of the programs that you’ve been working on. I think our 11 recommendation is going to try and find a way to perpetuate the Implementation Plan that’s in the 12 current Comp. Plan. I mean that’s what it is called. It’s called the Implementation Plan and it’s a list of 13 programs -- and our thought is that the introductory texted of which the subcommittee and then this 14 CAC and then the Council will get to weigh in on will explain how the programs will be implemented. I 15 think it is sobering that only 15% of the programs in the last Comp. Plan where actually implemented 16 and so I think we have an opportunity to frame the table and the list of programs with the introductory 17 text to the Implementation Plan that makes it clear. Some of these programs are on-going and some of 18 these programs are already resourced. Some of these programs are not resourced but they’re not costly 19 and don’t require a lot of work. Some of these programs are costly and will require a lot of work and will 20 have to be budgeted in an annual budget cycle etc. We’re all going to work on this explanation together 21 and I hope at the end of the day, it will be clear to folks that we’ve developed a suite of programs, we’ve 22 tried to prioritize them as best we can, we’ve acknowledged that priorities change over time but we’ve 23 given the community and the Council a clear view of how we think this Comp. Plan and its policies and 24 goals should be implemented over the life of the plan. Hope that made it a little clearer. 25 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Lisa and then Jen. 26 Lisa Peschcke-Koedt: Actually, two questions, just clarifying stuff. The Implementation Plan, I’ve 27 forgotten, it is an official required part of a Comp. Plan or it’s discretionary whether it’s there or not? 28 That’s question one, sorry. The law doesn’t call out the need for an Implementation Plan but it does 29 require implementation measures in some of the elements and this how we’ve chosen to implement 30 that locally. 31 Lisa Peschcke-Koedt: Ok. This is more – not to get into the debate of it but more – is there – did Council 32 specifically say or was there some downside to having said the top priority programs in the official 33 element and in the Implementation Plan? I think what you’re saying is based on what Council is saying 34 that it would only be in the Implementation Plan? 35 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 10 of 48 Hillary Gitelman: That could be something that they discuss on the 20th. I don’t know where the 1 majority will be on the 20th. I think it could either way. 2 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Jen and then Arthur and that’s the last – oh, I’ve got Alex, Shani, and 3 Hamilton. 4 Jennifer Hetterly: I just have a couple questions. First is that we have several programs that are EIR 5 mitigation measures and I wonder if those are ultimately, considered requirements – State requirement 6 even though – obviously the EIR has not yet been adopted? 7 Hillary Gitelman: Our position would be yes. The Council asked us to maintain existing legal 8 requirements and it we’ve identified something as a mitigation measure, it would fall into that category. 9 Jennifer Hetterly: The next question is as far as putting them all into an implementation chapter, how is 10 that any different from what the existing Comp. Plan does because the current implementation chapter 11 does attempt to prioritize among the programs. It's – what it sounds like to me is by removing them 12 from the elements, putting them into an Implementation Plan, which is not an adopted plan element. 13 That the only – we’re not doing anything but removing the programs and adding a ramble saying we 14 really hope you’re going to look harder at these than you might have. 15 Hillary Gitelman: I guess what I’m suggesting that the Implementation Plan would be part of the 16 adopted Comprehensive Plan. It would be part in parcel of the plan like it is today. I don’t think anyone 17 would look at the Comp. Plan today and say oh, there’s that implementation chapter in the back of the 18 book; it doesn’t count. I think we consider that part of the Comprehensive Plan. 19 Jennifer Hetterly: Just to may clarify then because I want to make sure I understand what the situation 20 is. In the current plan, the programs exist within the adopted plan elements; they are enumerated there. 21 They also exist in the implementation chapter which describes how those programs will be implemented 22 over time. It seems to me if they are removed from the adopted plan elements, that the Implementation 23 Plan then no longer – then the Comp. Plan no longer provides authorization for Staff to pursue those 24 programs without further Council action. Despite the existence of an Implementation Plan that says if 25 you want to do this, these are what we think might be more important than others. 26 Hillary Gitelman: I guess I’m suggesting that there’s another way to do that. That if you have an 27 Implementation Plan where all of the programs are located with the numeric attributes that related 28 them to the policies. All you’ve done is reorganized the document but you still have an Implementation 29 Plan that’s part of the Comprehensive Plan like it is today. 30 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Alex then Shani. Hamilton and then Arthur. 31 Alex Van Riesen: (Inaudible) till I read this so I’m – this is all pretty new. I just want to see if I get this and 32 what I’m ultimately – maybe you can’t say this – what drove the decision to do it this way? Was is surely 33 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 11 of 48 the amount of programs that were suggested? Was it – I guess I’m wondering why instead of a 1 comment to the CAC to go back and say why don’t you prioritize the programs? Why this way of voting 2 on the City Council and really -- even giving the effect and obvious response of the city, why not just give 3 it back to us and say do this verses have a vote which elicits this sense of corruption in the government 4 about not – about violating the public process. Do you know why it went down this way? 5 Hillary Gitelman: I really can’t speak to the conduct of the meeting or – it was a noticed discussion of 6 the Land Use and Transportation Elements and the votes that happened where in that context. I also 7 can’t predict what’s going to happen on March 20th but I do know that we’re going to agendize another 8 discussion of this issue, which is garnered a lot of intense and emotional input… 9 Alex Van Riesen: Yeah. 10 Hillary Gitelman: …and I hope at that time we’ll get clarity and my prediction or my hope is that we’ll 11 end up in the middle somewhere. In a place where people hate what they did on the 30th and people 12 who love what they did on the 30th can realize hey, there’s some common ground here and there’s a 13 way to get to the finish line with a plan that respects the current plans value and structure. 14 Co-Chair Garber: Shani and Hamilton. Arthur. 15 Shani Kleinhaus: I do not think we need the middle ground. I think there’s nothing that enforces or that 16 the City has to implement every one of the programs. It’s their choice which ones they want to 17 implement and they can always prioritize. The flexibility that they get by us not prioritizing things is a lot 18 wider than if we did. If we now go and prioritize programs and in 3-years there’s the (inaudible) and a lot 19 of vacancies and no problems to find housing, everything changes. We should not put priority in a 20 General Plan. We should be providing a big palette of programs the City can then prioritize when the 21 time comes as needed. If you look at what other Cities do for prioritization. The City of San Jose, their 22 prioritization is on the 28th. Other Cities have had it recently. They have different ways to do it. In San 23 Jose, the City Council and Staff can come up with memos. These are things that are important to us… 24 Co-Chair Garber: Shani? 25 Shani Kleinhaus: ...and that’s how they should do it. 26 Co-Chair Garber: Forgive me. You’re making comments which you are welcome to do in a moment but 27 it you have a clarifying question? 28 Shani Kleinhaus: I guess my question is why and I don’t have an answer to that and I want to – again, 29 like the letter we sent, register that this is a wrong way to do it. I wrote so many people to come here 30 and speak whether it’s the disabled community, the people who spoke for trees, all sorts of things. This 31 is just not right. 32 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 12 of 48 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Hamilton and then Arthur and Annette also wanted a -- one more. 1 Hamilton Hitchings: I have clarifying a question. You may have essentially, in assertion, that being in the 2 Implementation Plan was equivalent legally to being in the Land Use or Transportation Element but my 3 understanding and I’m not an expert, is that it is not the same legally. That if it’s in the plan then 4 ordinances and zoning and other things the City does has to be consistent with it but if it’s in the 5 Implementation Plan, it does not have to be. Could you speak a little bit about the subtle differences 6 between being in the elements versus being in an Implementation Plan? Thank you. 7 Hillary Gitelman: Well, this is one of the issues that I think we are going to have to carefully investigate 8 and present to the Council on the 20th. First of all, I should say that we’ve talked -- we’ve to look at what 9 the other jurisdictions do and many other jurisdictions put the implementation measures in another 10 chapter at the end of the book in a separate plan. It’s been our practice here in Palo Alto to include 11 those in – under the policies that they are intended to implement and I think that’s a perfectly fine 12 approach. My personal feeling is that it’s – when we evaluate programs for consistency with the plan, 13 we’re really looking at the goals and policies of the plan and whether an implementation action like a 14 new development proposal or a new ordinance would further the goals and policies of the 15 Comprehensive Plan or whether they conflict with the goals and policies of the plan. The 16 implementation measures are another way to implement the goals and policies of the plan. Normally we 17 implement the Comprehensive plan through our day to day decision making on ordinances, on capital 18 improvements, on development projects and we also implement the Comprehensive Plan through the 19 specific measures that are identified in the plan, which again, call for ordinances and actions on the part 20 of the City. That’s kind of a convoluted answer but I hope I got to your questions. 21 Co-Chair Garber: Yeah, we’ll do Arthur first and then we’ll go around. Can we pick up your question as 22 part of the surround? 23 Annette Glanckopf: (Inaudible) 24 Co-Chair Garber: Alright. 25 Bonnie Packer: (Inaudible) 26 Co-Chair Keller: I think that it would be good too – we’ve had a lot…(crosstalk) 27 Co-Chair Garber: Let's – yeah. 28 Co-Chair Keller: … of questions. Why don’t we do that when we go around the room. You can ask 29 questions while going around the room too. I think that we’ve just – this is getting a little bit out of hand 30 with lots of questions. We expected a few of them, not half the room making comments – questions and 31 some comments. Let me follow-up on Hamilton’s question. I had a chat with Mayor Scharff, who agreed 32 that having the programs not be in the elements but have them be in the Implementation Plan did not 33 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 13 of 48 have the same legal weight as having them in the element. Having them in an Implementation Plan has 1 less legal weight than having them in the elements. In particular, the fact that the EIR requires them to 2 be in the elements indicated that there is a distinction. The second thing is that when I was on the 3 Planning and Transportation Commission, I saw development proposals that said that policies – goals, 4 policies and programs were in support of those development proposals. I am wondering whether if the 5 programs are not in the element but instead in the Implementation Plan, will developers who say that – 6 not say that these Comp. Plan things are in favor of the development? Will they no longer list programs 7 and now only list policies – goals and policies and those handful of programs that are retained for legal 8 reasons – I think that that’s a useful distinction that I think would help people. 9 Hilary Gitelman: Thank you for that question again, Arthur. I think I’m saying to Hamilton and I’ll say to 10 you, you have my commitment as Staff, we’re going to delve into this issue and provide from our legal 11 team and from our professional planning perspective an answer to that very question and when we go 12 back to Council on the 20th. 13 Co-Chair Garber: Ok. Let’s move on. A couple of things before we go around the table. I had sent out an 14 email from Arthur and myself on the appointments to the implementation subcommittee. Let me just 15 read them off here. Alex, Annette, Bonnie, Don, Elaine, Hamilton, Shani and Stephen. The ex officio 16 appointments are Doria and Whitney. Actually, Hillary, could I have you very briefly describe the rules 17 and responsibilities of the mission of that subcommittee for the benefit of some who have asked? 18 Hillary Gitelman: Sure. Again, we’re hoping to get a Staff report out to the Committee – the 19 subcommittee this week that includes a listing of all of the programs that the CAC has recommended in 20 each of the elements you’ve looked at so far. There are 400+ … 21 Male: Oh, my gosh. 22 Hillary Gitelman: …of these. We will include in them our first take – very preliminary take on relative 23 priority and relative level of effort. We’re hoping that the subcommittee will review this list with us. 24 Look for redundancies and help us scale down the list to the extent that’s feasible and help us with the 25 priorities. I’m confident that the initial take we have on it will change some and think the Committee is 26 going to be very useful in helping us do that. I hope you – those of you who are on the subcommittee 27 will either bring with you or have access to one of the later versions of the elements that we looked at 28 because we’re using the same number system. We relating the programs on the list back to the policies 29 that wherein the elements. We’ll send you copies or links? 30 Elena Lee: We’ll provide links to the most recent elements and we’ll also have hard copies of that – one 31 hard copy of each element at the meeting. 32 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 14 of 48 Hillary Gitelman: Just to refresh what we want this subcommittee to help with – just as we did in prior 1 elements is to develop a set of recommendations, changes, that we would then bring to this full group 2 for discussion at your next monthly meeting. 3 Co-Chair Garber: We’ll go around the table. Alex, just to give you a head up. I’m going to go first and 4 then you’re next. 5 Alex Van Riesen: Awesome. 6 Co-Chair Garber: At the Council’s meeting three Monday’s ago, I share the Council person Phil initial 7 reaction to Wolbach’s motion to remove the programs of the Land Use Element from the Comp. Plan. 8 While he shared the spirit of Wolbach’s motion to make the Comp. Plan more clear and concise. He felt 9 that it was “a massive change to make without a lot more discussion.” To be more direct, I wasn’t 10 happy. I felt that the Council’s action threatened to under mind the hard work that we’ve done here at 11 the CAC. I think that all of us to a greater or lesser extent believe that the Comp. Plan can stand to be 12 condensed, redundancies removed, made easier to read and speak with more clear and concise voice. I 13 recognize that the CAC is advisory. The Council can take or leave our work as they wish but Arthur and I 14 have worked our butts off to get the CAC to work together towards a consensus where we can and 15 provide clear alternatives where we cannot. In fact, everyone here has done that. It has been hard, 16 difficult work that at times has been very trying. Who here hasn’t had their sense decorum challenged? 17 Who hasn’t wanted to leave the Committee? Who has wished that they didn’t have to deal with 18 someone else’s differing view? Who amongst us hasn’t complained that the CAC simple doesn’t work or 19 that it can’t work? We’ve managed to move through most of these feelings to a greater degree that I 20 think many of us have expected. We have been successful moving the Committee’s work forward. I was 21 pissed that the Council was ignoring our real accomplishment. That we were finding a way to get 22 something done together as a community. I will not support an action to (inaudible) the Council for their 23 action. We rightfully need to air our thoughts and criticisms so that they are captured in the verbatim 24 minutes for the Council and the public to read. Then, assuming that the underlining issue that the 25 Council’s attempting to grabble with 3-weeks ago, was how to make the Comp. Plan more clear and 26 concise. We need to focus productively on the ideas that the CAC can recommend that Council can take 27 to accomplish this. In addition to our own comments, Arthur will share some thoughts that he and I have 28 discussed along these lines. If we need to, we will present the Council alternatives for them to consider. 29 You’ll note that I have handed out at your places 5 question that may help us structure our conversation 30 this evening. The questions are regarding programs location, the CAC’s involvement, the continuity with 31 other elements, prioritizing programs in the work plan and the CAC’s commitment to it. It’s now 6:20. 32 I’m going to try and focus on seeing if we can get through this by 7:30 but let me ask a question of 33 everyone. Are there large issues that anyone wants to bring up relative to the Business Element? I’m 34 hearing that there is a lot of support for it and most people seem to be on the same page so I don’t think 35 we have a long discussion there. If we need some more time, I will take some out – sometimes out of 36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 15 of 48 that. Otherwise, we’ll try and end by 7:30 or shortly thereafter on this item. Alright. Let’s move forward. 1 Alex. 2 Alex Van Riesen: First, can I get a copy of those 5 questions? I don’t – I did not get one of those. Thank 3 you. As I stated earlier, this was relatively new information to me. I will leave it with, I think Dan, what 4 you read was well said and captured how I feel. I think I would also, had it not been inappropriate, 5 would have added my name to the letter that went to the Council. I guess I would just summarize but – 6 that at the best it seems like this was an unwise move. At worst, it seems somewhat questionable in 7 terms of motives and intentions but I don’t know enough and I’d like to hear more. I’m disappointed in 8 their decision. 9 Co-Chair Garber: Whitney. 10 Don McDougall: You can say anything you like… 11 Whitney McNair: Sorry, I was a little confused. 12 Don McDougall: …you don’t have to answer Dan’s damn questions. 13 Whitney McNair: We’re just commenting about that piece of… 14 Co-Chair Garber: Yeah, if you have comments regarding the Council’s action on the 30th. If you have 15 none, you can pass. 16 Whitney McNair: No, I don’t have any comments. 