Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2017-10-30 City Council Agenda Packet
City 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. Monday, October 30, 2017 Special Meeting Council Chambers 5:00 PM Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the Council Chambers on the Thursday 11 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 Special Orders of the Day 5:00-5:30 PM 1.Introduction of Lord Mayor, Professor, Dr. Eckart Wuerzner of Heidelberg, Germany and the Heidelberg Delegation AT THIS TIME COUNCIL WILL TAKE A 15 MINUTE BREAK Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 5:45-8:15 PM 1A. Discussion and Consideration of the Planning & Transportation Commission's Recommendations Regarding the Comprehensive Plan Update and Adoption of Resolutions Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Comprehensive Plan Update; Adopting Findings Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and Adopting the Updated Comprehensive Plan Dated June 30, 2017 With Desired Corrections and Amendments, Which Comprehensively REVISED Comp Plan Final EIR Memo 2 October 30, 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. Updates and Supersedes the City's 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan (Two Public Hearings Will Be Held: October 23, 2017 and November 13, 2017. On October 23, 2017, the City Council may Consider Action on the Planning & Transportation Commission’s Recommendations, Providing Direction to Staff, and Certification of the Final EIR. Other Actions Will be Deferred Until the Hearing on November 13, 2017.) (CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 23, 2017) Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions City Manager Comments 8:15-8:25 PM Oral Communications 8:25-8:40 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 8:40-8:45 PM 4.Approval of Action Minutes for the October 16, 2017 Council Meeting Consent Calendar 8:45-8:50 PM Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members. 5.Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Regulate Operation of Personal Delivery Devices, Also Known as Autonomous Robots Within the City of Palo Alto for an Approximate 1-year Period 6.Approval of Amendment Number 1 to Contract Number S18169410 With Dixon Resources Unlimited in the Amount of $69,862 for a Total Not-to-Exceed Amount of $100,762 to Conduct the California Avenue Parking Management Study and Approval of a Budget Amendment in the California Avenue Parking Permit Fund 7.Approval of Salary Schedule Amendments for Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 521 and the Utilities Management Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA) 8.Approval of a 5-year Contract With EnvisionWare, Inc. for Maintenance of the Automated Materials Handling Systems (AMHS) at Rinconada and Mitchell Park Libraries for a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $448,634 9.Approval of a Professional Services Agreement With BKF Engineers for the Amount of $450,000 Over a 3-year Term for On-Call Surveying and Design Support Services Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A 3 October 30, 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. Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 8:50-9:30 PM 10.Adoption of an Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Repealing Chapter 9.17 (Personal Cultivation of Marijuana) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code; Repealing Ordinance No. 4422; and Amending Chapters 18.04 (Definitions) and 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses) of Title 18 (Zoning) to Prohibit Medical Cannabis Dispensaries and Prohibit Commercial Cannabis Activities, Except for Deliveries. Environmental Assessment: The Ordinance is Exempt in Accordance With Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 11.PUBLIC HEARING/QUASI-JUDICIAL. 999 Alma: Council Determination on a Waiver Request From the Retail Preservation Ordinance. Environmental Assessment: Exempt in Accordance With the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15061(b)(3) Guidelines (STAFF REQUESTS THIS ITEM BE CONTINUED TO A DATE UNCERTAIN) Study Session 9:30-10:30 PM 3. 285 Hamilton [17PLN-00309]: Applicant Requests a Prescreening Discussion for a Possible Text Amendment That Would Allow Development Exceptions for Rooftop Decks Within the Downtown Area, Including the Subject Property. Environmental Assessment: The Subject Request is not a Project in Accordance With the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 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)CCM 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. 4 October 30, 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 Schedule of Meetings Schedule of Meetings Tentative Agenda Tentative Agenda Informational Report Independent Police Auditor's Report 2016-Part Two Public Letters to Council Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 4 Standing Committee Meetings Sp. Policy and Services Committee Meeting November 2, 2017 City of Palo Alto (ID # 8106) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 10/23/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Comprehensive Plan EIR Certification and Plan Adoption Title: Discussion and Consideration of the Planning & Transportation Commission's Recommendations Regarding the Comprehensive Plan Update and Adoption of Resolutions Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Comprehensive Plan Update; Adopting Findings Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and Adopting the Updated Comprehensive Plan Dated June 30, 2017 With Desired Corrections and Amendments, Which Comprehensively Updates and Supersedes the City's 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan (Two Public Hearings Will Be Held: October 23, 2017 and November 13, 2017. On October 23, 2017, the City Council May Consider Action on the Planning & Transportation Commission’s Recommendations, Providing Direction to Staff, and Certification of the Final EIR. Other Actions will be Deferred until the Hearing on November 13, 2017.) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions: 1. Receive and consider the Planning & Transportation Commission (PTC) report and recommendations regarding the Comprehensive Plan Update (Attachment A) and adopt a motion thanking the PTC and identifying specific changes to the June 30, 2017 Comprehensive Plan Update desired as a result of the Commission’s work; 2. Adopt a resolution (Attachment B) certifying that the Council has reviewed and considered the Comprehensive Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated August 30, 2017, the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City of Palo Alto; 3. Adopt a resolution (Attachment C) making required CEQA findings, including adoption of City of Palo Alto Page 2 mitigation measures, findings related to alternatives, findings of overriding considerations, and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP); 4. Adopt a resolution (Attachment D) adopting the updated Comprehensive Plan dated June 30, 2017 with the specific additional corrections and changes included in Attachment E, comprehensively updating and superseding the 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan in its entirety, preserving the Housing Element adopted in 2014; 5. Direct Staff to prepare and disseminate electronic and paper copies of the updated Comprehensive Plan with appropriate formatting, illustrations, and acknowledgements; and 6. Direct staff to return to Council for another review of the implementation chapter of the Comprehensive Plan in 2018 and in the interim, prioritize the following implementing actions to bring forward to Council on future agendas in the near term: A. Adoption of an Updated Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance; B. Adoption of Comprehensive Plan Implementing Ordinance #1 amending Title 18 (Zoning Ordinance) of the Municipal Code to support the production of new housing and the preservation of existing units; C. Initiation of a Coordinated Area Plan for the North Ventura area (also referred to as the Fry’s site); and D. Initiation of discussions with Stanford University about the potential for developing housing in the Stanford Research Park, Stanford Shopping Center, and Stanford University Medical Center vicinity. Note: This is the first of two hearings planned for consideration of these recommendations. This evening, staff requests that the Council act on the first two items (PTC Report and EIR certification) and specify any changes or additions requested to the list of corrections and changes in Attachment E. The second hearing for plan adoption is currently scheduled for November 13, 2017. The August 30, 2017 Final EIR is available at: http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/eir/ and the June 30, 2017 the Comprehensive Plan Update is available at: http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/07/PACompPlan_June30_PTC_we breduced.pdf. Hard copies of both documents are also available for review at the Planning Department and at local libraries. The Planning Department is located on the 5th floor of City Hall at 250 Hamilton Avenue in Palo Alto. Executive Summary The City has been working on a comprehensive update to its general plan, the Palo Alto 1998- 2010 Comprehensive Plan, for many years and the City Council will have an opportunity to complete this effort at tonight’s meeting and a second meeting currently scheduled for November 13, 2017. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Overall, the CAC and the Council have crafted a Comprehensive Plan Update that seeks to preserve the vision and values of the current Comprehensive Plan, while updating its goals, policies, and programs to reflect the world of today. The updates are aimed at: Land Use & Community Design stimulating housing through a host of implementation programs, supplementing policies and programs in the City’s Housing Element; making the non-residential development cap apply citywide and focusing it on office/R&D development only so square footage converted from another use like warehouse or retail to office/R&D development will count against the cap; preserving ground floor retail and limiting the displacement of existing retail; ensuring regular coordination with Palo Alto Unified School District regarding land use and development; recognizing and incorporating the goals of other recent planning efforts, such as the Urban Forest Master Plan and the Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan; guiding operation and improvements at the Palo Alto Airport, which was transitioned from the County to the City in recent years; Transportation reducing reliance on single occupant vehicles (SOV), making alternatives to the automobile more convenient, and addressing the needs of transit-dependent communities; establishing specific quantitative goals for trip reduction from new development prioritizing Caltrain grade separations; recognizing the State-mandated transition from Level of Service (LOS) to Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT)as a methodology for analyzing traffic impacts under CEQA, while preserving LOS as a methodology for ensuring Comprehensive Plan consistency; Natural Environment establishing a new focus on connected ecosystems, consistent with the Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan; recognizing open space, the urban forest, and a healthy natural environment as contributors to public health; seeking opportunities for adding open space, including connections between Skyline Ridge and San Francisco Bay; addressing climate changes and climate adaption; ensuring resilient supply and management of water in Palo Alto, including additional policies to protect groundwater as a resource and to respond to drought; encouraging energy efficiency, energy conservation, and renewable energy sources; City of Palo Alto Page 4 Safety updating policies on natural and man-made threats and hazards, with a focus on preparedness; expanding policies on community safety and emergency management; Community Services & Facilities perpetuating policies about new and existing parks and public open spaces; adding new policies and programs specifically tailored to the needs of youth and of seniors; sustaining the health and well-being of residents, consistent with the Council’s Heathy Cities, Healthy Communities resolution; Business and Economics promoting a comprehensive approach to fiscal sustainability; supporting the small local-serving businesses, start-ups, non-profit organizations, and professional services that make up Palo Alto’s business diversity. The updated Comprehensive Plan will serve as the City’s “constitution,” with policies that will inform development and implementation of land use regulations and infrastructure investments for many years to come. The updated Plan also contains implementation programs that are intended to advance the goals and policies of the Plan, and that may be reexamined and reprioritized by the City Council on a regular basis. Tonight, the City Council will first consider a report and recommendations from the PTC (Attachment A), as well as a draft resolution that would certify the Final EIR (Attachment B). Staff is also requesting that the City Council identify any final changes it would like to incorporate into the June 30, 2017 version of the Draft Plan. This document incorporates City Council comments and adjustments to the Citizens Advisory Committee’s (CAC’s) work products. Changes recommended by the PTC to this draft are shown in Table 2 and 3 in this report which are also included in Attachment A. An errata or list of corrections and clarifications developed by staff since the June 30th version was published has been provided In Attachment E. At the November 13th meeting, staff will be asking the City Council to consider and adopt required CEQA findings (including a “statement of overriding considerations” and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program), and adopt the Comprehensive Plan Update with the desired changes and adjustments specified this evening. Staff will also be asking for direction to prepare and disseminate electronic and paper copies of the plan, as well as direction to return to Council for an in depth discussion of the Implementation Chapter and to identify a City of Palo Alto Page 5 handful of near term implementation priorities. Background The City’s current Comprehensive Plan, Embracing the New Century, Palo Alto 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan, was adopted in 1998 and sets goals, policies, and programs related to land use and development issues, including transportation, housing, natural resource, community services, and safety. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Update contains chapters or “elements” that address topics required by State law, as well as optional elements and topics. This relationship is shown in Table 1. The Plan includes a total of seven Elements; two are optional. All of these draft elements are based on the existing Comprehensive Plan, revised to reflect the City Council’s direction regarding vision and goals, as well as input from the PTC’s proposed revisions and public input. The elements included in the June 30, 2017 draft Comprehensive Plan Update are the product of hundreds of hours of work by the Council, the PTC, the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), CAC subcommittees, staff, and consultants. Table 1. State-Mandated and Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Elements State-Mandated Element Comprehensive Plan Element Land Use Land Use & Community Design Circulation Transportation Housing Housing (adopted 2014 – not part of PTC review) Open Space Conservation Noise Natural Environment Safety Safety Optional Elements Business & Economics Community Services & Facilities Note: The previous Safety Element Goals, Policies and programs were part of the 1998 Natural Environment Element. The Comprehensive Plan also includes Governance and Implementation chapters, as well as an introduction and glossary. Source: Planning & Community Environment, September 2017 The City Council recognized the need to update the Plan and initiated the update in 2006. The PTC then spent close to six years working on the Comprehensive Plan Update (from 2008 to 2014), ultimately sending its recommendation to the City Council in April of 2014. Upon receipt of the PTC’s recommendations, the City Council adopted a schedule and strategy for “reframing” the long-running update to include expanded community engagement and a full evaluation of alternatives, cumulative impacts and mitigation strategies. A community-wide City of Palo Alto Page 6 Summit was attended by over 350 people in May 2015, and was followed by creation of the CAC to engage in further community dialog and inform the Council’s deliberations. Between July 2015 and May 2017, the full CAC met 23 times to review elements of the existing Comprehensive Plan, review recommendations advanced by the PTC, and receive and review community input. The CAC also formed subcommittees to discuss each Element, as well as a Sustainability subcommittee that considered sustainability-related issues in several Elements. There were a total of 29 meetings of CAC subcommittees. All CAC meetings were noticed and open to the public and included time for public comment. The CAC forwarded its recommended draft Comprehensive Plan Update to the Council on May 16, 2017. All meeting materials and minutes from CAC meetings are available here: http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/cac/citizens-advisory-committee/ In addition, the City Council met independently to review elements of the existing Comprehensive Plan, review recommendations advanced by the PTC and the CAC, and receive and review community input. The City Council discussed the Comp Plan goals and vision statements, EIR scenarios, and draft Elements at 24 meetings since 2010. City Council agendas, staff reports, and other relevant materials for Comp Plan discussion items are available here: http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/city-council/ On June 12, 2017, the City Council referred the Comprehensive Plan Update Draft to the PTC for review and a recommendation within 90 days. The draft Plan that was sent to the PTC (referred to in this report as the “June 30, 2017 Draft Plan”) reflects the Citizens Advisory Committee’s (CAC) May 16, 2017 recommendations to the Council and incorporates changes based on Council’s review up to and including the Council meeting on June 12th. At the June 14, 2017 PTC meeting, the PTC passed a motion to focus its 90 day review on the Land Use and Transportation Elements of the Comprehensive Plan Update. The PTC completed its review and recommendations on these two Elements on September 27, 2017, within the 90 day period. The Commission’s report and recommendations are in Attachment A. The Comprehensive Plan Update cannot be adopted until the City complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a State law requiring 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. Concurrent with the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan Update, 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 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 Comprehensive Plan. City of Palo Alto Page 7 Discussion With the requested actions, the City Council would accept and consider the PTC’s recommendations, address CEQA requirements, and adopt a new general plan for the City of Palo Alto. Once adopted, the plan would constitute a policy framework to guide decisions about land use and development, transportation, and infrastructure for the next 13 to 15 years. Each requested action is described briefly below, with a focus on any unresolved issues. The Planning & Transportation Commission’s Report & Recommendations At the beginning of July, the PTC was sent a bound copy of the June 30, 2017 draft of the Comp Plan, which was used throughout the PTC’s review (available at: http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/07/PACompPlan_June30_PTC_w ebreduced.pdf). At the outset of their review, the PTC decided to focus on the Land Use and Transportation Elements. The PTC met on July 12, 2017 for an orientation to the Comp Plan document and agreed on a schedule for review of the Land Use and Transportation Elements. The July 12 PTC staff report provided an overview of the Comprehensive Plan Update legal requirements and key issues in the Land Use and Transportation Elements. This is a link to that report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/58650. The objectives of the PTC review were: To recommend needed high-level adjustments to policies and