17 Co-Chair Garber: Don. 18 Don McDougall: First off I want to say, these are incredibly, interesting and insightful questions. Thanks, 19 Dan. I want to thank Hillary for her introduction and perseverance in answering all of the questions. I do 20 want to say, Hillary, I disagree with the concept that we need to get a half way -- in between 21 compromise. I, like Dan, believe that it – working hard to come up with something that is better than 22 what we have or good or perfect or whatever, that’s ok with me. Working to improve it is ok with me 23 but compromising half way in between, I hope we don’t start with that. Second thing I want to say is 24 that I’m really proud to be asked by Jennifer to co-author this At Place document you have. I think it was 25 a good spirit that we did this together. The third thing I want to do is echo what Dan said. I am very 26 proud – more proud than co-authoring with Jennifer. I am more proud that as part of this Committee, I 27 think we have encouraged and listened to input from the community, both through people coming and 28 participating here and through online. I think we’ve done a good job of listening to Staff and their 29 Council. I think we’ve done a particularly good job of listening to one another and I think now, we do 30 have something that is a balance. It’s not determined to go one way or the other; whatever issue it is. 31 I’m proud of that conclusion but I would say that the process – I’m concerned that the process we used 32 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 16 of 48 was to look at each element, to work with what Council gave us at the vision for that element and what 1 Council gave us as a first draft, I would say, of the goals throughout that element. Then we were 2 challenged to having those goals to come up with the policies and programs that fall into that space. We 3 could have approached this totally different and I suspect that as we compare our results to other 4 communities, that might be part of the difference that people come up with. Let’s agree on what all of 5 the elements are and then let’s agree with the vision for all those elements. Then let’s agree with all of 6 the goals through every element. Then let’s come up with all of the policies and then go back and come 7 up with all of the programs. If you were doing a Business Plan in a startup or whatever, that’s probably 8 how you would do it. You would put up policies on the wall. You’d get all them right and then you would 9 figure out, what programs do I need to do to implement that? We didn’t do it that way. I suspect that if 10 we did it that way, we would come up with a very, very different output and that’s one of the reasons 11 I’m reluctant to just simply say, let’s take the programs out and put them else ware because I really 12 believe that we created those programs in the context of the plan we were given. The fourth or the fifth 13 thing however – whatever – however we’re counting is I’m really concerned that any of the CAC work is 14 considered transparently and separating the policies out does not constitute transparency or separating 15 the programs out from the policies does not constitute transparency. I would like to finish a couple more 16 points. One is that has been viewed as a small minority of the Council or whatever and like Dan, I’m not 17 particularly interested in admonishing particular members of the Council or whatever. I do remember – 18 you probably remember me coming back to this body a year ago, saying, we just went to Council. I sat 19 on the – I sat up there with Staff and had Council Members say, you need to create a document that is 20 wishy-washy so that we have more flexibility. That was not one of the current majority. The purpose of 21 what they did last – on the 30th or 31st was again, to give them more flexibility. My biggest concern, both 22 last year and this year is that flexibility is another word for ignore and that’s why I am reluctant to 23 encourage that they get separated out. 24 Co-Chair Garber: Don? 25 Don McDougall: I don’t see it as partisan, I see it as a dangerous way to set up the Comp. Plan for not 26 just last year’s Council or this year’s Council but 5-years and 10-years from now where everything gets 27 separated and you give them, even more, flexibility. 28 Co-Chair Garber: Don? Don? Forgive me. 29 Don McDougall: I’ll stop. 30 Co-Chair Garber: Ok. Thank you. Whitney, you had a brief comment? 31 Whitney McNair: I do, I’m sorry. Thank you for indulging me. I did get a chance to look at the questions 32 for the CAC to consider and I do support the things that Dan, you said. I don’t feel comfortable sending a 33 letter admonishing the Council. It was maybe something that was done. It wasn’t very eloquent or – the 34 way it was done but I don’t know if I believe by stripping out the implementation measures and – or the 35 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 17 of 48 programs and making an Implementation Plan that diminishes them in some way. It’s like an EIR. You 1 guys have seen those, EIRs? At the end of an EIR, you have a mitigation monitoring and reporting 2 program. You have a collection of all of the programs and all the requirements. It says when you’re 3 going to get them done, who’s responsible for them and it gives you an easy checklist that you carry 4 with you. That you follow all of those things to make sure that they’re implemented. It’s easier to 5 prioritize them. It’s easier to see them all in one place. You can – if you look at some different Cities, 6 they prioritize them over a time period or by funding mechanisms but there’s a way that you can kind of 7 sort them and see them together versus just within a document. I’m not sure I would actually ask that 8 you have the City Attorney review to see the way that it’s done. I don’t know if I support or agree with 9 the comment that by having it in an Implementation Plan, it doesn’t carry the same legal weight. It’s still 10 is adopted by ordinance or by resolution so I think you could make sure that implementation of it does 11 carry the same weight as the Comp. Plan. I do think we should continue as a CAC. It’s been challenging 12 at times but the group has worked well together. I think the subcommittees have been very effective at 13 really diving into an issue. We should continue to look at those programs and develop them as we see fit 14 through the document and still carry those forwards in whatever it is the CAC takes forward to Council. 15 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. I want to make clear that my comments were no way criticizing the letters 16 that have been written or the letters to the editor or anything of that sort. All I was talking about was 17 this body formally taking a position of admonishing the Council. Julia. 18 Julia Moran: I agree that 400+ programs are too many but like Dan, I think that there are ways that we 19 can trim it down and make it more concise and make it more usable and this was disappointing. I also, I 20 mean Dan touched upon, I think we are a huge Committees that probably too big to be as functional as 21 it could be but we also represent such a huge breath of the community and I think that the work that 22 we’ve done here -- there are times that we’ve been incredible divisive but we’ve also come together a 23 lot and really compromised and worked, especially, on those subcommittees. I think that’s valuable and 24 it’s created a document that’s not perfect to any of us but really has a place in the City. 25 Co-Chair Garber: Shani. 26 Shani Kleinhaus: I want to the City of San Jose to ask for a certain project to move forward. It wasn’t 27 high priority for them, it was for me. Their City manager brought out their Comprehensive Plan or 28 General Plan and said this is a book of conflicts. That’s what I have to deal with. Everything is in there 29 and I have to pick and choose and your project is not something I feel is a high priority. We went to City 30 Council and I’m not going to go through that but there is a different process. The Comprehensive Plan is 31 not a Comprehensive Plan outline. It is a Comprehensive Plan, everything is in there. The City’s priorities 32 are given to City Council. How do other Cities do this? Some of them have a priority session where 33 different City Council Members, as well as Staff, come up with – these are our priorities for the next 6-34 months or year and then they vote and then they choose the ones they want to move forward with. 35 Other Cities do – Sunnyvale, they’ve had a study issue system, where anyone can propose a study issue. 36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 18 of 48 It can be somebody from the public or somebody on City Council or Staff and then they go through 1 these in a certain manner and they have to get at least 3 votes or 2 votes to get through this first step 2 and then they go on. Just to take all those programs out, to me, is quite offensive; I’m offended. I 3 reached out to communities – the people who came from the disabled community are people who I 4 notified and I told them, this is another opportunity. You might want to come again and speak to us. A 5 lot of what they spoke about when into – a lot of the programs are not going to be a high priority for 6 Staff. They probably are a high priority for the community but they are not really big things that take a 7 huge amount of work and a lot of resources; they are really important to keep there. I don’t know that 8 we can’t have in the implementation chapter that something puts all these programs together but I’m 9 really opposed to removing them from where they are. At least those that had consensus and did not 10 have a huge opposition here. The ones that are controversial, those really should be prioritized 11 potentially, City Council should pay attention. All of the rest of them really should stay where they are. 12 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Doria. 13 Doria Summa: I want to start out by thanking everyone who’s already spoken about this very elegantly 14 and eloquently. I have to say, I was there that night as where some of my colleagues. Co-Chair Dan and I 15 were there till the end and it was shocking to me. I’ve been to a lot of City Council meetings and I’ve 16 never quite seen anything happen that way. I realize that we’re a recommending body and the Council 17 can do whatever they want with us but I frankly, was a little bit ashamed that they would so cavalierly 18 through away the work of so many people including Staff, the Co-Chairs and this body with no 19 discussion; no warning. I surely would – if I had known anything like that was going to happen, I surely 20 would have taken an opportunity to speak, whereas I didn’t think I had to speak that evening because I 21 thought it was time for other people in the community who have not been able to have as much 22 influence over the process as I did, to speak and there were already many speakers. I would also like to 23 say that I was not able – I did not think since I’m back here as the representative from PTC, I did not 24 think it would be appropriate for me to sign onto the letter that 6-people sent in but I was very proud of 25 them. I’m proud to know people like that, that aren’t afraid to speak up and write so plainly and well 26 about things. I really appreciate Alex’s simple question. Why did the Council do this? Sure, maybe it was 27 for flexibility but I don’t think flexibility should be built into the Comp. Plan. I think the Comp. Plan 28 should serve Council’s that have majorities or minorities that have different priorities. The Comp. Plan 29 should serve those of us in the community that is more pro-growth, faster growth, and those of us who 30 believe in slower growth. I don’t see how tearing the programs out of the Land Use Element makes for 31 an elegant document across the board unless we take the programs out from all the elements and I 32 don’t think anyone’s suggesting that. I also believe that the process of us developing this would have 33 been totally different if we had taken the programs out. I think it would have been a tighter and cleaner 34 process. I think we would have written policies that had – that were more precise, relevant and well 35 written and I think it’s a very disappointing turn of events. I don’t know what to do to remedy it except 36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 19 of 48 to ask the larger community, all of Palo Alto, to share in thanking the Staff and the Co-Chairs and my 1 colleagues for the work we did and to ask the Council to better respect us and the process. Thank you. 2 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Len. 3 Len Filppu: Yes Hillary, I have a question and was told that we could – it’s ok. I was patient. Is the 4 compromise idea that you’re talking about, has that been floated by the Council at all? Is that… 5 Hillary Gitelman: You know, I just – I didn’t want to suggest that something is fully baked. What I 6 wanted to impart to this group is our thought process as we’re trying to put together a report – a Staff 7 report to the Council for March 20th. We are investigating how other jurisdictions do it. Putting some 8 thought into what’s happened in this community in the past. In other words, the structure of the current 9 Comp. Plan and how that’s worked and what some various approaches might be. I think there are a 10 number of ways that this could have finally be resolved and ultimately, it’s going to be up to the Council. 11 What we have so far is this slim majority telling us they want us to put the programs in a separate 12 chapter. I’m trying to suggest, I guess, that there’s a way to do that and not lose the value of the work 13 that’s happened so far. I don’t know whether the Council will reconsider their position. I think some of 14 the comments that you all are making are not just passionate but insightful. We probably would have 15 approached this task a little differently if we’d know that the structure was going to be different. We’ll 16 see on March 20th what the Council says and what the Staff comes up with in terms of a final 17 recommendation, whether it’s this kind of compromise or one extreme or the other, will be available to 18 everyone 11 days before the meeting. 19 Len Filppu: Thank you for that and thank you also for making this item number 1 on the agenda; for 20 changing that, I greatly appreciate that. It’s the elephant in the room that we’re very glad to be able to 21 talk about. I think the Council, you know, they’re a political body and I think they made a political 22 decision. A slim sliver of a majority voted to remove the programs and this is after years of work by 23 other Councils, citizens, CAC members, Staff and as others have mentioned, input from citizens, input 24 from the community of Palo Alto. Often when I was speaking for programs and – that helped to define 25 the meaning and the intent of the policies, that was based on input from the soccer mom or the --26 whomever, out in the community who doesn’t have time to watch all this but does wish to have a voice. 27 I would urge the CAC, all of us here, to push back on Council. I don’t – I think they threw the baby out 28 with the bathwater. I don’t believe that they expected the kind of impact and result and reaction that 29 their getting. Not just from some of us in the CAC but also from the community and the speakers who 30 were here tonight. I believe that as a political body they will pay attention and I’d rather have them pay 31 attention to the importance of the entire community participating in input on this plan and have them 32 reconsider their position. I would urge us to – as they’ve thrown the baby out with the bathwater, I think 33 we should try to save the baby. Thanks. 34 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Jen. 35 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 20 of 48 Jennifer Hetterly: I don’t support a middle ground approach. I think -- I don’t have confidence that this 1 new Implementation Plan would carry the same weight as what we currently have in the existing Comp. 2 Plan in terms of the direction the programs offer to Staff and to the community. I think the context of 3 putting the programs and the policies together – if you take them apart, you lose the context and that 4 makes it more difficult not only for Staff and for Council to figure out what’s implementing what -- what 5 measure is related to what policy? It makes it impossible for the community to get a holistic view of 6 what exactly the City is trying to do. I also think that the policies without the program, like others, have 7 said before, was – we built those together as representatives of a balance and I think separating them 8 without going back through and reconsidering every single set of policies and programs, it—there’s just 9 – it doesn’t represent the consensus. I think it’s a false representation of what the CAC has put forth. I 10 don’t think that we need to admonish Council though I would love to personally, but that doesn’t mean 11 that we can’t ask them to reconsider what was an imprudent move. I think that – I think and hope that 12 the CAC would have a unified voice in requesting that, rather than supporting some middle ground that 13 doesn’t meet our needs. 14 Co-Chair Garber: Thanks. Annette. 15 Annette Glanckopf: Thanks. I – my comments are going to echo a lot of what everyone had said. I really 16 think its 100% acceptable for us to go back and say, you know, this whole thing only took ten minutes of 17 your time, it came in the middle of the night, there was no one there, it wasn’t noticed. I think you need 18 to reconsider after some thought and here is our number of letters etc. that really flush out the 19 situation. I actually, also think that we all need to call our Council Members and tell them what we think 20 so we need to be proactive. They still haven’t said anything about the programs in the other elements so 21 now it’s both transportation and land use. This really talks about transparency in government, which 22 really is a concern. This major decision happening in ten minutes. There were a lot of questions. People 23 said – even Council Member Phil says that gosh, I’ve got a couple minutes to think about it? I’m very 24 concerned that even though this might be the perfect solution, how the whole public, and I think other 25 people talked about this, are going to reflect on it. Reflect on our time and reflect on the work that 26 we’ve done. In the process, I think people have mentioned this but again, this should have been done – 27 if we were going to do it this way and I understand that other Cities have done it this way, we should 28 have been given this direction on day one because if you look at the policies, they’re – we really have – 29 we would have flushed them out like what was described earlier but the way we’ve got it now is some of 30 the policies are really programs, some of the programs are really policies and they are all sort of 31 intertwined. I think it would have been dramatically different, as pointed out if we had been given a 32 different direction initially. The other problem with putting it into an appendix, which we’re going to do 33 anyway, which I don’t support. I mean, I support the appendix the way Hillary described it but I think 34 you need to have the programs under the policies. Even Council Member Phil says that I would like to 35 see the programs under the policies. How am I going to compare this program by this aspect of the 36 policies? The policies are really the meat, they are the specifics that talk about how it – the programs are 37 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 21 of 48 the specifics that talk about how the policy is going to be implanted. A Julia Child cookbook doesn’t 1 work here so the question that I was going to ask is how are you going to relate all this if you don’t have 2 it right there and that doesn’t make any sense. I’m also against this idea that oh, let’s do it – that came 3 out -- oh, it was done at the CCAP, let’s do it here. I don’t think there was any comparison between the 4 CCAP and the Comp. Plan. This is our document – legal document. This is our vision of the future and 5 again, the programs do flush out our vision. Even Council Member Holman said when someone comes – 6 Hillary, you talked about this early. When someone comes to the Planning Commission or Council, they 7 refer to this program and this policy. I think it’s just totally diluted if you hide the programs off 8 somewhere which – and you don’t tie them all together, which is what I’m thinking. Again, I’m running 9 out of time. I’m not so concerned about doing every single program. That’s ok but again, there is vision 10 so you can have a vision but you don’t have to fulfill it. I end up with the recommendation that we 11 respectfully ask them because there wasn’t enough public input because it wasn’t noticed etc., for them 12 to rethink this and have a more robust discussion on where we should go from here. 13 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Ellen. 14 Ellen Uhrbrock: I’m really in favor of splitting out the programs into a separate list and having them very 15 well cross referenced to the policies because they support them and they give each other meaning. 16 Actually, I think this is a move which gives the Staff considerable power because what you do is move 17 the programs off into a separate treasure chest, which they can go back to and look and see what fits 18 and what we do next. I think it could be advantageous for the Staff. I think that it will, in fact, make it 19 easier to read the plan for the citizens -- for us because you read back and forth. What I do each time is I 20 first study the vision and then I study the goals and I look at the programs, in order to see how they 21 support the goals. I think that’s not a usual way to examine a business problem, which this is. We don’t 22 want to throw out the baby with the bath water. We want to save the baby no matter how informed it 23 may be. It’s taken a lot of thought and time and you treasure this and you have it in your supply kit that 24 you can then go ahead and give good direction and good plans for the Council. I think that – I’ve spent 25 most of my time on this Committee, even before it was a Committee, working hard in order to get the 26 voice of the seniors heard by the City Council and to also help them know how you can share your 27 opinions and be heard so they’re writing letters and all the things – maybe they can’t come here for one 28 reason or the other. I think that the improvement of the – I will look back as my greatest 29 accomplishment and contribution to this group. I am in favor. I can see why this happened and at the 30 end of the meeting, the agenda didn’t allow enough time in order to really discuss the programs at all 31 and actually, they moved right along. I was listening to it late at night and it was a way of moving 32 forward. No, you don’t reprimand them for it. You say gosh, you know, it’s true. You couldn’t really think 33 about that. Let’s do it and let’s see what’s best. My own recommendation split them off as an 34 organization problem and see how it will work – an operation problem. 35 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Bonnie. 