programs in the Land Use Element, Transportation Element, and the Implementation Plan, to better address major policy issues. To identify any inconsistencies or redundancies between the elements for clarification or elimination in order to make the document more useable for the PTC and the public. Over the course of an additional five meetings in July, August, and September, the PTC reviewed first the Transportation Element, then the Land Use Element, providing comments and suggestions on background narrative, maps, goals, policies, and programs. After each meeting, staff organized those comments, identified areas of consensus and returned at the next PTC meeting with a synthesized list of comments for the commission’s review and further discussion. At their fourth and fifth meetings, the PTC reviewed a compiled list of comments, identified those comments that seemed most significant for further discussion, and engaged in more in-depth discussion and debate on approximately 20 topics. The outcomes of this discussion are relayed to the Council in Attachment A. Table 2 lists the nine consensus comments that the Commissioners viewed as non-controversial comments that had the overall consensus of the PTC. Seven of these general consensus City of Palo Alto Page 8 comments are related to the Transportation Element. These transportation comments range from adding more language about pedestrian safety to considering adding policies about High Speed Rail. The two Land Use Element comments cover making sure the goals, policies and programs are clear and actionable and placing more emphasis on creating neighborhoods, not just building housing units. Table 2: PTC GENERAL CONSENSUS COMMENTS PTC COMMENT 1. Land Use Element Overall/General The Element should place more emphasis on creating neighborhoods, not just building housing units. 2. Land Use Element Overall/General Goals, policies, and programs throughout should be clear and actionable, and the City should be able to track progress toward achievement. 3. Transportation Element Overall/General Don’t build the Plan around specific technologies. The ultimate consequences of new or emerging trends such as transportation network companies ( TNCs – e.g. Lyft, Uber) or autonomous vehicles may be positive or negative and cannot be predicted. 4. Transportation Element Narrative and Maps Geng Road improvement is too specific for the Comp Plan. Re-state more broadly as a policy to reduce traffic on East Bayshore.” 5. Transportation Element Narrative and Maps Support for Caltrain grade separation. 6. Transportation Element Goal T-1: Sustainable Transportation Program T1.2.2: Add reference to stable, sustained funding for the TMA, but don’t be proscriptive or limit the City’s options for funding. 7. Transportation Element Goal T-4: Neighborhood Impacts Policy T4.1: Policy should recognize that residential arterials, along with local and collector streets, are also school commute corridors. Policy should state that safety on residential arterials is also important. 8. Transportation Element Goal T-6: Road Safety Policy T-6.6: Policy and related programs discuss education for bicyclists. Language should be updated to reflect that pedestrian safety is also included. 9. Transportation Element Goal T-8: Regional Collaboration and Coordination Consider adding a policy statement about a potential future High Speed Rail station and/or other aspects of High Speed Rail. Source: Department of Planning & Community Environment; Approved by the Planning Commission on September 27, 2017. City of Palo Alto Page 9 At their August 30 PTC meeting, the Commission determined that their report to the City Council would have more impact and be more persuasive if the Commission also identified their highest priority recommended changes. The Commission created a process to identify these high priority PTC changes/ comments. At their final two meetings, the PTC reviewed a compiled list of comments, identified those comments that seemed most significant for further discussion, and engaged in more in-depth discussion and debate on 21 topics. The outcomes of this discussion are shown in Table 3. Table 3 includes 11 PTC high priority recommended changes and indicates the vote associated with each. Most are changes to the Land Use Element. The PTC recommended unanimously that support for BMR housing should be strengthened. There are several changes recommended by a majority of the PTC to support housing. The PTC recommended policies that support more family oriented housing for all demographics, state a strong preference for affordable housing and housing that is affordable and commit to increasing the supply of housing over time consistent with the Housing Element. Another recommendation, supported unanimously by the PTC, was to strengthen policies supporting walkable neighborhoods to ensure that space for professional and personal services, as well as retail, is available near neighborhoods. Staff expects that the City Council will want to consider these recommendations and provide direction to incorporate some or all of them as changes to the draft plan. Staff will have to prepare specific language to implement any of these recommendations that the Council wishes to implement, and return with that language on November 13th. The PTC recognized that their recommendations would require changes to the current draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update and adopted a motion (See Attachment A ) that if the City Council approves any of the PTC’s recommendations, the PTC recommends and welcomes the City Council to direct that these changes be returned to the PTC to be worked into the Plan. (This recommendation is not reflected in the staff recommendation or timeline/next steps discussion at the end of this staff report.) Table 3: PTC Highest Priority Changes to the Transportation and the Land Use Elements PTC COMMENT MOTION* VOTE 1 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management We need a strong commitment to creating BMR housing inventory for purchase and rental. It is too tentative appearing at a program level. Suggest we make Program L1.3.1 into a separate policy – perhaps having a quantifiable goal for ten years in the future. The PTC supports a strong commitment to creating BMR housing inventory for purchase and rental. It is too tentative appearing at a program level. The PTC recommends that the Council make Program L1.3.1 into a separate policy consistent with and in support of the quantified goals for 7:0 City of Palo Alto Page 10 PTC COMMENT MOTION* VOTE housing production in the adopted Housing Element. 2 Land Use Element Narrative and Maps The distinction between commercial districts and employment districts is a fundamental linchpin of the previous comp plan that largely seems lost in the draft. We need to test the draft commercial district definition to ensure it still provides space in the commercial districts for the sort of walkable services the neighborhoods expect. These include not just retail, but also services like doctors, dentists, veterinarians, accountants, lawyers, therapists, auto repair… Also spaces for not-for-profits, maker spaces, performance spaces, clubs, dance and music schools, gymnastics and other uses catering to the entire age range including families, kids, and seniors. We need to test that retail includes spaces where lower margin and more specialized retail businesses can operate. OR we need to look at some new definitions for mixed use districts so we don’t undermine commercial districts. We also need to discuss whether the land use map contains proper spaces for neighborhood services. The PTC recommends that the Council strengthen policies supporting walkable neighborhoods to ensure that space for professional and personal services as well as retail uses is available near neighborhoods, recognizing that all of these uses are desirable in thriving commercial centers. Similar attention is needed to provide space to accommodate non-profits and small medical offices in our community. (Note: After an extensive discussion of this item, the Commission approved a motion to have staff prepare a statement that summarized the Commission’s recommendation. At the Commission’s request, this language was developed by staff to reflect the Commission’s discussion.) 7:0 3 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management Strengthen Policy L-1.3 about infill development to indicate not just that infill should be compatible but that “infill development should be preferred or promoted.” Add the following policy: Identify development opportunities for BMR and more affordable market rate housing on city owned properties, like alleys and parking lots 5:2 4 Land Use Element Overall/ General We need to expand our stock of family-oriented housing. Where do we have spaces to accommodate this use? How do we ensure new neighborhoods receive full investment in schools, parks, adjacent commercial districts and other services we traditionally offer to neighborhoods. Our current neighborhoods are built out, and don’t provide substantial spaces for new family-oriented development. In light of Palo Alto’s traditional family orientation, we need housing policies that encourage building more family-oriented housing for all demographics. The PTC recommends that the Council add policies to Goals L-4 and L-5 to accommodate larger scale family- oriented housing development in retail and commercial districts, and policies to ensure school and other service impacts are fully mitigated. 5:2 City of Palo Alto Page 11 PTC COMMENT MOTION* VOTE 5 Land Use Element Goal L-4:Commercial Centers & Hotels Support for Program L4.6.1 to prepare a Coordinated Area Plan for Downtown, which is a huge undertaking. Revise the Program to add that the Coordinated Area Plan should consider converting parts of University Avenue to a pedestrian-only zone. The PTC supports Program L4.6.1 to prepare a Coordinated Area Plan for Downtown, which is a huge undertaking. The PTC recommends that the Council revise the Program to add that the Coordinated Area Plan should study converting parts of University Avenue to a pedestrian-only zone. 5:2 6 Transportation Element Goal T-1: Sustainable Transportation PTC members had different views on the offering incentives for TDM achievements. Some suggested lowering parking requirements for projects with successful TDM programs; other felt that permanent parking reductions are not appropriate for uncertain future trip reductions. The PTC recommends that the Council add language to ensure full participation among Palo Alto employers in TMA. 5:2 7 Land Use Element Overall/General Include stronger emphasis on taking on responsibility for dramatically increasing housing supply in Palo Alto. Both BMR housing and “housing that is affordable,” including housing for the middle class. Recommend that the Council include language that expresses a strong preference for affordable housing and housing that is affordable and a commitment to increasing Housing supply over time consistent with the goals set by the City Council through the Housing Element Process. 5:1:1 8 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management Comments on Goal L-1: Concerns 1. Why not put vision statement this section by the goal (instead of on page 1) so we know what we are committed to accomplish? 2. Goal does not call for diversity in demographic groups. 3. Neighborhoods are not prioritized as the most important. 4. Passive wording and relegation to project level does not suggest COMMITMENT to future action. Suggestions for change: 1. Goal L-1 should read “A compact and resilient city prioritizing diverse and vibrant neighborhoods – and Recommend the following changes: 1. Goal L-1 should read “A compact and resilient city prioritizing diverse and vibrant neighborhoods – and existing compatibly with shopping and services, workplaces, public facilities, parks and open space.” 2. Policies: Swap L1.1 and L1.2 for emphasis on neighborhoods – substituting “prioritize” for “strengthen” in current 1.2 4:1:2 City of Palo Alto Page 12 PTC COMMENT MOTION* VOTE existing compatibly with shopping and services, workplaces, public facilities, parks and open space.” 2. Policies: Swap L1.1 and L1.2 for emphasis on neighborhoods – substituting “prioritize” for “strengthen” in current 1.2 9 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management Strengthen Policy L-1.3 about infill development to indicate not just that infill should be compatible but that “infill development should be preferred or promoted.” Add a sentence at the beginning of Policy L-1.3 stating that Palo Alto has a preference for infill housing 4:2:1 10 Land Use Element Overall/General The Introduction to the Comp Plan describes a different city than the land use element. The introduction describes a walkable suburb oriented around residential neighborhoods. Land Use describes a mini-city-office-park and is largely silent on neighborhoods and neighborhood services. Either the introduction is wrong or the land use element is wrong. How do we reconcile the different views? Reconcile the narratives, description and goals with the policies and programs, where there appear to be contradictions 4:2:1 11 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management Some PTC members felt that the Citywide growth cap on office/R&D development and annual limit on office/R&D development (enacted as a separate ordinance) were appropriate growth management tools. Others expressed that the consensus at the 2015 Our Palo Alto Summit was that a Citywide cap is not the right tool, and policies should manage the impacts of office/R&D growth (such as traffic) rather than setting a cap on square footage. The PTC recommends that the Council keep the growth cap, focus on offsets and quality of life and other indication metrics that are based on the impact of development, including traffic, noise, pollution, etc. Set specific goals for a couple of key quality of life measures and other indication metrics. 