36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 22 of 48 Bonnie Packer: This is a difficult issue. If what the City Council did was actually throw away the 1 programs as some here have said, then I would be vehemently opposed. They didn’t throw the 2 programs away so I think that’s a miss characterization and its one to get – one could easily be 3 emotional about. What they did do is recommend a separation and it’s a separation that most of us are 4 concerned with and what that separation of the programs from the policies means. I agree with what 5 others have said that if we had known this from the get-go, everything would have been written very 6 differently. The policies might have reflected – would have said, this should be our policy to be – for 7 example, this and then had the programs under, we would have written it differently. When you 8 separate the programs out from the policies, you lose a lot and I see that’s a problem. We also don’t 9 know, until we get a legal opinion about this, what weight the programs have if they are located 10 someplace else. I don’t think they would lose weight but in the way, people respond to documents if 11 could happen. I think – when I – I was about to agree with whatever – either thing in the letter but then I 12 went and listened again – well, it was really the first time I had listened to the YouTube transcript and I 13 don’t think that the City Council meant to throw away our work. They said that several times. They 14 actually used the word – somebody used the words, this is not a slap in the face of the CAC. I don’t think 15 that was their intent but I also think that they did not understand the consequences or the unintended 16 consequences of the separation and that’s what I think needs to be reconsidered. Some policies have 17 certain kinds of programs that you could take away and it wouldn’t hurt and other policies have 18 programs that – it’s very complicated and so do you separate, what you don’t, could create so much 19 work for the Implementation Committee that it could slow down the whole Comp. Plan process; that is 20 may not be worth it. I would agree that we respectfully ask them to reconsider and that we should also 21 recognize, I think, that they really didn’t mean to throw it away. I think they respect our work and I think 22 we should acknowledge that and feel grateful – I don’t know if grateful is the right word. Just except 23 that they liked us. That’s -- what I’d like to know is what the impact – I mean, they have to understand 24 the impact of the location of the programs. Oh, did the – my time is up? My time is up? 25 Co-Chair Garber: Please, complete your thought. 26 Bonnie Packer: I was just going to say, when I was on the Planning Commission, I remember that there’s 27 an exercise that we have to go through to see whether the Comp. Plan – the implementation process is 28 going. We do that annually; do you still do that on the Planning Commission? Do an analysis and the 29 15% of the program from the existing Comp. Plan is kind of – turns you into a cynic. Maybe the result of 30 all this discussion is that we urge and keep on urging the City Council Members to direct Staff to give 31 them tools so that these things can be implemented. Look at all the programs that say, change the 32 zoning code to do X, Y and Z. Go and do that. That doesn’t cost anything. It’s just a few more hearings 33 and you have a zoning code change, I mean, you don’t have to build anything. Why can’t we do those 34 things? Remember when we did minimum densities in the House Element? That’s been sitting there for 35 3-years, nobody has done anything, right? To change the zoning code. That’s where – that’s it. 36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 23 of 48 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Hamilton. 1 Hamilton Hitchings: What this Committee has accomplished is truly impressive. We’ve managed to 2 come to a consensus on all the policies and programs in every element except the land use. Even in the 3 Land Use Element, we worked together to queue up options for the City Council to vote on. This 4 remarkable achievement meant that we had crafted a Comprehensive Plan that truly represented our 5 City and community. Many of these programs took significant discussion to thoughtfully craft. When I 6 look at the work of the Transportation Element, Environmental, Community Services and Public Safety, I 7 see a brighter future because of the programs in those elements. By removing the programs from the 8 Comprehensive Plan, the City Council has discarded much of the community consensus. Community 9 consensus is important. Not including the programs in the Land Use and Transportation Element, 10 weakens their weight and loses context. One of the biggest concerns I had with that City Council 11 meeting on 1/30 is that removing all the programs was not publicly noticed and that was a dramatic 12 change. As a fundamental shortcoming in transparency and open government. It’s one thing to publicly 13 notice it and then remove it, it’s another not too. Some of the justifications that were given where that 14 the old Comprehensive Plan had conflicting programs yet not a single conflicting program was cited in 15 the current one and of course if they had, we would have eagerly worked to remedy that as Staff has 16 been very diligent with this plan. The second was flexibility but I believe this makes the program less 17 nimble. I know a lot about management. The biggest problem with micromanagement is the lack of 18 bandwidth resulting in items not getting done and when they do, not being properly thought out at the 19 level they deserve. The City Council should be working at a higher level on the big issues like moving the 20 ball on transportation and housing, not on these individual programs. City Council’s come and go. Do we 21 want to divide, hostile town for the next 15-years or do we want to – or do folks have the foresight to 22 pursue community consensus based approach that will form a much stronger, longer lasting and a more 23 effective foundation for the City. When I think about the programs in our Comprehensive Plan, I think 24 about things like the Fry’s Coordinated Area Plan, which is a program. The – reducing and measuring 25 single occupancy vehicles – let me just give you an example of a specific program. Private – Walk and 26 Roll have been tremendously successful and there is a program in there to do it for private schools. That 27 will never see the light of day and get time on the City Council agenda but it’s a great program that City 28 Staff can easily implement if it was in the Comp. Plan. There are numerous programs concerning public 29 safety, environment, community services and specifically to help the child, elderly and the disabled, that 30 will be lost as a result of this. This is not about admonishing the City Council. It’s about adopting 31 community consensus for the future of this City. Thank you. 32 Co-Chair Garber: Thanks, Hamilton. Stephen. 33 Stephen Levy: Thanks, Ellen, for your work for seniors. What I hear is a lot of distressed of an 34 ambiguous Council statement that I happen to, with Bonnie, trust that they meant what they said that 35 the programs were not discarded. I think that lack of trust is not helpful to a civil discussion going ahead. 36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 24 of 48 I think that what Hillary proposed is my version of what reconsideration means. Reconsideration doesn’t 1 mean putting all 400 programs back in the Comp. Plan, Land Use Element willy-nilly. Reconsideration 2 means -- I think, what the Council meant, was time for the community to come in and give feedback on 3 the priority question here. For Staff to give feedback on implementation; time of Staff. I am struck that 4 only 15% of the program were ever implemented. That suggests to me that our subcommittee and our 5 Committee and the Council work with Staff to give Council on recommendations on what priorities are, 6 what timeframe is reasonable for people to work on. I think we are doing with the implementation 7 subcommittee exactly what reconsideration means. We’ll give them either a set of consensus 8 recommendations or a set of options like we did with the policies and life will go forward. I don’t think 9 admonishing anybody -- I don’t think this sense of outrage which was never there when the last Council 10 passed vote after vote that was 5-4, when the last Council routinely dismissed the recommendations of 11 the Planning and Transportation Commission and admonished them. I think we can cool that all down. 12 Council’s come and go. The Council that gave us direction was unseated in a sense. If the new Council 13 wanted to give us direction when we wanted to work for another year, that would be this sitting 14 Council’s direction, not the last Council’s direction. I think we have to muddle through and try and get 15 through this with some civility as best I can. I hope the Implementation Committee finds a middle 16 ground because we are a divided group. We are a divided community if we’re not going to continue to 17 have 5-4 and letters of people being appalled. We need to find some middle ground to identify the 18 programs that are a priority. Get Staff and Council working on them. I don’t whether they’re in the 19 element or in an Implementation Plan. I’m not a lawyer but I’d like the implementation subcommittee to 20 have the scope to weigh in on these issues. 21 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you, Stephen and Lisa, just before you go and if I can ask Hillary to help me out 22 here. Unfortunately, I’m going to need that light. There we go, thank you. I was just checking back on 23 the draft action minutes just so that we’re not going around and around on this topic. I believe that the 24 last action that the Council did and I’m going to read it here from the motion on this top is Council 25 Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to direct Staff to remove from the final 26 draft of the Comprehensive Plan update all programs in the Land Use Element not required by State law. 27 To be taken up at future dates a policy discussion and use the implementation section of the plan to 28 indicate the relative cost and priority of each program. Am I understanding that they were taking it out 29 of the element and then putting it into the – they were not – ultimately, they didn’t take it out of the 30 Comp. Plan but they putting them just in the Implementation Plan? 31 Hillary Gitelman: I think that’s one reading of it and I think on March 20th we’ll confirm whether that is 32 the will of the majority of the Council. 33 Co-Chair Garber: Ok. Lisa, thank you. 34 Lisa Peschcke-Koedt: I have very much similar views I think to what has been shared, a couple of 35 differences but I want to share my views and then a recommendation also of what we would do going 36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 25 of 48 back to Council to see if we agree on it. I don’t think it would necessarily be unanimous but maybe close 1 and apologize in advance, I might just go slightly over but I’ll try not to. First of all, kind of like Don was 2 saying, I’ve also been an exc. In tech. companies for decades now and we always do what we call VSEM, 3 which is vision, strategy, execution and metrics. You set your long-term visions and your goal is kind of 4 the big picture that should last a long time. Strategy is usually a more mid-term, it could be 5 or 10-years 5 whatever but that kind of goes I think to the goals and to some extent our priorities and then the 6 execution isn’t just what you’re going to do today and in the next year. It really is the big buckets of stuff 7 we’re going to go which I’ve always thought as what we were doing in the programs and they care out 8 that vision and strategy. Then when you’ve got that, you also need your metrics to see if you’re on track 9 and what matters and what you’re going to measure but you normal then, also have your 1-2-year 10 priority list. The stuff you’re going to do first. Most critical including with resources and such. You can’t 11 do everything at once, what are we going to do there? I’ve always thought the Comp. Plan was 12 something very similar to that and it worries me a lot if we take the programs, which I think are kind of 13 our execution and even a little bit of our strategy, out of the element. Legally or not, I have my own 14 opinion but I think it doesn’t have the same weight to only be in the Implementation Plan. My personal 15 view is I think we should have the most important, maybe more long range programs in the element, 16 including the land use -- any element but including the land use and then the stuff that we think is most 17 important to do first would be in the Implementation Plan and clearly there would be duplicates. The 18 Implementation Plan, what are you going to do now kind of thing? I think taking them out and I 19 apologize but I don’t think that middle ground of only being in the implementation – again, if where my 20 discussion, I don’t think it carries the same weight and there where various comments about it gets it 21 more – it’s not a comprehensive and I also don’t think it’s coordinated very well that way. That’s my 22 personal view. As far as the Council and I – it’s hard because I didn’t go that meeting and I’ve certainly 23 been at meetings where it’s late at night and someone give you a mountain of work to do and you just 24 kind of go, I can’t deal with it. 25 [Video skipped a section of Lisa’s speech] 26 Lisa Peschcke-Koedt: [Video started back up mid-sentence] … policies and leave a lone the visions and 27 goals. That was our original charter. We questioned it and they said no, that’s what we want to do. If 28 now the Council – if they are truly saying and we’re now going to take those programs out and not give 29 them the right weight, I do think that’s disrespectful. I’m not saying they intended it to be because I 30 have no – I’m guess that everyone was just tired, right? I have certainly had nights like that. I don’t mean 31 it in that sense and it’s not personal but I would think that if we could ask the Council to clarify and if 32 we’re understanding correctly, the majority interpretation here, then to reconsider and come back and 33 tell us. It is a new Council. If they don’t want us involved, they can tell us that. If they do want us 34 involved, what can we do to help? I would ask them to reconsider – sorry, if it’s not just a clarification 35 like yeah, Lisa, we actually agree with everything you just said, this is just a clarification. Assuming it’s 36 not then they have to reconsider is that the Council could ask us – number 1 was really think through 37 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 26 of 48 that shouldn’t at least the key programs be part of the elements and a prioritized sub-set of those – and 1 it may be that they aren’t 400 by the time we’ve done that but whatever the smaller number are also in 2 the Implementation Plan so that we can give it back to the Council and say this is what we, the 3 community input to us and the CAC as a whole, this is what we think is most important. Here Council, 4 this is really it and you shouldn’t leave them out of the elements. The other thing I think around the 5 prioritization is that was something we all talked about when we first forming is that there is so many 6 things to do here. Shouldn’t we have a, across the whole plan, a prioritize list? I think that’s a valuable 7 thing if the Council wants it from. The last is again, not deeming bad intent or assuming it, is I think if the 8 Council comes back and says no, we don’t need to clarify. You guys understood us and no we’re not 9 going to reconsider, I would formally propose that we disband. I think that we have no role to play then. 10 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Arthur. 11 Co-Chair Keller: Thank you. First thing is I’m going to make a couple comments but before that, I’m 12 going to make a question of Hillary and the question is in the current Comp. Plan that was done is 1998, 13 what’s in the Implementation Plan? My understanding is that it has all the programs and some sort of 14 prioritization or ranking or something in there already. Is that what’s in there? Am I correct about that? 15 Hillary Gitelman: Yeah. It also identifies who would be responsible for the programs and there are 16 another number of columns but essentially, that’s it. 17 Co-Chair Keller: If I understand the recommendation of the motion by the Council majority, it is 18 retaining that Implementation Plan as it is, without change and to remove the programs from the Comp. 19 Plan. Am I understanding that correctly? 20 Hillary Gitelman: Again, you heard the transcript that Dan read from. We’re all trying to parse and then 21 understand exactly what the Council’s directions was. I think that is certainly one reading of it and we 22 will get further clarification on the 20th. 23 Co-Chair Keller: Great, thank you. As I mentioned, I had some conversations – it was actually at the 24 Chinese New Year Celebration at Mitchell Park Community Center and Mayor Scharff, who is a real 25 estate attorney, said that not having the programs be in the Land Use Element means that they have 26 less legal weight. He did make a clear statement to that affect to me. In addition, Council Member 27 Wolbach said that their decision was not final. That the – he wanted feedback from the CAC. That’s what 28 the CAC is for is to give feedback to the Council and give advice to the Council. He wanted our advice as 29 to what to do and he said that the idea of removing the programs from the Comprehensive Plan was a 30 new idea. Its hadn’t occurred to him in previous times that the – this had gone before the Council, for 31 example, last year and that’s why he hadn’t brought it up. It was a new idea that he had. The item does 32 come back to Council on both land use and transportation as Hillary mentioned on March 20th. I’m not 33 sure what the compromise is. A compromise sounds to me like Solman splitting the baby, using a 34 metaphor that other people had talked about but in fact, I don’t see a compromise. Either the programs 35 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 27 of 48 are in the elements – and housing element – I’m sorry in the Land Use Element or they’re not in the 1 Land Use Element. They can’t be half in except for maybe the ones required by the EIR are in and the 2 ones not required by the EIR are out. That’s – either there in or out. You can’t be half pregnant. Either 3 there in or out. That’s pretty clear to me. I, like Bonnie, participated in the PTC when we did the zoning 4 ordinance update and that was not cost free. It took a lot of Staff time and some consultant time. It also 5 took up PTC time that we could have done on other things. It was a multi-year process. We did that. 6 Also, as we mentioned by quite a number of people, the program – if we had the opportunity to 7 understand that we were no going to have the programs as part of the Comp. Plan, that only policies 8 would be part of the Comp. Plan. We would have written the programs differently and the policies 9 differently, we would have done that. In particular, one of the things mentioned at the Council meeting 10 was the idea that Council Members where to have the opportunity to select programs that they wanted 11 to reinstate as policies. I think that as they are now, programs are – there wasn’t a motion but it was in a 12 narrative. If you actually listen to the video, there was a comment about that. That people can – Council 13 Members can bring that back when the item comes back to them on March 20th. It seems to me a 14 couple of things. First of all, programs explain policies where they appear. We’ve written them that way. 15 We’ve written the programs – we haven’t – we made the policies and programs redundant. We’ve made 16 it so that the programs elucidate the policies that they appear under. I think that’s the way we wrote 17 them. If we knew the programs where going to be differently – where located somewhere else and not 18 in the body of the element, we would have written the policy to be self-contained and not rely on their 19 interpretation for the programs. It seems to me that there are two options. The options are either put 20 the programs back, which by my count there are 14 voting members of the CAC present today and 11 of 21 those people said that they wanted the programs put back into the Comp. Plan. I counted only 3 people 22 who said otherwise. Secondly, the other option is that if the Council persists in the notion of having the 23 programs be in – not in the Comp. Plan and only in the Implementation Plan, which they have long been 24 in the current 1998 Comp. Plan. Then the CAC, as a recommending body and as the citizens – and as the 25 embodiment of the citizen’s inputs into the Council for the Comp. Plan should have to opportunity to 26 change programs into policies and reword policies to make them clearer where they are not clear as 27 being separated from the programs. I think we should have the same opportunity to do that as it’s being 28 given to Council. If that means that we have to stretch things out, I hope that those of you on the 29 Implementation Plan – a subcommittee will be participating in that because I think it’s important work 30 but in a fact, it furthers our work in an important way. I think that’s – when you change things around 31 it’s not cost free. For us, the cost is that we have to spend more time on the Implementation Plan than 32 we otherwise might and I’ve been thinking about this for some time that the Implementation Plan, 33 having one meeting about it wasn’t sufficient in the first place. Now that the Implementation Plan might 34 have a whole bunch more weight than when otherwise and then the implementation subcommittee 35 actually should decide if the programs are removed from the Comp. Plan Element and only in the 36 Implementation Plan that decision as to realigning some programs as policies should be recommended 37 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 28 of 48 by the Implementation Plan and this – to the CAC as a whole and then more forward from that. I think 1 that’s the alternative solution we should consider. Do you want to weigh in Hillary before? 