4:3 12 Land Use Element Narrative and Maps The distinction between commercial districts and employment districts is a fundamental linchpin of the previous comp plan that largely seems lost in the draft. We need to test the draft commercial district definition to ensure it still provides space in the commercial districts for the sort of walkable services the neighborhoods expect. These include not just retail, but also services like doctors, dentists, The PTC recommends that the Council strengthen policies supporting walkable neighborhoods to ensure that space for professional and personal services as well as retail uses is available near neighborhoods, recognizing that all of these uses are desirable in thriving 7:0 City of Palo Alto Page 13 PTC COMMENT MOTION* VOTE veterinarians, accountants, lawyers, therapists, auto repair… Also spaces for not-for-profits, maker spaces, performance spaces, clubs, dance and music schools, gymnastics and other uses catering to the entire age range including families, kids, and seniors. We need to test that retail includes spaces where lower margin and more specialized retail businesses can operate. OR we need to look at some new definitions for mixed use districts so we don’t undermine commercial districts. We also need to discuss whether the land use map contains proper spaces for neighborhood services. commercial centers. Similar attention is needed to provide space to accommodate non-profits and small medical offices in our community. (Note: After an extensive discussion of this item, the Commission approved a motion to have staff prepare a statement that summarized the Commission’s recommendation. At the Commission’s request, this language was developed by staff to reflect the Commission’s discussion.) 13 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management Strengthen Policy L-1.3 about infill development to indicate not just that infill should be compatible but that “infill development should be preferred or promoted.” Add the following policy: Identify development opportunities for BMR and more affordable market rate housing on city owned properties, like alleys and parking lots 5:2 14 Land Use Element Overall/ General We need to expand our stock of family-oriented housing. Where do we have spaces to accommodate this use? How do we ensure new neighborhoods receive full investment in schools, parks, adjacent commercial districts and other services we traditionally offer to neighborhoods. Our current neighborhoods are built out, and don’t provide substantial spaces for new family-oriented development. In light of Palo Alto’s traditional family orientation, we need housing policies that encourage building more family-oriented housing for all demographics. The PTC recommends that the Council add policies to Goals L-4 and L-5 to accommodate larger scale family- oriented housing development in retail and commercial districts, and policies to ensure school and other service impacts are fully mitigated. 5:2 * Staff will draft specific language for any recommendations that the Council wishes to implement for consideration at the next hearing on November 13. Source: Department of Planning & Community Environment Based on Commission actions at their meetings of September 13 and 27, 2017. EIR Certification Preparation of an EIR is a time-consuming process, involving many steps, each of which take considerable time. In the case of the Comprehensive Plan Update EIR, the process began in earnest with issuance of a Notice of Preparation in mid-2014. The entire process, including City City of Palo Alto Page 14 Council sessions to discuss the EIR and EIR scenarios is summarized in Table 4, below. Table 4. City Council EIR Review – Key Dates Date Action July 28, 2008 City Council and Planning & Transportation Commission held a joint study session on the work program for the Comp Plan and EIR May 30, 2014 Notice of Preparation issued for the Draft EIR August 4, 2014 City Council scoping session on the Draft EIR August 6, 2014 City Council continued scoping session on the Draft EIR January 19, 2016 City Council and Citizens Advisory Committee held a joint study session on the Draft EIR; City Council discussed two new Comp Plan scenarios (Scenarios 5 & 6) for analysis in the EIR February 5 to June 8, 2016 124-day Public comment period for the February 2016 Draft EIR February 8, 2016 City Council continued discussion of Scenarios 5 & 6 May 16, 2016 City Council provided staff with basic parameters for Scenarios 5 & 6 June 6, 2016 City Council public comment hearing on the February 2016 Draft EIR January 30, 2017 City Council directed staff to develop a preferred scenario for inclusion in the Final EIR and defined some of its characteristics (regarding housing sites, non-residential development cap, transportation investments, etc.) February 10 to March 31, 2017 49-day Public comment period for the Supplement to the Draft EIR March 20, 2017 City Council public comment hearing on the Supplement to the Draft EIR August 30, 2017 Final EIR transmitted to the PTC and City Council. Made available at libraries, City Hall and to commenters. September 27, 2017 PTC recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR. Source: Planning & Community Environment, September 2017 The Final EIR was published in late August 2017 and was available for PTC review in September along with its review of the Comprehensive Plan Update. The Final EIR responds to comments on the February 2016 Draft EIR and the Supplement to the Draft EIR, describes the “preferred scenario” based on the Council’s input on March 27, 2017 and May 1, 2017, and presents revisions to the February 2016 Draft EIR and the Supplement to the Draft EIR. For a good summary of the EIR’s conclusions, please see Table 1-3, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, in the Final EIR. This table is reprinted from the Supplement to the Draft City of Palo Alto Page 15 EIR with revisions resulting from the public review process. Where changes have been made, they are shown in strikethrough and underline. As shown in Table 1-3, several adjustments have been made to the mitigation measures in the EIR. Most of these revisions are to ensure that implementation of mitigation measures is consistent with the policy approach arrived at through the Comprehensive Plan Update process. None of these revisions weaken the effectiveness of mitigation measures. Chapter 2 of the Final EIR includes a good summary of the Preferred Alternative and a comparison to other EIR scenarios (See Table 2-4). The City received 29 comment letters on the February 2016 Draft EIR and 18 letters on the Supplement to the Draft EIR, as well as oral comments made during public meetings. Chapter 5 of the Final EIR provides