2 Hillary Gitelman: (Inaudible) 3 Co-Chair Keller: In terms of this, I think that makes sense. I also raise the question in (inaudible) number 4 3 – question number 3, continuity with the other elements. If all programs are removed from the Land 5 Use Element and also, there was a motion to remove them from the Transportation Element in reaction. 6 Does it make sense to have them with the housing natural environment, safety, community services and 7 business and economics because there’s some inconsistency there. Well, there’s a little kind of glitch 8 that happens with that. If the decision is made to remove them from everywhere, they can’t legally be 9 removed from the housing element because that’s an approved housing element by the housing – HCD 10 (Housing and Community Development) department of the State of California. Therefore, that can’t 11 even be touched so that’s one element that has all of its programs and then the other elements don’t 12 have any programs? Somehow there’s some weirdness going on there that is -- I think we have to 13 understand that better. That may make us go back and wont to revisit all the elements in terms of these 14 programs and put the policies back – put programs back as policies, that’s going to be a lot more work. I 15 think that – to me those – the recommendations that I’d like to see and may I make a motion to that 16 effect? 17 Co-Chair Garber: Why don’t you hold it until after Hillary has a chance. 18 Co-Chair Keller: Ok, I’ll let Hillary give her comments and then if I may make a motion to that effect I 19 will. 20 Hillary Gitelman: Just because I such a stickler about the Brown Act earlier, we noticed this for 21 discussion rather than action but I think – let me see if I can try and … 22 Co-Chair Garber: Summarize. 23 Hillary Gitelman: I think you all have made incredibly insightful and important comments. I recognize 24 the passion with which some of them where delivered and I think your suggestions and your Council are 25 much appreciated. I would love to transmit the full transcript of this to the Council with a summary that 26 says a majority of those present requested that the Council reconsider – clarify and reconsider their 27 direction. I think it’s clear that a majority of you feel like the programs – you would have done this 28 differently if the programs where going to be separated and that the programs you crafted had some 29 purpose in being just opposed with the policies they were implementing. I would hope that you would 30 trust the Staff to characterize your input in that way and we’ll also transmit the full transcript because I 31 know there some folks who didn’t agree with everything I just said and I don’t want to diminish those 32 comments. I think you have our commitment, as Staff. We’ll transmit your comments, characterize them 33 carefully. We will provide the Council with answers to some of the questions we weren’t quite able to 34 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 29 of 48 handle this evening and we are fully committed to working with the subcommittee on implementation 1 to review the Implementation Plan and bring it back to this group for further discussion. Just looking 2 ahead, your next meeting is March 21st, I believe, which is the night after the Council meeting so we will 3 have an opportunity to understand and react if the Council does or doesn’t reconsider their action based 4 on your request. 5 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Let’s take a couple of questions if people have and then maybe, rather 6 than creating a motion because you’re right, it wasn’t noticed. Maybe we find it appropriate to take a 7 straw poll if that’s appropriate or if that’s a desired thing. I’ve got Stephen, then Lisa, then Hamilton, and 8 the we had Bonnie, Len. Anyone else? Alright. Stephen, go ahead. 9 Stephen Levy: If I remember the roll call, there are 14 present of what 21 or 22 members? 10 Co-Chair Garber: Actually, because of the [phonetics][netristion], we’re at 17 so there are 3 members 11 that are not here. 12 Stephen Levy: Right, but 13 Co-Chair Garber: 2. 3, yeah. 14 Stephen Levy: When the element that we’re talking about was considered, there are a number of 15 members who weighed in on that element who are not present and their voices should be represented. 16 They worked as hard as anyone else on that element so it’s not really 14 out of 17 who worked on the 17 element. Isn’t that correct? 18 Co-Chair Garber: That is correct. 19 Stephen Levy: Secondly, I thought we had a long discussion several meetings ago about taking votes and 20 the sense of the room was not to take votes. If we start taking votes, I have a whole lot of votes that I’d 21 like to go back and have taken. I think that’s a path that’s probably not prudent. Isn’t that correct that 22 we decided as a body to give options and not take votes? 23 Hillary Gitelman: If I can… 24 Co-Chair Garber: Please. 25 Hillary Gitelman: I don’t want to speak for the Co-Chair but I think what Dan is suggesting that we 26 simply take everyone temperature and make sure that my characterization of the majorities views is 27 accurate. 28 Stephen Levy: I support what Dan said, that’s why I raised the point about the people who are not here. 29 Amy is not here, Elaine is not here. I’ve talked to both of them. Adrian is not here. Lots of people who 30 worked on the element are not here. 31 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 30 of 48 Hillary Gitelman: Am I right Dan? You just – we’re going to take a straw poll to make sure that I had 1 appropriately characterized the views of those present. 2 Co-Chair Garber: That is correct. We can – we don’t even have to raise our hands but I think it is 3 appropriate for us to find out who feels what about what topic. I don’t think that is creating a motion or 4 formalizing, which is what we had avoid doing previously. For instance, when we had submitted – 5 correct me if I am wrong Hillary. When we had submitted the Land Use Element, we did have some 6 notices to how many people spoke for which of the alternatives where supported. Right? There… 7 Stephen Levy: We did when there where options. We absolutely did when there are options. 8 Co-Chair Garber: I think the idea here – Shani? 9 Shani Kleinhaus: (Inaudible) 10 Co-Chair Garber: Don, I was hoping to get back to you because I cut you off but… 11 Don McDougall: (Inaudible) 12 Co-Chair Garber: Right. 13 Don McDougall: (Inaudible) 14 Co-Chair Garber: Mic. 15 Don McDougall: I am a perfectly willing to support an effort to improve this. As I – I want to repeat, I 16 don’t like the idea of let’s compromise as oppose to find a way to make it better, if we all agree. In any 17 priority activity, I think you have to except that – except for the issue of the housing – all programs come 18 out and I don’t think that as much as I’m on that Committee, I don’t think the implementation 19 Committee should decide priorities. The whole CAC should and there should be some way of polling or 20 whatever that you do that you need to come up with. 21 Hilary Gitelman: Again, we’re going to transmit the full transcript so everyone’s input will be presented 22 to the Council. 23 Co-Chair Garber: Yeah, it’s looking like our straw poll is quickly being blown by the wind here. Thank 24 you, Stephen. Lisa, you had some comments as well? No. Hamilton? Then Bonnie and then Len. 25 Hamilton Hitchings: Sure. I think it’s not fair to characterize this as an issue about trust because I spend 26 over an hour, very carefully transcribing word by word what Greg Scharff and Cory and other folks said 27 at the Council meeting to try and understand and accurately interpret what they were saying. I think I 28 got a pretty clear idea afterwards which was that the intention was to remove the programs from the 29 plan and not only would they be removed, there would be a significant barrier to get them implemented 30 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 31 of 48 because you’d have to come back in front of the Council and get the Council’s approval. It’s – I’m literally 1 just reacting to what Greg and Cory said. The thing to keep in mind here, these where not the 2 controversial programs. We cued up the controversial programs for votes because that’s the idea. There 3 the City Council, they get to decide on – this was the stuff that we agreed on. Maybe not everything is 4 100% but that’s part of what being – coming to consensus was on it. I think that’s pretty powerful that 5 we had a consensus on that. The – I think that there – we’re talking about whether we trim them down 6 and prioritize them. I think it’s a really big effort to go through it and cut, let’s say, the programs in half. I 7 mean I basically think that’s biting off more than we can chew but I do think it’s the purview of the 8 Council and the Staff to pick the programs that they believe are important and prioritize those but I 9 don’t think it’s appropriate to do it for the next 15-years. Does anyone in this room honestly think things 10 aren’t going to change dramatically in the next 2-3 years in ways that we might not even be able to 11 imagine? We have major changes going on at the federal level just for starters. Certainly, changes we 12 couldn’t anticipated a year ago, I don’t think prioritization is the right tool here. I think the right tool is to 13 recognize that the programs will be prioritized based on the current Council and Staff, based on the 14 conditions that are local at that time. We should put them back in but maybe even acknowledge 15 formally within the plan something to that effect. Those are my comments. 16 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Bonnie and then Len. 17 Bonnie Packer: One thing I think would inform our discussion and maybe also the Council’s discussion 18 when they do reconsider is a full understanding of the role of the Comprehensive Plan. People here – 19 some people said that the authority of the Comp. Plan and I don’t know that the Comp. Plan has 20 authority in the same way the ordinances do so I think we need to understand that the relationship 21 between the Comp. Plan and how the Council makes decisions. I always understood that the Comp. Plan 22 is something that they can measure their decisions against as opposed to the plan that dictates what the 23 decisions are. Maybe it goes back and forth but I think we need a little clarification and maybe the City 24 Council needs clarification on that. I don’t know. The other thing about all the different people touching 25 the different parts of the elephant and I think the elephant was a discussion that the City Council had 26 about this issues and each of us had read it somewhat differently, which just shows how in artful they 27 were in – I think the motion was poorly drafted and their discussion on it was poorly drafted so none of 28 us really knows what they intended for anyone to do. That’s a concern and I hope that would be 29 reflected in the transcript that they read when you send it to them. In terms of your summary, Hillary, of 30 what we are talking about. I think the issue is programs in or programs out? It’s not so much you 31 reconsider. I think the sense of many people here is that when we did this work, we understood that the 32 programs where going to be with the policies and that’s what the whole thing was based on. Had we 33 known it differently – and they even said that in their discussion; well, we had told them this a year ago, 34 we should have done that but they didn’t so now they have kind of created a mess and it’s going to 35 delay – their goal – one of their priorities is to finish the Comp. Plan and they’ve kind of just thrown in a 36 monkey wrench because it’s going to take a too long to unravel what it is they did, which they may have 37 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 32 of 48 thought was going to be streaming but looks like maybe not. I just hope that that goes into your 1 transcript. 2 Co-Chair Garber: Ok, so clearly, we’re not going to be taking a poll or anything of that sort, however, 3 let’s make sure that anybody else that would like to speak to this – and I’ve got Len and Annette. It’s 4 already 7:30. We’ll go perhaps another 10-minutes or so unless somebody else needs to speak. Len, go 5 ahead. 6 Len Filppu: My comment or question was going be how would you characterize the term majority 7 thinking on this issue tonight when you talk to City Council? That’s been talked about and – but I think 8 that it is important for, at least for me, to say that I believe that we should push back and keep the 9 programs in the Comprehensive Plan. To fully reflect the input of years of work, not just from Staff and 10 Council and the CAC but citizens, residents, the community of Palo Alto, many of whom were here today 11 to speak on this issue. Probably more speakers than we’ve ever had and all of whom were sad to learn 12 about the Council actions. Thanks. 13 Co-Chair Garber: Just before I go to Annette, let me just ask in general, I think there’s – most of us here 14 are – our first recommendation is to keep the programs where they are and keep the plan in place as 15 we’ve had it so that we don’t have to revisit the damn thing. If the Council comes back and says no. Do 16 we want to consider additional recommendations about how we would deal with that now or is that 17 something we would deal with in a – as part to the Implementation Committee or what? Later. 18 Len Filppu: Later. Just to continue on my time, I would say later. I think that you put the ball in their 19 court. 20 Co-Chair Garber: Ok. Thanks. Annette. I’ hearing that later from several voices in the room here. 21 Annette Glanckopf: I really want to be clear about this and I’m definitely an advocate of leaving the 22 programs in. I think we’ve made – people have been very eloquent tonight. I think a lot of us have been 23 trying to second guess what Council is intending and I don’t want to have any false facts. Hamilton said 24 this but I think it’s really important to restate it. They were in credible clear on what they meant and 25 Hillary, you asked Mayor Scharff, ‘can I clarify the motion? Is it to illuminate the programs’ and Greg 26 Scharff said, ‘(inaudible) in the implementation section’, so he did talk about relative cost and priority 27 which is great, ‘and see the way I understand this would work is that it would be an implementation and 28 that’s where all the programs would be but they wouldn’t actually mean that we would do them.’ That’s 29 very clear to me. ‘Staff would come forward and say, now we’re going to implement program such and 30 such or we should implement program such and such or Council Members could write a colleague’s 31 memo or whatever at the point there would be implementation of that, would move forward.’ Now that 32 to me, is very, very clear so we shouldn’t have any false facts. This was their intention as far as I’m 33 concerned, that they really wanted to be able to be the people that selected what gets moved forward. I 34 want to see the programs still in the Comp. Plan and I think the implementation section should be as – I 35 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 33 of 48 think one of use described it, to start off with – in each element some sort of 2-year plan, 3-year plan 1 and have the high priority items of the element. To me, it’s incredibly clear what the Council intentions 2 where. Scharff goes on to say, ‘There are a bunch of programs that a lot of people put time and work 3 into and thought we should do but none of these have been vetted by Council.’ They want to dump 4 them out. ‘Frankly, by Council and a careful and thoughtful discussion of each one of them and if Staff 5 wants to move them forward or a Council Member thinks we should move them forward, then we’ll 6 move them forward.’ To me, I think we should – that was very clear to me what he actually – what his 7 intent was. I don’t think we should be false and try to second guess it. You can’t be clearer than that. 8 Co-Chair Garber: ok, thank you. Alex. Stephen, you want to speak again but Alex. 9 Alex Van Riesen: I just wanted to say, as one of the folks who initially did call in to question, I think the – 10 whatever the Council’s motivations where. I want to say I agree. I want – I can back pedal from that. I 11 don’t know what those where. I think it still would be interesting to hear them reflect on that but even if 12 you take that out of the equation. I guess what I want to say that it seems clear to me tonight, if we 13 remove all intention and motive out of it. What’s been uniformly said is that the way this was done and 14 even that it has been done is highly suspect by the vast majority of this group. Even if you through in 15 some of the people who are no longer here or not here tonight. Even if the comments could speak for 16 themselves, it would be pretty obvious that it’s at least twice the number of people. That it’s a pretty 17 strong feeling on this team. I feel like I just wanted to make that clear. 18 Co-Chair Garber: OK. Stephen. 19 Stephen Levy: How does Staff decide what programs to move forward in? I’m wondering where they are 20 talking about a serious issue of contention here or whether in reality Staff takes direction from Council 21 on what programs to pursue and in what order. I really don’t know the answer. 22 Hillary Gitelman: At present, we’ll be working with the Implementation subcommittee and this CAC on 23 the programs that you have identified and put in the plan. 24 Stephen Levy: I meant in general. 25 Hillary Gitelman: Ultimately, in the future… 26 Stephen Levy: No, in the past. Just in general. Do you do programs on your own without Council asking? 27 Hillary Gitelman: I think when the Committee looks at the programs next month, you’ll see some of 28 these things are ongoing already so they’ve already been budgeted and they’re in play. Some of them 29 have not been budgeted and will take very little effort and some of them have not been budgeted and 30 will take a lot of effort. 31 Stephen Levy: I was asking a different question. Let’s take the ones that are in play. Did… 32 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 34 of 48 [Greg ??:] (Inaudible) 1 Stephen Levy: Do you do programs when Council doesn’t ask for one? Do you do them when – in the 2 order that Council asks for them? How are – how is your work on programs developed? 3 Hillary Gitelman: We have an annual budget and an annual capital improvement plan that’s adopted by 4 the Council (inaudible)(crosstalk) 5 Stephen Levy: Right so it’s Council, right? Programs – right, so this whole idea that somehow you do 6 programs that Council doesn’t want, that just sticks me as strange so wherever they are – it sounds to 7 me like the programs you work on are ones that are in the Capital Plan or the annual budget or the 8 annual thing that you take direction from Council on the programs. This is a mountain in a molehill it 9 seems to me. Anyhow. 10 Co-Chair Garber: Arthur. 11 Co-Chair Keller: Firstly, I don’t think that on the adopted budget it says you’re going to implement X, Y, 12 and Z programs and budget for them. I understand it gives budgets to the various Staff departments and 13 as Staff departments will then figure out in terms of the programs they do based on those budgets and 14 there’s – but I’ve never seen in the budget saying we’re going to do program number L -3.1.4, for 15 example. I’ve never seen such a thing and I don’t think is occurs. In terms of – there was a mention that 16 was made of the authority of the Comp. Plan. Well, I have seen things where it says this is consistent 17 with the Comp. Plan or this is not consistent with the Comp. Plan. If the program is part of an element is 18 it considered whether it’s consistent with the Comp. Plan. The program is not part of an element and 19 somewhere else like the Implementation Plan, then it is not considered whether it is consistent with the 20 Comp. Plan. That’s my understanding of when Mayor Scharff said it is not have the same value so that’s 21 my understanding. I think that that’s a question that Hillary should ask of the City Attorney when Hillary 22 gives the information to the Council. I think that’s a question that she should raise. We have not, in our 23 City, encountered the environment in which we have no programs in the Land Use Element so there will 24 only be speculation other than Mayor Scharff saying, it doesn’t have the same legal value. I think in 25 terms of Alex’s comment that says that it’s hard for us to understand what the Council says. Actually, 26 Dan and I had invited several Council Member. We had invited originally the Mayor and the Mayor 27 couldn’t make it and then Council Member Wolbach he could make it but he said it depends on whether 28 Staff says its ok. Also, Council Member Holman was invited and they both did a contingent on whether 29 Staff said it was ok. Staff said it was inappropriate to have Council Members give us information of only 30 two of them considering that it’s a 9-member Council so that was not done but that’s, in some sense, 31 why we are in continuing to speculate. I see it as the sense and an overwhelming consensus of this body 32 that it is our considered recommendation to put the programs back into the Comp. Plan. I think some of 33 us and I’ve mentioned this as a fall back and I think others of us do not want to have a fall back measure 34 but as a fall back measure, if they choose not to do that. I think it makes sense to give the CAC the 35 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 35 of 48 opportunity to change programs into policies just as was given to Council Members at that meeting to 1 come back on March 20th. I think that means that essentially, the schedule will have to be stretched out 2 to give us an opportunity to do that and we’ll have to take that – to do that because we’re the ones who 3 are closest to those programs. They’re supposed to be high level. We – our job was to tee up questions 4 for the Council to decide a high level and in particular its inconsistency’s. For example, there where 5 motions made by the Council to include programs. There was a motion made by the Council to include a 6 program to consider increasing FAR for hotels from either 3.0 or 2.5, where ever it is. Does that program 7 now go into the Implementation Plan after they made a motion to include it? This – clearly, they were 8 not even self-consistent in that meeting. I’m confused as to what they are doing but I think there’s 9 clarity in this Committee and I think that that’s pretty clear, the sense of what we should put forward to 10 the Council Thank you. 11 Co-Chair Garber: Bonnie, I am going to take your comments and then I want, to sum up and move on 12 here. Go ahead. 13 Bonnie Packer: I don’t disagree with the last part of what you said but I think Arthur, you were 14 misleading us by saying – by implying the Implementation Plan was not part of the Comprehensive Plan. 15 The Implementation Plan is very much a part of the Comprehensive Plan. This is why the Council 16 Member’s keep on saying, it was a formatting issue. They were just moving the programs into the 17 Implementation Plan. Now, I think a lot of us think that the programs belong with the policies for a lot of 18 other reasons because of the way they work together. The way the inform each other but the 19 implementation – I just had – the Implementation Plan is also the Comprehensive Plan and I don’t think 20 we want to say – I think it would be wrong… 21 Hamilton Hitchings: (Inaudible) 22 Bonnie Packer: Well, he may not have been correct but I mean, when he said it that way but the Comp. 23 Plan has an Implementation Plan as part of the Comp. Plan, I mean that’s what it is. 24 Co-Chair Garber: Bonnie, may I interrupt? Hillary, could you offer some clarification but I want to move 25 past this. 26 Hillary Gitelman: I think that the Implementation Plan can be adopted by the resolution that adopts the 27 Comprehensive Plan and can be part of the Comprehensive Plan as Bonnie says. I did not go back and 28 check out how the resolution reads. In the current Comprehensive Plan, it’s a little bit moot because the 29 programs, as people have pointed out, are sprinkled throughout so it’s a little bit different but the 30 question is, if the implementation program were separated out into an Implementation Plan they could 31 be adopted as part of the Comp. Plan. 32 Co-Chair Garber: Let’s a – we need to – we’re going to move on here because we’ve got something else 33 that we have to discuss but let me make this one suggestion and that is Staff has gotten a very good idea 34 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 36 of 48 of where the CAC is on this topic. I would also like to suggest that with the establishment or the 1 Implementation plan if there are the further direction that the Council does make that that be 2 considered in the implementation subcommittee and their recommendations brought to the larger CAC 3 for direction/action and/or other thoughts. With that, we’re going to move on. Someone in this room 4 would like to take a 3-minute break. We will be back here in 3 minutes. 5 2. Action: Business and Economics Element 6 a. Introduction of revised Business and Economics Element 7 b. Report from Business and Economics Element Subcommittee 8 c. Discussion of Draft Element 9 Co-Chair Garber: Alright, we are at item #2. Although I – we do still have one member of the public here. 10 If anyone would like to speak on this topic, please give me a card but I’m not seeing any. Staff will 11 introduce this so Elena? 12 Elena Lee: Thank you. Following the January CAC and February business and economics subcommittee 13 meeting, the element was revised with narrative goals, policies, and programs. The vision statement was 14 revised to provide a more balanced tone between businesses and neighborhoods. The 6 existing goals 15 were retained although the position for the first and second goals were changed and one new goal was 16 added on fiscal responsibility and that is now Goal B-2. Other changes include seeking to clarify that 17 start-ups and entrepreneur are highly valued. Redundant policies and programs were removed as they 18 are already discussed in Land Use and Safety Elements and that was specifically identified in the report. 19 The word character was replaced with neighborhoods. Other changes included languages added to 20 recognize the value of local serving retail. Language about livability was replaced with specific 21 neighborhood concerns such as traffic and parking. The natural environment was also specifically 22 identified as a significant asset for the local economy. In Goal B-6 it now includes the word retail so it’s 23 clear is about retail centers and not just centers. Those represent some of the changes that were made 24 reflected in the revised element. Staff now requests that the CAC forward this revised element to 25 Council. Thank you. 26 Co-Chair Garber: Ok. I think we can start by going around the table. 27 Co-Chair Keller: (Inaudible) 28 Co-Chair Garber: Ok. Lisa, can we start with you? 29 Lisa Peschcke-Koedt: Overall, I like it. I think it’s a – the subcommittee did a great job and it’s more 30 balanced to me, given our comments last time so overall, positive. Just reviewing the comments – the 31 other comments that came in, most of mine agreed with, I think, Bonnie’s specific changes and such so 32 just for the record. I had a couple of important comments and a couple that is more just questions or 33 typos but I’m just going to go through it and do it all at once. Is that ok? 34 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 37 of 48 Co-Chair Garber: Yes. 1 Lisa Peschcke-Koedt: In the vision, second to last line, it uses the word employment areas and I didn’t 2 know, is that its own term or should be districts? Just a – don’t have an opinion. Just a question. In the – 3 page 2 – sorry, I’m using the redlined Attachment B as my version. In the second big paragraph where it 4 says the City is recognized as a hub. It lists out the different things. I think we should add the word 5 technology because otherwise, we don’t cover HP and some other companies in the area. It’s 6 substantive, it’s not fall on your sword but it is substantive. Minor typos. A couple of the places where 7 the section heading where at the end of the paragraph before. It just needs to get moved down. Then I 8 had questions. I think this was in Bonnie’s as well but the – on page B-9, policy B-1.1, where it talks, or 9 service requirements. I wasn’t really sure what that was but I had suggested that that’s the broader City 10 Goals -- I mean the Goals of the Comp. Plan and our broader goals are what I would mean by that but I 11 didn’t know. Then Policy B-1.3 where it says engage with all stakeholders in the business community. I 12 might delete business because I think it’s in the community. Especially since we are talking about 13 including the public. Then Policy B-1.4, I don’t disagree with the focus on mobility and sustainability. It’s 14 more is that all we wanted to make a priority? There are others in there. Is that a broader one? I don’t 15 disagree with those two I just think it may be too few. Then I like the changes for the fiscal 16 responsibility. I think I’m near the end. Then on page B-17, Policy B-6.4, more talk about discouraging 17 development that would turn the district into a regional shopping center. I was just curious more about 18 the thinking of it. I’m not sure I have a strong opinion either way but I wanted to hear… 19 Stephen Levy: (Inaudible) 20 Lisa Peschcke-Koedt: …what the subcommittee – I’m done. Thank you, Stephen. 21 Co-Chair Garber: That’s fine. We will be liberal so long as you guys are willing to stick (inaudible) 22 Stephen Levy: Maybe if there’s another round, I want to thank Hamilton especially, Don and Amy who 23 are not here and Whitney and Alex. It was a great subcommittee. I’m pleased with the draft. I’m pleased 24 with the collegiality. I’ll wait to see what other comments are. Obviously, we wrote the draft so I don’t 25 have any particular objections to the draft that we wrote. 26 Co-Chair Garber: Ok, thanks. Hamilton. 27 Co-Chair Garber: I really appreciated working with everybody. Stephen took a little bit of extra time to 28 work with me so I’m very grateful for that. I’m going to completely switch gears. Forgetting everything 29 that happened in the last hour and a half. Ok, here we go. Every day, it warms my heart to watch 30 parents walk their young children by my house to the local elementary school. Likewise, I take pride in 31 the fact that this City has incubated the most successful tech. companies in the world, such as Google 32 and Facebook and continues to do so with companies such as VMWare and Tesla. It is possible to have a 33 very livable neighborhood and a world class innovative technology companies in the same city as we do 34 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 38 of 48 today. I feel this element has been improved in terms of the focus on being business friendly and does a 1 better job of emphasizing the City’s fiscal health. It has definitely been watered down in terms of its 2 focus on neighborhood livability but given the productive discussion we had in the subcommittee, I 3 really only have one recommendation addition that I would like to see in this regard, which is to add 4 back in the strip policy – stripped down version of Policy B-1, from the original 2007 version of the 5 element which would not go under Goal 2 which would say, use a variety of planning and regulatory 6 tools to ensure the business change is compatible with Palo Alto neighborhoods. I have one other minor 7 point – well, actually two. Although my colleagues in the subcommittee where not enthusiastic about it, 8 I am still advocating for retaining a revised version of the policy on our City trees, which reads, Palo Alto 9 means tall tree and its flourishing tree system is part of our brand along with the other assets such as 10 great City services and its adjacency to Stanford University. Not exactly an earth shattering controversial 11 statement. 12 Stephen Levy: (Inaudible) 13 Hamilton Hitchings: Yeah, they didn’t put it in so that’s… 14 Stephen Levy: (Inaudible) 15 Hamilton Hitchings: …See, so Stephen liked it too. A good reason for City Staff to put in that last thing I 16 just suggested about the trees. Lastly, I would say Palo Alto is positioned -- Lisa, this gets to the thinking 17 behind that program you commented on, sustainability and mobility. I would say that Palo A lot’s 18 position to be a national leader on mobility companies. We already have Tesla, which is the leader in 19 electric vehicles and becoming a leader in autonomous driving. We have huge amounts – to be precise, I 20 think either half a billion or a billion, pouring into Stanford for anonymous driving and given our 21 particular issues around traffic, it makes a lot of sense for us to actively try to recruit pioneer companies 22 in this area. Likewise, global warming is the largest issue facing man kinds existence and Palo Alto 23 continues to be a leader – a City leader in this area and I think we should focus on attraction companies 24 that are innovative in this area. Thank you. 25 Co-Chair Garber: Thanks, Hamilton. Bonnie. 26 Bonnie Packer: Ok, thanks for the subcommittee and – oh, thanks for the subcommittee and Staff for a 27 good element. I have a – I submitted comments and I’ll just focus on the substantive ones. The rest are 28 all just typos and stuff. I’d like to put in the narrative at the end of the employment section. The 29 importance of the other parts of the programs in the Land Use and Transportation Element that address 30 mobility and housing – transit and housing for the employees because this is what benefits the 31 employers and this is how we’re helping keep business – economic vitality and so a reference – I had 32 some language in here. A reference in the narrative and perhaps also a policy somewhere in the plan. I 33 think under Goal B that addresses – that recognizes that we should continue the work and the programs 34 and the other elements that help employees, which then help employers. The other thing I suggested is 35 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 39 of 48 there’s a policy under Goal 5, it’s 5.4, it says businesses of all kinds should be encouraged to advance 1 Palo Alto’s commitment to both fiscal and environmental sustainability. That really belongs under Goal 2 B-1 so I suggest moving that policy under Goal B-1. The other substantive thing is I think you should add 3 Town and Country back in as a reginal center. Just because it’s described elsewhere in greater detail, all 4 you need is one sentence but to not have it there when you have all the other centers, which are also 5 addressed in the Land Use Element in different ways. Just to say, don’t put it in there because we talk 6 about it elsewhere is -- doesn’t make sense to me. All you have to say is recognize and preserve Town 7 and Country Villages that is an attractive retail center servicing Palo Alto and residents of the wider 8 region. That’s the first sentence of the land use program or policy or whatever it is but that’s all you 9 have to put in here. That’s what I would recommend. My last point was adding a general policy that 10 refers to the Land Use and Transportation Element which support housing and transit opportunities to 11 support the employees and that benefits economic vitality. The rest are just some verb suggestions; 12 rewrites. Thank you 13 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you, Bonnie. Ellen. 14 Ellen Uhrbrock: All I have to say is this subcommittee for business and economics was the best 15 subcommittee and best Committee working I have ever seen in this group. I had wonderful Staff people 16 that also shared it and I’m sorry I missed the second round of when you did this but I have great 17 confidence that what you did was as good as could be done at this time so congratulations. 18 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Annette. 19 Annette Glanckopf: Well, I have a couple comments and I still think that this general introduction is to 20 flowery. I – unfortunately, I’m a crisp, technical writer and I think it sounds like a PR announcement from 21 the Chamber with all – apologizes to the Chamber. I don’t ever remember specifically, discussing shuttle 22 serving retail centers although it’s a good idea. Throughout this document there seems to be a lot of 23 emphasis on the office of economic development and up to this time, it’s just really been a number of 24 bean counters and so there’s a lot of implications about additional Staff like on page B-7, the office – the 25 OED plays a key role. Well, it hasn’t ever so far in supporting business growth so that to me is very 26 concerned and ‘the office can serve as a facilitator between residents and businesses.’ I think that’s 27 really a planning or building function. This is also reflected on page B-9 and go – Program B-1.1.1, 28 implement the office of economic development policy to guild business development. I would use the 29 word direct if you have to have that in there and Policy 1 – B-.1.4, I think the City should attractive 30 businesses and I agree, rather than OED and I think there needs to be much more areas other than 31 mobility and sustainability. There is a lot discussion about partnerships between public and private 32 space for community non- profits. I think that’s a great goal but you know, as long as you’re going to do 33 that, it might be good to put the concept of private sector providing meeting spaces or connecting – 34 reaching out to the community as well. There’s lots of things they could do for transportation and 35 parking. I, again, saw that the tree system, because it was referenced in the Staff report, it -- I never did 36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 40 of 48 find it in the document and again, I support putting it back in. When I look at Goal B-2, which is sort of 1 out there -- and I am really concerned about Policy B-2.2, strong inter dependence between commercial 2 centers and surrounding neighborhoods. I’m not sure what that really means and who is going to do 3 this? To make any kind of this connection work, there really needs to be the right type of retail and a key 4 plan to have someone whether – just to finish this point – to reach out and work with the residents. I 5 think if we were going to focus on something, we should as a City, start trying to develop especially, in 6 the small neighborhood centers, to form a merchant’s association and just – since I am running out of 7 time. There is – along in Goal-4, I think we really do need, Jennifer mentioned this, to really focus on 8 small independent locally serving businesses, especially in the neighborhood centers. We need to attract 9 the right business to the right location and assist in keeping them. That is very, very true but the real 10 problem these days is not – that fact is that they’re in the wrong place and we should – and the problem 11 is the cost in rents as opposed to maybe the viability of the business or even being in the wrong place. 12 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you, Annette. Jennifer. 13 Jennifer Hetterly: I’d like to commend the subcommittee also. I think this is greatly improved from the 14 last go around. I don’t think it’s balanced but I think it is a vast improvement. I do think it’s irresponsible 15 for us to promote a Comprehensive Plan that doesn’t acknowledge – even an interest in striving for 16 moderation in the pace of job growth and that has been eliminated from this first goal as well as Policy 17 B-2.3 I guess is the closest one in this latest draft. Seems like, with intense local and regional criticism of 18 our jobs and housing balance, it’s undeniable impacts on the local and regional economy and quality of 19 life. I just don’t see how we can put forward a Comp. Plan that doesn’t say we’re going to at least try to 20 pace job growth. That aside, I was thrilled to see the At Places comments today because I agree with all 21 three of you on virtually all of your comments so I was happy to see that consensus and I hope that Staff 22 and the subcommittee will incorporate those where there is agreement. I was sorry to see that there are 23 no policies or programs in the compatibility and interdependency section that address compatibility or 24 how the business environment will complement the residential neighborhoods so I would love to see 25 that fluffed up a little bit with something to acknowledge the compatibility piece of that heading. I also 26 noticed the street tree policy that was referenced in the Staff report is gone so I assume that’s going 27 back in. 28 Male: (Inaudible) 29 Jennifer Hetterly: Ok, awesome. Great. 30 Male: That policy will go in there. I’m sorry. 