responses to every comment received on the EIR. Chapter 5 of the Final EIR also contains three “master responses” that provide comprehensive responses to common topics that arose in the comments received: Master Response 1 addresses comments related to the merits of the Comp Plan Update, as opposed the EIR analysis. Because CEQA does not require the Final EIR to respond to comments on the merits of the proposed project, Master Response 1 explains how the City considers these non-CEQA comments. Master Response 2 addresses comments that requested that the EIR analysis include recent cumulative projects and plans in nearby jurisdictions that have been proposed or approved since the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Comprehensive Plan EIR was issued. The response explains that the EIR analysis is based on regional projections that are large enough to accommodate planned and approved projects in the region through the year 2030. Master Response 3 addresses comments regarding the EIR’s analysis of impacts to schools. The response corrects and supplements information presented in the Supplement to the Draft EIR and responds to specific comments from the School District and others on the scope and conclusions of the analysis. To ensure that the EIR is responsive to concerns regarding potential impacts to schools, the City has coordinated with the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) at various junctures in the EIR process. Master Response 3 summarizes the information received from the public and PAUSD during the EIR’s public review period. Since preparing the Final EIR, the City has also received additional data from the PAUSD regarding school capacity (see Attachment F). The updated capacity data is intended to capture factors that lower the effective capacity of schools, and varies from the capacity data presented in the EIR as follows: elementary school capacity is lower than presented in the EIR by approximately 1,000 students, middle school capacity is the same as presented in the EIR, and high school capacity is lower by 100 students. This reduced capacity data is important for planning purposes but does not substantively affect the conclusions of the EIR, which as required by State statute, concludes that the payment of City of Palo Alto Page 16 school fees would offset and mitigate potential impacts to schools. Importantly, the City Council has addressed the issue of school impacts as a policy matter by including a related policy in the draft Plan: Policy L-2.11: Ensure regular coordination between the City and PAUSD on land development activities and trends in Palo Alto, as well as planning for school facilities and programs. Under State law, impacts on school facilities cannot be the basis for requiring mitigation beyond the payment of school fees or for denying development projects or legislative changes that could result in additional housing units. The City will, however, assess the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts of development projects that result in new school construction or enrollment. Under CEQA, the City Council must consider and “certify” the Final EIR prior to making a decision on the plan itself. The Resolution in Attachment B would accomplish this and certify that the EIR: (1) has been completed in compliance with CEQA, (2) was presented to the Council and reviewed and considered by them prior to making a decision on the project, and (3) reflects the City’s independent judgement and analysis. At the PTC’s final meeting, the Commission received a number of comments on the Final EIR and the Comprehensive Plan Update itself, which have been summarized and responded to in Attachment G. In addition, at least one commenter seemed to suggest that any plan or EIR with significant and unavoidable impacts would be unacceptable. As the Council is aware, CEQA anticipates the potential that agencies will approve projects with significant and unavoidable impacts, and allows agencies to do so if they adopt findings that the project’s benefits outweigh the impacts; this is referred to in CEQA as a statement of overriding considerations. These findings are included in Attachment C, and are necessitated because the actions and development contemplated under the Comprehensive Plan Update will have significant and unmitigable impacts related to: contributions of air pollutants to a region that is in “non- attainment” for ozone and particulates; contributions to traffic congestion at area intersections; contributions to traffic congestion at freeway ramps; and transit delays due to traffic congestion. In all cases, the City is proposing to implement mitigation measures, and is conservatively concluding that the impact will remain significant even after mitigation. As noted in the proposed findings, these conclusions would be the same for virtually any plan (and any planning scenario) proposed in the region if it were analyzed using the same thresholds of significance. In other words, there is no getting away from the fact that we live in a congested region and that any programmatic EIR that fairly examines cumulative growth over a period of time will conclude there are unmitigable impacts. CEQA Findings City of Palo Alto Page 17 Under CEQA, the City Council must also make certain “findings” as part of a decision to undertake a project for which an EIR has been prepared. The Resolution in Attachment C contains these findings, which include: Findings concerning significant impacts and mitigation measures, Findings concerning the infeasibility of alternatives, A statement of overriding considerations, and Adoption of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP). The findings concerning significant impacts and mitigation measures summarize each impact identified in the EIR, describe the applicable mitigation measures, and state the findings on the significance of each impact after imposition of the mitigation measures. The findings concerning the infeasibility of alternatives explain that there are no feasible alternatives that would substantially lessen the significant impacts of the project and the statement of overriding considerations states that there are specific project benefits that outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts. The MMRP is a program spells out how the City will implement and monitor measures that the EIR incorporates to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects. In many cases, these mitigation measures are being implemented by adopting Comprehensive Plan policies that specifically address the impact identified. For example, policies in the plan regarding land use compatibility ensure that future developments -- and future capital projects -- are designed to ensure compatibility and these policies will be implemented as these future projects are reviewed for conformance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. In some