31 Jennifer Hetterly: Then, under predictability and flexibility, Policy B-4.4, which was about large – 32 attracting and retaining large employers in the Stanford Research Par. I’d like to see that rewarded to 33 say concentrate large employers in the Stanford Research Park. It seems to me that it’s Stanford role to 34 attract and retain leaseholders within the Research Park and it’s the City’s job to talk about where they 35 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 41 of 48 want what type size. Then again as Annette mentioned, small independent and community services 1 businesses are distinct from -- just any retail business is really valuable in Palo Alto and I would like to 2 see that highlighted more and just lastly, Policy B-5.3, about strengthening the office of economic 3 development. I think it absolutely needs to be strengthen but I would go beyond just communication 4 between residents and businesses and navigating procedures and have that office serve a role in 5 attracting and retaining local serving retail and services because that’s – clearly, we’re saying all over the 6 place retail is suggesting here and that’s what we need is somebody that can help them bridge – make 7 that connection. Thank you. 8 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Len. 9 Len Filppu: Yes, thanks. I too like this rev. a lot and I think we’re definitely getting in there. On Goal B-1, 10 the policies that moderate the pace of job growth has been deleted. I’m wondering if an alternative 11 might be considered. Something along the lines of policies that support prudent growth. That’s a 12 possibility and I offer it because in the meaning of prudent, showing thought and care for the future. On 13 Policy B-2.2, I agree with Annette’s view. I offer – support a strong interdependency. You could change 14 that to make it more proactive, support strong, synergistic programs between existing commercial 15 centers and surround neighborhoods. That gets us active to take advantage and leverage the 16 interdependence that exists. Not just acknowledge the interdependence. Policy B-2.3, at the end of the 17 sentence it says such as – coordinate on shared concerns such as traffic, parking issues. I’d include 18 livability. Recognize that business and neighborhoods need to coordinate on a shared concern such as 19 traffic, parking, and livability issues. It isn’t just traffic and parking, there’s more involved. Then here’s 20 the one that I’m wrapping up. These are the pink box comments. Some of these indicate that this 21 program has been put over to land use and if land use doesn’t have any programs, then I would really 22 like to consider inserting these programs into this element. Especially, the comments that are identified 23 as JJ6, JJ8, and JJ10, all of which deal with the appearance of streets, enhancing sidewalks, preserving 24 adequate parking, widening sidewalks, narrowing travel lanes, that kind of thing so if we’re going to lose 25 them in land use, let’s put them in here. Thank you. 26 Co-Chair Garber: Thanks. Doria. 27 Doria Summa: Yes, great work by the subcommittee. Something that Jennifer had in her comments that 28 she didn’t mention is Figure B-2 and B-3 are contradictory and that probably needs to be cleared up and 29 kind of hard to understand. In the discussion about business employment districts on page B-8, its noted 30 that 1/3 – over 1/3 of the jobs in Palo Alto are located in the Stanford Research Park. It goes on to talk 31 about Stanford University medical center. I think it would be very helpful to know approximately how 32 many people work in the medical center also and to have those two figures in the same place. Policy B-33 1.3, I agree with an early speaker that said just take business out, ‘engage with all stake holders in the 34 community.’ The tree thing is taken care of. Policy B-2.3, I agree with Len that livability should be added 35 back in and I thought B-2.1 was just written in kind of a confusing way so maybe take a look at that. B-36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 42 of 48 4.4, retain and attract large employers in the Stanford Research Park. I think that the – I think there 1 should be a recognition that that’s where – the Stanford Research Park is where a large employer are 2 appropriate as opposed to other business areas in the City. In B-4.7, encourage and support the retail – 3 operations small independent retail businesses and other services that service community. I think some 4 of those – small independent is taken out. I think it should be put back in. I’m not sure if this is the right 5 place to evaluate the effectiveness of ground floor retail requirements and preserving retail space. I 6 would recommend removing that. About Goal B-5 in B-1.2, improve design guild lines to reduce 7 ambiguity more clearly – articulate design principles. I think what we really want to talk about here are 8 the compatibility rules not design. Let’s see, economic development – just some other things. Oh, I also 9 think the – B-7.3, invest – encourage investment in activity along El Camino and within the Stanford 10 Research Park that compliments the Research Park and enhances its physical appearance. It should 11 include that enhances adjacent neighborhoods to the Research Park not just the Research Park. Thank 12 you. 13 Co-Chair Garber: Thanks. Julia. 14 Julia Moran: Just a couple comments. Like Ellen said, I was only able to make the first subcommittee 15 meeting but we had a very productive meeting and I see a significant amount reflected in the revised 16 element. It’s much, much better than it was before and much less combative between living in Palo Alto 17 and working Palo Alto. The – it still feels to me a little too focused on the current economic situation of 18 Palo Alto of strained retail and very strong office space economic environment, which is what’s 19 happening today but it is not necessarily what will be happening in 10-years. I’d like to see something 20 that reflects what our policies are if there aren’t jobs here or empty office spaces. Then second, I’d also 21 – I didn’t see anything about our neighboring huge companies like Facebook, Google type companies 22 and the economic impact those have on our City and if one of those chooses to move, what that means 23 for us and just in general, what the impact of those – the significant amount of employees in those 24 companies to our downtown retail and health services and everything else. I know those are broad 25 comments but I’d like to see those reflected. Thanks. 26 Co-Chair Garber: Thanks. Whitney. 27 Whitney McNair: Great, thank you. It was a great discussion with the subcommittee. Let’s see, I agree 28 with Julia’s comments about the snap shot – the information on the pie charts; they’re just one year. 29 They don’t really show you any trends. I think it would be better to have a trend line. One of the 30 interesting trends is sales tax that – just for instance, the Research Park shows 3 million dollars in sale 31 tax revenue in 2015 but it was up to 10 million in 2013 and it’s been 6 and 10 and 4.5 so what’s the 32 trend in sales tax. You also have transfer tax, which makes that a more complete picture. The economy 33 may change. It’s currently strong but some areas it might be diminishing so if you want to – if the City 34 wants to attract certain businesses, it has to be more than just saying, that’s what I want to have come 35 here to Palo Alto. There needs to be – I like to think of it as an on switch. If you determine what kind of 36 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 43 of 48 business you want to have, what levers can you turn on in order to encourage those types of companies 1 – that business sector to come to Palo Alto and there isn’t anything in here really, that’s giving you that, 2 that on switch. It still has a regulatory tone to it. To that degree, I agree with Annette’s comments about 3 the office of economic development. I’m not even sure how fully Staffed it is at this point but there’s a 4 lot of responsibility in the element played to OED. Just trying to consider how that would Staff its self-up 5 in order to reach out to companies, whether it’s retail companies or small companies up to big 6 companies. What is it that the City can do in order to keep you here with in Palo Alto? Then a few little 7 things. Let’s see, there was a program, B-5.1.4, and it says that it’s revised the zoning and other 8 regulations to encourage revitalization of aging retail structures and then there was a new – just quickly. 9 There was new tag onto that, ‘and encourage the preservation of Class B and C office spaces’ and that 10 says it’s an existing program in the Comp. Plan. I went back to the existing Comp. Plan and that last 11 piece of it is not in there at all. It was about encourage revitalization of ageing retail areas so I 12 understand there has been some discussion about trying to maintain some spaces for smaller 13 independent consultants – independent practitioners but to now, put in there something that’s 14 preserving Class B and Class C office spaces. I think that goes against some of the sustainability practices 15 and some ideas about revitalizing some of these older businesses in buildings, especially like in the 16 Research Park. If you want to have smaller spaces for smaller firms then say that. I don’t think that this 17 roundabout way of saying preserve Class C office buildings I the way to do it. Just be clear on what it is 18 that you want to get at. I think – oh, and I just had – just a fact on the – the business registry that the 19 City put out, indicates that the Research Park has 29,000 employees and so these pie charts are saying 20 there’s 36% of the jobs are in the Research Park, which would be a lot high than that 29,000 so I just 21 don’t know what that data source is. If you could just look to confirm that that percentage is actually 22 accurate. 23 Co-Chair Garber: Thank you. Alex. 24 Alex Van Riesen: I to enjoyed being on the Committee and I was unable to make the last meeting but 25 I’ve – the other comments that I’ve heard echo mine so I’ll pass. 26 Co-Chair Garber: Arthur. 27 Co-Chair Keller: Firstly, I’m hearing that there are lots of tweaks. Not major changes but lots of tweaks 28 that people are asking to be made. I’m wondering – I’m going to first as Staff, does it make sense since I 29 don’t think this is going to Council right way, to have the Committee do – meet one more time to reflect 30 these changes – subcommittee meet one more time to reflect these changes in the element and have it 31 come back to us on consent next time and hopeful people will just be able to review it. Then not actually 32 have us meet on it but it doesn’t seem like it’s 100% ready for prime time. 33 Hillary Gitelman: I guess let me ask a question of the group. In past elements, you were able to adopt 34 them subject to the changes that we could incorporate from the comments that were made that 35 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 44 of 48 evening and those that we couldn’t include, we were instructed to attach when we transmitted it to the 1 council. Do you not think that that would be appropriate? I’m just asking because we are chock-a-block 2 with things that we have to do like Staff reports for Council meetings and for the implementation 3 subcommittee and all the rest. 4 Co-Chair Keller: Well, in – ok, let me try a different thing. How about if we do not have the 5 subcommittee meet but instead Staff make the changes and bring it back to us so that we can actually 6 see them and bringing it back on consent, rather than having us not see what happens until months 7 later when it goes to Council. 8 Co-Chair Garber: Arthur, can I ask – Stephen, is one of the Committee Members and maybe some of the 9 other Committee Members might want to add on. 10 Stephen Levy: There have been two sets of what you call tweaks. One set dealing with the elements 11 that were redundant, dealing with the pattern of growth in the City, dealing with the word livability. 12 These were unanimously 6-0 approved by the subcommittee the way they are. There are other language 13 tweaks that the Staff may consider but this Committee, which everyone has praised, was very deliberate 14 and very much in unanimity on illuminating the redundant arguments. Not making this element a 15 debate about the growth of the city, which will come up in the scenarios and very consciously 16 illuminating the word livability. 17 Co-Chair Garber: Hamilton. 18 Stephen Levy: I think the comments today would go back on that. 19 Hamilton Hitchings: The only thing it say is – I agreed to the illumination of livability within the context 20 of adding that one policy I mentioned earlier and it didn’t make it in so – and I know a number of other 21 Committee Members want to see, and I heard today, some language in there around protecting the 22 neighborhoods. It’s not very controversial language. It’s just saying you’re going to take it into account. 23 To have – to say we’re not going to put anything in there about businesses having to have any impacts, I 24 think, is a little bit much. I mean, I would like to see something added in there about that. 25 Co-Chair Garber: I don’t want to open this up a great deal here but Hillary, do you have a suggestion 26 about how we can move through this? 27 Hillary Gitelman: I think there are two choices. If the Committee feels like this is close enough. That with 28 some of the changes that have been recommended you would feel comfortable recommending this to 29 the Council subject to those revisions and ask us to transmit any comments we can’t include. For 30 example, comments that might conflict with the Committees discussion. That’s choice number one. 31 Choice number two is Arthur’s suggestion that this needs enough work that it should come back on 32 consent at your next meeting. 33 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 45 of 48 Co-Chair Garber: Could it be that Staff makes modifications, minor they may be, and they sent a draft to 1 the subcommittee for review. They don’t have to meet but could then sent back comments and then it 2 could come back to the meeting here on consent. 3 Hillary Gitelman: What I’m really trying to do is have the Staff have – and consultants have to work on 4 multiple sets of revisions. I mean in past elements; this group has felt comfortable… 5 Co-Chair Garber: You’re trying to avoid that. 6 Hillary Gitelman: Giving us enough direction that we just have to update the element once and transmit 7 it to Council. Obviously, if you not comfortable doing that here, we can make the changes and bring it 8 back to the CAC but what we’d like to do in that case is not get further revisions but just get comments 9 we would enclose with the element. 10 Co-Chair Garber: Subcommittee? We’re not doing motions. 11 Co-Chair Keller: (Inaudible) 12 Co-Chair Garber: Oh, that’s true. I suppose it is. 13 Co-Chair Keller: (Inaudible) 14 Co-Chair Garber: I have not forgotten that. Stephen. 15 Stephen Levy: Ironically, we had an almost 2-hour discussion about reading the mind of Council 16 Members with all sorts of words like appalling and disrespecting and throwing the baby out with the 17 bath water yet when you come back with the subcommittee nearly 6-0 on every item. To which Staff 18 can report to Council a sense of the subcommittee. That (inaudible) goes out the window, you know? I 19 don’t know what our subcommittee worked on if (inaudible)(crosstalk) 20 Co-Chair Garber: I think there are… 21 Stephen Levy: Now wait a minute, wait a minute. 22 Co-Chair Garber: Yeah? 23 Stephen Levy: We had a long discussion about quality of life and livability, ok? And tried, with 24 Hamilton’s help, to find some way that wasn’t a code work in the 1950’s, 60’s, 70’s, 80’s and 90’s and we 25 did. The idea that the neighborhoods and the businesses aren’t connected and need to work together is 26 all through the element. If Hamilton has a word or two to make it better but I see no reason to go back 27 and go over with the subcommittee a discussion that we had in quite depth, in two meetings on some of 28 these. There are other issues that the Staff can look at. Some wording changes about whether Town and 29 Country is in or some other stuff and make a decision. 30 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 46 of 48 Co-Chair Garber: I was actually… 1 Stephen Levy: (Inaudible) 2 Co-Chair Garber: …more focused on topics that were not having to do with livability because I think 3 there have been a number of conversations or a number of suggestions here that I think could make the 4 element better. Annette and then Hamilton. 5 MOTION 6 Annette Glanckopf: I’d just like to make a motion. I would like to make a motion that to save Staff work, 7 it comes back on consent. I think you can’t think of everything in a Committee is – it’s great the work 8 you’ve done. I heard a number of very compelling arguments that are not about livability and I think that 9 I’m very happy to see how Staff incorporates them. Bring them back on consent and … 10 Co-Chair Garber: Move from there. 11 Annette Glanckopf: That’s my motion. Bring is back on consent. Any comments would just be added to 12 the transmittal and so I hope I get a second. 13 Co-Chair Keller: I second. 14 Co-Chair Garber: Well, we have not finished out substantive comments from both Arthur or me yet. A 15 motion has been noted. It has been seconded by the Co-Chair. Let’s get some discussion around this. 16 You’ve already spoken on your motion. Do you want to speak on it anymore, Annette? 17 Annette Glanckopf: No but it’s 8:30 and so I don’t think – this is very academic where we are going on 18 this. I think we need to cut to the chase so I’d like to call the discussion to an end. 19 Co-Chair Garber: The secondary to the motion. 20 Co-Chair Keller: I’m happy to have the vote on it. I think it will be clear but Dan and I have not made 21 substitutive comments on the substance of the element and so we should have the motion taken quickly 22 after we make our substantive comments. Firstly, with respect to University Avenue in down town and 23 California (inaudible), there’s a mention (inaudible) of office in University Avenue. We really should be 24 talking about small office, profession office, not large RND. In particular, the mention that was made of 25 concentrating large businesses in the Stanford Research Park, I think that that’s missing and needs to be 26 added. Julia mentioned the effect of large businesses like Google and Facebook on our retail. I also 27 wonder about the effect of Google and Facebook on our housing and their impact on Palo Alto housing 28 needs because they don’t supply the housing on site. Also, with respect to not large RND within Stanford 29 – within California Avenue, Ventura, El Camino. Those are not places for RND. I think we should have 30 some policy in there about retaining local professional – serving professional services in small offices 31 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 47 of 48 and limit their displacement, especially by large RND. I think that’s something that needs to happen. I 1 think we saw that at 550 Hamilton. We’re seeing that happen in the former Bank of America building 2 where people are being displaced for a large RND building. I don’t think it’s appropriate. Those are my 3 substantive comments and I agree entirely with Annette’s motion. 4 Co-Chair Garber: If I may, I will make a couple of comments and then we’ll go to the vote. First of all, I 5 think I support almost all of the comments that have been said but let me just point out a couple of 6 them in particular. Hamilton, I think that your revision of the tall tree piece I think is good. I mean my 7 concern initially about that was not to redo what we did in the Natural Element but the fact that it is a 8 part of what the vision, what the environment is, the branding -- although I hate to use that word -- of 9 our town, I think it’s appropriate. It’s an appropriate thing to do there. I do have some quibbles with the 10 vision. The word duel suggests to me that the business world and the residential world exist together 11 but in parallel and it doesn’t suggest that these two parts are in fact dependent and reliant on each 12 other to for the City that we know. For me, the test is sort of simple. Without our businesses, we’d be 13 something more like Atherton. Without our neighborhoods, we’d be come – we could become all sorts 14 of different things. A biggest East Palo Alto, a mosaic of big box stores and office or office buildings. I 15 don’t know – Yeah, Emeryville – fine. The second piece there and this is going to be kind of controversial 16 I suspect but I think some of you know that I have been writing a history of Oregon Expressway and I 17 lecture for PAST and at other places on the history of Palo Alto. Ignoring for the moment that we have 18 had no neighborhoods if Stanford hadn’t created Palo Alto over 100 years ago. There’s no mention of 19 Stanford’s central role in driving the vitality in innovation of Palo Alto’s business community. We simple 20 wouldn’t be the Silicon Valley if Stanford where not here. What we would have become possibly, was 21 the town of Mayfield, which would have like been annexed either to Menlo Park or Mountain View a 22 couple of decades ago. I don’t know if that deserves to go into the vision but I think there needs to be 23 some acknowledgement that the fact is that all of our business reputation stems from that and the 24 adjacency and closeness we have with that. To Whitney’s point, I was going to make the exact same 25 comment. Jennifer, thank you for the catch on the – those two pie charts not adding up. I do think that 26 seeing that as a trend is, for me, almost the heart of this element because it gets to the question of 27 where you can start to ask, what do I get? What do I get from all that money and what is it doing for me 28 in the community? I would also like, frankly, to see another graphic in there and that is because the 29 taxes and fees are generated from the use of our land is so central to how our community sees itself as 30 well as funding more than half the general fund. That includes our community services. I would have 31 liked to have seen a graphic that trended and shows that relationship in there as well. Finally, to 32 Annette’s comment about the economic development office, spot on. We have an extraordinary weak 33 to non-existent development, economic, whatever you want to call it. I have worked in a variety of other 34 cities where that role is a key in dynamic and power role and that just simple doesn’t exist. I think 35 importantly for a town like Palo Alto, if can help us tie the visions and the needs of the neighborhoods to 36 the mission of the business community and that would be something of great value. With that, all those 37 in favor of the motion as its stated say aye? 38 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Page 48 of 48 Group: Aye. 1 Co-Chair Garber: All those opposed? All those abstaining? 2 Stephen Levy: I don’t even know what the motion is. 3 Hamilton Hitchings: (Inaudible) 4 Co-Chair Keller: The motion is to have the item to come back on consent at the next meeting – the 5 element. 6 Stephen Levy: (Inaudible) 7 MOTION PASSED 13-0 WITH STEPHEN LEVY ABSTAINING. 8 Co-Chair Garber: Folks, it is 8:35, thank you very much. 8:33 to the Co-Chairs watch. We are adjourned. 9 Feedback for Continuous Improvement: 10 Future Meetings: 11 Next meeting: March 21, 2017 – Rinconada Library (Embarcadero Room) 12 13 Adjournment: 8:35 p.m. 14 CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 12 Special Meeting January 30, 2017 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 5:07 P.M. Present: DuBois arrived at 5:15 P.M., Filseth, Fine, Holman, Kniss, Kou, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Absent: Closed Session 1. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY-EXISTING LITIGATION Subject: Buena Vista MHP Residents Association v. City of Palo Alto, Santa Clara County Superior Court, Case No. 115-CV-284763 Subject Authority: Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1). MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to go into Closed Session. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 DuBois absent Council went into Closed Session at 5:07 P.M. Council returned from Closed Session at 6:06 P.M. Mayor Scharff announced no reportable action. Special Orders of the Day 2. Selection of Applicants to Interview on February 1, 2017 for the Historic Resources Board, the Parks and Recreation Commission, and the Planning and Transportation Commission. MOTION: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to: A. Interview all new applicants for the Parks & Recreation Commission and the Planning & Transportation Commission; and ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 12 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 1/30/17 B. Interview all previously interviewed applicants for the Parks & Recreation Commission and the Planning & Transportation Commission if they would like a second interview; and C. Limit Planning & Transportation Commission interviews to 10 minutes. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member XX to interview all new applicants for the Parks & Recreation Commission and the Planning & Transportation Commission. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions None. Consent Calendar MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to approve Agenda Item Numbers 3-4. 3. Approval of the Acceptance and Expenditure of Citizens Options for Public Safety (COPS) Funds on Various Law Enforcement Equipment and Approval of a Budget Amendment in the Law Enforcement Services Fund. 4. Resolution 9664 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto in Collaboration With the Cities of Redwood City, Menlo Park, and Mountain View Directing Staff to Participate in Sub-regional Planning on Bike Routes.” MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Action Items 5. Comprehensive Plan Update: City Council Review & Direction Regarding the Draft Land Use & Community Design Element and the Revised Draft Transportation Element. MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to direct Staff to include in the final Draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update: ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 12 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 1/30/17 A. Cumulative Cap: Policy L-1.10 would maintain a Cumulative Cap of 1.7 million square feet, which is the square footage remaining under the existing cap, focus the Cap on Office/R&D uses and apply it citywide rather than only in “monitored areas.” It would also exempt medical office uses in the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) area (the current cap does not apply to this geographic area), and require annual monitoring to assess the effectiveness of development requirements and determine whether the cap and the development requirements should be adjusted; and B. Annual Limit: Direct Staff to return with a permanent Ordinance addressing the Annual Limit, separate from the Comprehensive Plan Update; and C. Downtown Cap: Eliminate the Downtown cap found in existing Program L-8 and focus on monitoring development and parking demand. AMENDMENT: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to replace Part C of the Motion with, “retain the existing Downtown Cap for 45,000 square feet and exempt retail from the Cap.” INCORPORATED INTO THE AMENDMENT WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Amendment, “and hotels” after “exempt retail.” AMENDMENT RESTATED: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to replace Part C of the Motion with, “Program L-1.16.4 would retain a Downtown Cap of about 45,000 square feet for Office/R&D similar to Program L-1.16.2, and would also Cap new hotel development at 50,000 square feet.” AMENDMENT AS AMENDED FAILED: 4-5 DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kou yes AMENDMENT: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Tanaka to add to Motion Part A, “with the exception of the Stanford Research Park” after “apply it citywide.” AMENDMENT FAILED: 2-7 Fine, Tanaka yes ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 12 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 1/30/17 INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace Part B of the Motion with, “direct Staff to make permanent the Annual Limit Ordinance of 50,000 Square Feet, separate from the Comprehensive Plan Update.” AMENDMENT: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to Motion Part C, “and initiate a community driven Specific Area Plan for the Downtown Area.” AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER AMENDMENT: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to replace Part B of the Motion with, “Policy L-1.14 would perpetuate the interim annual limit of 50,000 square feet of Office/R&D and expand it to apply citywide, except that an additional 50,000 square footage allocation would be provided for the Stanford Research Park (SRP), and that allocation could be carried forward to future years if unused, up to the existing allowable square footage in the SRP. Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) would be exempt from the annual limit. This exemption could be clarified to apply only to approved uses only if desired.” INCORPORATED INTO THE AMENDMEND WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Amendment, “establish a baseline traffic measure for the Stanford Research Park.” AMENDMENT AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to replace Part B of the Motion with, “Policy L-1.14 would perpetuate the interim annual limit of 50,000 square feet of Office/R&D and expand it to apply citywide, except that an additional 50,000 square footage allocation would be provided for the Stanford Research Park (SRP), and that allocation could be carried forward to future years if unused, up to the existing allowable square footage in the SRP. Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) would be exempt from the annual limit. This exemption could be clarified to apply only to approved uses only if desired. Establish a baseline traffic measure for the Stanford Research Park.” AMENDMENT AS AMENDED FAILED: 3-6 DuBois, Holman, Kou yes MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to direct Staff to include in the final Draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update: ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 12 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 1/30/17 A. Cumulative Cap: Policy L-1.10 would maintain a Cumulative Cap of 1.7 million square feet, which is the square footage remaining under the existing cap, focus the Cap on Office/R&D uses and apply it citywide rather than only in “monitored areas.” It would also exempt medical office uses in the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) area (the current Cap does not apply to this geographic area), and require annual monitoring to assess the effectiveness of development requirements and determine whether the Cap and the development requirements should be adjusted; and B. Annual Limit: Direct Staff to make permanent the Annual Limit Ordinance of 50,000 Square Feet, separate from the Comprehensive Plan Update; and C. Downtown Cap: Eliminate the Downtown Cap found in existing Program L-8 and focus on monitoring development and parking demand. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 5-4 DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kou no MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to maintain the current 50 foot height limit separate from the Comprehensive Plan Update, continuing as an Ordinance. AMENDMENT: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member XX to replace in the Motion, “the current 50 foot height limit separate from the Comprehensive Plan Update, continuing as an Ordinance” with “any but only existing language in the 1998 Comprehensive Plan relating to height limits.” AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Kou to add to the Motion, “include Policy L-6.7 and add possible, limited exceptions to the Fry’s and Cubberley sites. AMENDMENT FAILED: 3-6 DuBois, Holman, Kou yes MOTION PASSED: 7-2 DuBois, Holman no Council took a break at 8:49 P.M. and returned at 9:00 P.M. ACTION MINUTES Page 6 of 12 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 1/30/17 MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to direct Staff to exclude from the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update “child care” from the list of typical Neighborhood Commercial uses. MOTION PASSED: 6-3 Filseth, Fine, Tanaka no MOTION: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update: A. Pursue multifamily housing at the Stanford Shopping Center, provided adequate parking is maintained, as alluded to in Policy L-4.7 (the language could be strengthened); and B. Pursue multifamily housing in the Stanford Research Park, particularly along the El Camino Real frontage as alluded to in Program L-5.4.1 (the language could be strengthened); and C. Reinstate the language in previous Policy L-33 (now Policy L-4.12 and Program L-1.12.3) about housing potential in the Town & Country area; and D. Include a new program to pursue multifamily housing near Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) and/or in the western part of the Stanford Research Park. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace Part B of the Motion with, “Program L-5.4.1 explore with Stanford University various development options for adding to the Stanford Research Park a diverse mix of uses, including residential, commercial hotel, conference center, commercial space for small businesses and start-ups, retail, transit hub, and other community- supporting services that are compatible with the existing uses, to create a vibrant innovation-oriented community.” (New Part E) AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to add to the Motion Part C, “which would be limited to second floor office conversion.” AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER AMENDMENT: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to replace Part C of the Motion with, “not support housing in the Town & Country area.” AMENDMENT PASSED: 5-4 DuBois, Fine, Tanaka, Wolbach no ACTION MINUTES Page 7 of 12 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 1/30/17 INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in Parts A and D of the Motion, “pursue” with “explore.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to remove from Motion Part D, “and/or in the western part of the Stanford Research Park.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion Part A, “and vibrant retail” after “adequate parking.” MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update: A. Explore multifamily housing at the Stanford Shopping Center, provided adequate parking and vibrant retail is maintained, as alluded to in Policy L-4.7 (the language could be strengthened); and B. L-5.4.1 Explore with Stanford University various development options for adding to the Stanford Research Park a diverse mix of uses, including residential, commercial hotel, conference center, commercial space for small businesses and start-ups, retail, transit hub, and other community-supporting services that are compatible with the existing uses, to create a vibrant innovation-oriented community; and C. Not support housing in the Town & County area; and D. Include a new program to explore multifamily housing near Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC). MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 9-0 MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, a new program to eliminate housing sites along San Antonio Road and increase residential densities in Downtown and the California Avenue Area to replace potential units on the sites eliminated. MOTION PASSED: 6-3 Filseth, Kniss, Kou no MOTION: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to direct Staff to eliminate from the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update Development Requirements and Community Indicators. ACTION MINUTES Page 8 of 12 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 1/30/17 INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “direct Staff to consider a Community Indicator Program as part of the next iteration of the Annual Performance Report or another on-going monitoring effort.” (New Part B) SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Kou to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update: to articulate the purposes and topics for development requirements in the Comprehensive Plan, but develop details later via Comprehensive Plan program and reference tables L-1 and L-2 and include Staff comments regarding these tables and include references to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) wherever Level Of Service (LOS) is included in the Comprehensive Plan. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED: 4-5 DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kou yes SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update to articulate the purposes and topics for development requirements in the Comprehensive Plan, but develop details later via an implementation program excluding Comprehensive Plan Programs. SECOND WITHDRAWN BY THE SECONDER SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update: A. Eliminate Development Requirements and Community Indicators in the Comprehensive Plan; and B. Direct Staff to consider a Community Indicator Program as part of the next iteration of the Annual Performance Report or another on-going monitoring effort. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 8-1 Holman no MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update to create new opportunities for retail/residential mixed use and pursue conversion of some non-retail commercial Floor Area Ratio (FAR) to ACTION MINUTES Page 9 of 12 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 1/30/17 residential FAR as alluded to in Policy L-6.12, this policy will be separated into two Programs, Program L-1.16.5, and Program L-1.12.3. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 8-0-1 Tanaka abstain MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, Policy L-2.3 about encouraging a mix of housing types and sizes designed for greater affordability and Policy 3.4 about encouraging a mix of smaller housing types. MOTION PASSED: 8-0-1 DuBois abstain MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update Policy L-3.5 and associated Program L-3.5.1 regarding ways to minimize displacement of existing residents. MOTION PASSED: 8-0-1 Tanaka abstain MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, policies and programs like Policy L-4.1, Program L-3.2.1, and Program L-6.12.4 about preserving ground floor retail space. MOTION PASSED: 5-0-4 Filseth, Holman, Kou, Scharff abstain MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Kou to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, maintain Policy L-3.3 and/or Policy L-3.6 (some repetition can be eliminated) and associated Program L-3.3.1 about preserving existing housing that is affordable, such as small cottage clusters, removing from Program L-3.3.1, “and the replacement of rental housing units with ownership housing units.” MOTION PASSED: 6-0-3 Kou, Tanaka, Wolbach abstain MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, Program L-1.16.5 (we will fix the numbering problem here) or L-7.12.1 (some repetition can be eliminated) to revise or consider revising the Transferable Development Rights (TDR) Program Downtown to create bonus residential rather than commercial square footage. MOTION PASSED: 7-0-2 Filseth, Tanaka abstain ACTION MINUTES Page 10 of 12 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 1/30/17 MOTION: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Tanaka to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, a program to explore increasing hotel Floor Area Ratio (FAR) from 2.0 to 3.0. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “in areas inside of Downtown and 2.5 in other areas.” MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Tanaka to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, a program to explore increasing hotel Floor Area Ratio (FAR) from 2.0 to 3.0 in areas inside of Downtown and 2.5 in other areas.” MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 5-3-1 DuBois, Holman, Kou no, Filseth abstain MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, Policy L-4.10 regarding enhancing the pedestrian environment along El Camino Real and Program L-9.4.1 specific to sidewalk widths and building design. MOTION FAILED: 4-1-4 Fine no, Filseth, Kniss, Scharff, Wolbach abstain MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to direct Staff to include in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update converting Policy L-4.10 regarding enhancing the pedestrian environment along El Camino Real to a Program and maintain Program L-9.4.1 specific to sidewalk widths and building design. MOTION FAILED: 3-5-1 DuBois, Holman, Kou yes, Fine abstain MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to direct Staff to eliminate from the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update Program L-4.2.1 regarding preparation of a Coordinated Area Plan for South El Camino (pp. L-48 through L-49). MOTION PASSED: 6-2-1 Fine, Tanaka no, Filseth abstain MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to direct Staff to restore in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, existing Policy L-6 language about preserving neighborhood character (“avoid abrupt changes in scale and density between residential and non-residential areas and between residential areas of different ACTION MINUTES Page 11 of 12 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 1/30/17 densities. To promote compatibility and gradual transitions between land uses, place zoning district boundaries at mid-block locations rather than along streets wherever possible.”) This is in lieu of the new language proposed in Policy L-6.11. MOTION PASSED: 5-2-2 Scharff, Wolbach no, Fine, Tanaka abstain MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to direct Staff to remove from the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, all Programs from the Land Use Element, not required by State Law to be taken up at future dates as policy discussions and use the implementation section of the Plan to indicate the relative cost and priority of each Program. MOTION FAILED: 4-2-3 DuBois, Kou, no, Filseth, Holman, Scharff abstain MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to direct Staff to remove from the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, all Programs from the Land Use Element, not required by State Law to be taken up at future dates as policy discussions and use the implementation section of the plan to indicate the relative cost and priority of each Program. MOTION PASSED: 5-4 DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kou no MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to remove all Programs from the Transportation Element. MOTION PASSED: 6-1-2 Holman no, Filseth, Kniss abstain MOTION: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to continue the Revised Draft Transportation Element to a date uncertain. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to continue the Land Use Element to a date uncertain. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs None. ACTION MINUTES Page 12 of 12 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 1/30/17 Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements None. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 10:59 P.M. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/6/2017 1:28 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Don McDougall <mcdougall.don@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 06, 2017 10:57 AM To:Council, City Cc:Hetterly, Jennifer Subject:Comprehensive Plan structure Discussion March 20, 2017 Attachments:CAC Comments - 2-21-17 Final .docx Honorable Gregory Scharff, Mayor Honorable Liz Kniss, Vice Mayor Honorable City Council Members City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto CA 94301 Re: March 20, 2017, Discussion of CAC Goals. Policies and Programs Structure Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice Mayor Kniss, and City Council Members, Please see the attached joint memo Jennifer Hetterly and I submitted to the CAC meeting of February 21st. The memo reflects our concerns about the form and structure of the Comprehensive Plan and has received attention and discussion. We are concerned that Council has seriously threatened:  Public trust in the Council and the CAC;  Hard-earned consensus within the CAC;  Contextual cohesion of the Plan;  Transparency and accessibility of the Plan; and  The city’s current and future guidance and flexibility to act. Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Respectfully, Don McDougall CAC Comments for 2/21/17 Meeting Jennifer Hetterly and Don McDougall 1 As Palo Alto citizens, we are appalled by Council’s blanket removal or even separation of the Programs from the body of the draft Comprehensive Plan. As CAC members, we are deeply offended. TRUST The city told the community the Comp Plan was very important. Citizens and stakeholders were asked to sacrifice their time and invest their energy beginning with the “Our Palo Alto 2030” process so that their interests were fully represented. Citizens and stakeholders did so, by the hundreds. The city tasked the CAC with the work of reviewing that input and striking a balance among competing interests to produce a Comprehensive Plan. The CAC has done that through 20 months of difficult and often contentious effort. Council asked that the Plan be developed in an Element – Vision - Goals - Policies - Programs fashion. Frequently Vision and Goals were dictated by Council. That process placed Programs throughout the Comp Plan as integral and fundamental to the desired balance. In many cases, Program inclusion was the lynchpin to achieve agreement and consensus. Several Policies were designed with the expectation that the Programs would provide necessary detail and clarity. Without adoption of that context, staff, Council, and most importantly the community, can only speculate as to the meaning or implications of those Policies. To suggest that the Policies, taken alone, could represent CAC intentions and consensus is inaccurate and misleading. Council’s blanket approach to the Land Use and Transportation Programs belittles the effort, subverts the balance and invalidates the consensus. This is not a mere formatting change, nor can it accurately be described as “accept[ing] strong consensus where it existed.” In the name of Council flexibility, Council has damaged public trust and undermined the very work enabling them to earn it. SPECIFICS MATTER IN A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Substantively, a Comprehensive Plan without Programs is barely a “Plan” at all. Yes, several Policies in the draft Comp Plan include specifics, but for many, the Programs provide important clarity about what is intended. The Comprehensive Plan must offer sufficient specifics to be actionable and for staff, Council and citizens to know what the plan is and get on board. The Programs inform the public what to expect and allow them to hold the city accountable – these are the keys to public trust. In fact, the existing Comp Plan clearly states that the “Implementation Chapter is not a Plan Element,” nor is an appendix. Thus, Programs located in an un-adopted chapter or appendix carry no authority for (or expectation of) action. Council has rendered them largely irrelevant. It is also argued that because the Council chose to simplify the S/CAP by removing action items from the body of that plan, it would be equally appropriate to do so with the Comp Plan. Unlike the S/CAP, however, the Comprehensive Plan provides the underpinning for all city action. It is State-mandated and has much more comprehensive impacts than the S/CAP. Nonetheless, even for the S/CAP, the removal of all proposed action items from the body of the Plan necessitated CAC Comments for 2/21/17 Meeting Jennifer Hetterly and Don McDougall 2 substantial modification and expansion of the Goals and Policies in several sections. Council proposed no such revisions for the draft Comp Plan. A COMP PLAN WITHOUT PROGRAMS IS LESS NIMBLE Programs adopted in a Comprehensive Plan provide direction for city staff to pursue specific efforts without undergoing an additional, lengthy legislative process. They are what makes the Plan readily actionable. According to the State’s General Plan Guidelines, adopted Comp Plan Programs provide a short term mechanism for the city to “quickly respond to the demands of new funding sources, the results of their own activities, and the jurisdiction’s immediate needs and problems.” By eliminating authorization for any Programs, in the name of simplicity and flexibility, Council’s action actually created a significant barrier to implementation. Now, before any Program can be implemented, the city staff or Council leadership must bring it forward to be taken up by the full Council. Several high-priority Programs may well successfully compete for limited Council time. But where the Program is non-controversial or doesn’t require specific budget authorization, that legislative time is wasted and only delays implementation. The bulk of the CAC recommended Programs do not merit individualized legislative attention, but are nonetheless very important to the community. They are recommended for adoption in the Comp Plan to reflect that importance and enable staff implementation in an efficient manner. Requiring further Council review in order to act creates a significant burden on both staff and Council. With a poorly considered action, Council has: 1. Threatened public trust; 2. Destroyed hard-earned consensus; 3. Undermined the contextual cohesion of the Plan; 4. Removed Plan transparency; and 5. Hindered the city’s flexibility to act. We recommend reconsideration by Council and a unified voice of concern from the CAC. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/8/2017 11:01 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Jennifer Chang Hetterly <jchetterly@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 08, 2017 10:59 AM To:Council, City Cc:Gitelman, Hillary; Keene, James Subject:March 20, 2017 Discussion of Comprehensive Plan Attachments:Open Letter to City Council .pdf Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice Mayor Kniss and City Council Members, The City Council’s January 30 action directing wholesale displacement of implementation programs from the Land Use and Transportation Elements of the draft Comprehensive Plan was of great concern to the CAC and to the community. Please see the attached letter outlining our concerns. A draft of this letter was shared with our fellow CAC members at our February 21st meeting. In addition to several public speakers, and throughout a two hour public discussion of the topic, the vast majority of both voting and ex officio members present expressed similar concerns. In addition to creating confusion, we believe the decoupling of Policies and Programs threatens public trust, undermines hard earned consensus and the contextual cohesion of the Plan, and impairs the City’s ability to act in an efficient manner on measures of significant importance to the community. We hope that City Council will revisit the Land Use and Transportation Elements with a view to restoring the interconnected implementation programs required for a coherent, inclusive, and “comprehensive” Plan. Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Respectfully, / Len Filppu / Annette Glanckopf / Jennifer Hetterly / Hamilton Hitchings / Shani Kleinhaus / Mark Nadim / Alex Van Riesen  OPEN LETTER TO PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL from members of the Citizens Advisory Committee for the Comprehensive Plan Update We respectfully acknowledge City Council’s prerogative to revise or reject policies or programs recommended by the Citizens Advisory Committee for the Comprehensive Plan (CAC). Nonetheless, we feel compelled to formally voice our objection to: 1. The wholesale removal of all implementation programs from the body of the Land Use and Transportation Elements, or any other Element of the Comprehensive Plan; and 2. The fast track voting process employed on January 30, 2017 that allowed for their removal without full opportunity for Council debate or public comment and without a clear and common understanding of the impact of that action. The across-the-board decoupling of policies and programs in the Comprehensive Plan destroys the cohesive balance of the Plan, impairs the city’s ability to act and sends a dangerous “just trust us” message to the public at the very moment comprehensive community input was rejected without review. Rather than defining the city’s path into the future based on thorough deliberation and consensus building, (as a Comprehensive Plan is intended to do), City Council’s recent action leaves the public, staff, and City Council uncertain about intended strategies, lacking data to inform decisions and measure impacts, and devoid of tools for accountability for years to come. In addition, Council’s fast-track disposition of all implementation programs devalues the challenging and responsible efforts of the CAC and the input of hundreds of citizens. It undermines and discourages future citizen engagement in the self-governance of the City. We ask that Council restore implementation programs to the body of the Land Use and Transportation Elements to reinstate the cohesion, balance and accountability represented in those important chapters. Our city faces intractable challenges. In Palo Alto’s current political climate, public trust is fragile. Wholesale rejection of community compromises and flying blind into the future in the name of simplicity and flexibility will not fortify it. The CAC was appointed to reflect a diversity of views across the community. We considered hundreds of broad based pleas from community members and worked for 20 months to develop a draft Comprehensive Plan that promotes more affordable housing, addresses traffic and parking issues, and preserves our environment and residential neighborhoods while improving our business districts as we continue to grow. These top concerns were further reflected in Palo Alto’s annual, statistically valid Citizen’s Survey, along with declining satisfaction that citizen’s interests are well represented.1 As in most city General Plans, the policies and programs throughout the Draft Comp Plan are interdependent. Together, they were debated, negotiated and crafted by the CAC to balance  1 On the following measures, excellent/good ratings declined by statistically meaningful percentages: • The job Palo Alto does at welcoming citizen involvement: -11% • How well Palo Alto government does at generally acting in the best interest of the community: -9% • Opportunities to participate in community matters: -7% • Treating all residents fairly: -6%  often competing citizen interests and to meaningfully address community challenges in ways that were actionable by city staff. In the few areas where the CAC was unable to achieve compromise, we put forward policy and program options for the Council to deliberate. Taken together, the policies and programs as well as the wording of the non-consensus “options” garnered the unanimous recommendation of the diverse CAC. At its retreat on Saturday January 28, the City Council voted, in part based on the Citizen's Survey, to make Transportation and Housing two of the city’s highest priorities for 2017. Yet two days later, under a fast-track voting procedure that forestalled open deliberation, Council removed all implementation programs from both the Transportation and Land Use Elements of the Draft Comprehensive Plan. Without public notice of that intent, there was no opportunity for public or CAC questions or comments regarding the significance and impact of the wholesale displacement of implementation programs. The community is rightfully confused and upset. Council’s action eliminates important contextual detail reflecting community priorities related to specific policies. For example: The policy to “[p]rovide for sufficient but not excessive parking” is open to broad interpretation and lacks actionable substance without the associated program direction: “For each commercial center and employment district, conduct a parking needs assessment in consultation with business owners, employers and local residents to establish a baseline for parking need. Evaluate the need to update parking standards in the municipal code, based on local conditions, different users’ needs and baseline parking need.” A program calling for improved code enforcement and review of regulatory tools to enhance and preserve the livability of residential neighborhoods and the vitality of commercial and employment districts helps guide interpretation and implementation of an otherwise vague policy to “[p]rovide positive stewardship of development and manage change to benefit the community.” In addition, the blanket relegation of implementation programs to an “appendix” renders impotent several required Comp Plan Draft EIR Mitigation Measures as well as substantial content pertaining to studies, data collection, monitoring and reporting. Some examples include: • Monitor non-residential development, tracking new square footage by use as well as commute trips by single occupancy vehicle and parking demand; • Study the feasibility of unbundled parking for office, commercial, and multi-family residential developments that are well served by transit and demonstrated walking and biking connections; • Collect, analyze and report transportation data through surveys and other methods, to evaluate implementation of related policies on a regular basis; • Complete a nexus study to identify the impacts of peak period motor vehicle trips from new development and the cost of needed transportation improvements.  Finally, decoupling all programs from their related policies and placing them outside the body of the element leaves valued priorities in indefinite limbo to be taken up at whim, if at all. It eliminates authorization for significant and time-sensitive planning tools such as Coordinated Area Plans for the Fry’s site area, South El Camino Corridor and Downtown/Transit Station. Furthermore, many of the recommended programs authorize valued undertakings and time-tested approaches that are too small to compete on their own for future City Council attention. Adopting them as part of the Comprehensive Plan, consistent with past practice, would have the positive impact of directing city effort towards strategies that may be less high profile, but nonetheless serve important community needs and concerns: • Review development standards to discourage the loss of housing units and the replacement of rental housing units with ownership housing units. • Provide better east-west connections across El Camino Real to bring the Ventura and Barron Park neighborhoods together and to improve linkages to local schools and parks. • Encourage private schools within the community to develop Walk and Roll Maps as part of Transportation Demand Management strategies to reduce vehicle trips. • Periodically update the Adopted School Commute Corridors Network to include updated school commute routes. Ensure these routes are prioritized for safety improvements and considered in land use planning decisions. We sincerely hope that City Council will reaffirm its commitment to inclusive and collaborative city governance, recognize the critical interdependence of policies and programs, and value the practical and hard won balance of community interests reflected in the CAC recommendations. Please revisit the Land Use and Transportation Elements with a view to restoring the interconnected implementation programs required for a coherent, inclusive, and “comprehensive” Plan. Respectfully submitted, / Len Filppu / Annette Glanckopf / Jennifer Hetterly / Hamilton Hitchings / Shani Kleinhaus / Mark Nadim / Alex Van Riesen City of Palo Alto (ID # 7440) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 3/20/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Airport Fixed Base Operator Expiring Leases and Info Update Title: Palo Alto Airport Fixed Base Operator Expiring Leases and Informational Update From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation This is an informational report and no Council action is necessary. Background In August 2014, City Council approved the transfer of the Palo Alto Airport operations from the County of Santa Clara to the City of Palo Alto (CMR: 4723).As part of the transfer, the City agreed to perform the executory portions of all contracts assigned by the county, including the two Fixed Based Operator (FBO) Lease Agreements with Roy-Aero Enterprises, LLC and Airport Management Group,Inc., which expire in April 2017. In June 2016,Council approved a contract with Aviation Management Consulting Group (AMCG)to perform needed evaluation and planning tasks prior to the lease expirations (CMR: 6671). Tasks encompassed in the contract included performing a highest and best use analysis for the airport; developing the Primary Management and Compliance Documents (Rules and Regulations, Minimum Standards, Leasing/Rents and Fees Policy, and related documents); and an optional scope of work for an Airport Business Plan. To reduce proposed costs, Airport Division and Real Property Division staff determined building condition and appraisals could be assessed in-house,aided by consultant Valbridge Property Advisors. The resulting appraisal report was used by AMCG to develop recommendations for interim property management. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Timeline Now Over multiple site visits, AMCG was able to collect and review data on the community, market, existing businesses and the airport. This data was the basis for providing guidance and recommendations for an interim plan for the expiring leases to allow time to conduct a comprehensive Airport business Plan that will identify the long-term recommendations for the Airport for Council approval. The City will enter into two-year term leases with the current FBO sub-lessees as an interim solution until the Airport Business Plan is complete. Fall 2017 The extensive data AMCG was able to collect and review will also help in developing the Primary Management and Compliance Documents (Rules and Regulations, Minimum Standards, Leasing/Rents and Fees Policy, and related documents).Outreach with the pilots, businesses, and the community will be conducted to ensure stakeholder input and program success. Establishing effective property management practices and updated fees and rents will ensure the airport is financially self-sufficient and well-run. Staff will return to Council in fall 2017 to present the completed documents for approval. January 2018 Shortly thereafter, staff expects to return to Council to amend the contract with AMCG to add the optional scope for an Airport Business Plan. The Airport Business Plan will utilize input from businesses, pilots, airport neighbors and the community to plan for the future development and management of the airport. As well, the Airport Business Plan will ensure the airport meets all FAA grant assurances. Next Steps Following Council approval of the amendment, AMCG will begin developing the Airport Business Plan and when complete,the airport anticipates issuing an RFP for long-term lease agreements for business activities at the airport that meet the goals identified in the plan. This timeline will allow the airport to minimize operational and financial impacts on airport users, while maximizing the airport’s revenue stream. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Resource Impact In Fiscal Year 2016, revenue from the two primary leaseholds equaled $80,054.72. It is estimated Fiscal Year 2017 will end with short-term lease revenues equaling $136,930.02. AMCG has projected Fiscal Year 2018 short-term lease revenue to equal between $1.2M and $1.6M. The General Fund has loaned about $2.9 million dollars to the Airport Enterprise Fund to support operations and provide seed money for capital improvement projects between Fiscal Years 2011 and 2017 (Table 1). Table 1. Fiscal Year Loan Amount 2011 $300,000 2013 $310,000 2014 $325,000 2015 $760,000 2016 $515,601 2017 $704,150 TOTAL $2,914,751 This recommended interim plan is establishing effective property management practices and updated fees and rents to ensure the airport is well-run and financially self-sufficient. The Airport is scheduled to initiate repayment of loans in Fiscal Year 2019. Policy Implication There are no changes to existing City policies.