cases, the mitigation measures are implemented by making changes to the City’s CEQA procedures or sections of the Municipal Code and the MMRP provides a timeline for these actions. The June 30, 2017 Comprehensive Plan Update On June 12, 2017, City Council referred the current draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update to the PTC for review and a recommendation. The June 30, 2017 draft Plan reflects the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) May 16, 2017 recommendations to the Council and incorporates changes based on Council review. Following Council adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, staff and consultants will create the final Comprehensive Plan by making any substantive changes to Plan that are directed by Council motion, including the corrections and changes listed in Attachment E if or as directed by the City Council. As noted in the recommendation section, above, staff also recommends non- content (formatting) revisions to create the final Plan. These non-content revisions include: City of Palo Alto Page 18 A graphically rich cover An Acknowledgement section An index Formatting clean-ups, such as updating the footer on each page to say “Adopted [date]” Agency Consultation A key part of any general plan update consists of consultation with State and regional agencies and Native American tribes, as required by various sections of the California Government Code. Consistent with these requirements, staff provided notice to Native American Tribes in early February, and copies of the Safety and Natural Environment Elements to State agencies in early August 2017. Notice to adjacent cities, LACFO, PAUSD, and other agencies were provided in late-September. All periods for agency comments (45-days in some cases and 90 days in others) will close prior to the Council’s second hearing on November 13, 2017. In staff’s experience, the City may receive last minute comments from one or more agency that require immediate responses or revisions. If this is the case, staff will provide a recommendation for the Council’s consideration. The List of Corrections and Amendments Attachment E includes a list of corrections to the June 30, 2017 Comprehensive Plan that have been identified by staff since its publication in June 2017. These changes correct mistakes, clarify wording, and shift some programs to policies, primarily to be consistent with the Final EIR mitigation measures. None of these revisions would affect the intent or effect of a policy or program. Some notable corrections and clarifications listed in Attachment E include: Rewording the Regional/Community Commercial designation to more accurately reflect Council’s motion on May 1, 2017 that software development is an allowed use Downtown, rather than allowed throughout the Regional/Community Commercial designation, which also includes Stanford Shopping Center and Town and Country Village. Revising Policy L-5.4 to remove reference to East Meadow Circle Concept Plan because some of its policies are not consistent with the draft Comprehensive Plan Update, while keeping policy wording to maintain the East Bayshore and San Antonio Road/Bayshore Corridor areas as diverse business and light industrial districts. Rewording Policy L-6.5 to clarify that the policy is intended to preserve views up City streets to the hills, not from a street across private property. Rewording Program T2.3.1 to clarify that maintaining City standards for both VMT and LOS analysis of proposed projects is consistent with new State CEQA requirements under SB 743. City of Palo Alto Page 19 Attachment E also includes a small mapping errata in the Comp Plan and Final EIR. Implementation Priorities The Implementation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan repeats implementation programs included in all Elements of the Plan and the City Council has reviewed the programs in that context. The implementation table also identifies the lead department or agency for each program, as well as each item’s relative priority and level of effort. These notations (department, relative priority, level of effort) have not been previously reviewed by the City Council and currently reflect relative priorities as they were identified by the CAC. While the City Council’s input on this Chapter is welcome as part of plan adoption, the Chapter is intended to be reviewed and revised on an annual basis. Staff’s recommendation is to (1) schedule a separate, in depth discussion of the table in 2018, and (2) identify a few key priorities that the City Council would like to prioritize in the interim. The Implementation Chapter is a key mechanism to link the Comprehensive Plan to Palo Alto’s budget process. The priorities, timing and resource estimates in this chapter are intended to be modified depending on the city’s budget, available staff resources and other changes over time and do not require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The PTC is scheduled to review and provide a report on this chapter before the end of the year and the Council will have an opportunity for in depth review upon receipt of the PTC’s annual report. The specific interim actions that staff are recommending that the City Council prioritize include: 1. consideration of an updated nexus study and Transportation Impact Fee ordinance by the Finance Committee and the Council; 2. consideration of the first of several implementing ordinances to amend the Zoning Ordinance to address Comprehensive Plan programs, prioritizing programs related to housing production and preservation (for example, incentives for small units, preserving cottage clusters, minimum densities in multifamily zoning districts, etc.); 3. consideration of actions necessary to initiate a Coordinated Area Plan for the North Ventura (aka Fry’s) area; and 4. initiation of discussions with Stanford University about the potential for developing housing in the Stanford Research Park, Stanford Shopping Center, and Stanford University Medical Center vicinity. These items are recommended for prioritization based on individual Councilmember statements during hearings on the Comprehensive Plan and the EIR, and the Council as a whole may alter these immediate priorities or defer discussion on them if desired. Many communities City of Palo Alto Page 20 follow adoption of a new general plan with an update of their zoning ordinance. Staff recommends Palo Alto address necessary changes with a series of ordinances addressing different subjects, with the first one focusing on housing. If Council wishes to take an alternate approach, staff will need to return with a detailed scope and cost estimate. Policy Implications The Comprehensive 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 has been crafted by the Citizens Advisory Committee, Planning and Transportation Commission, and the City Council to perpetuate 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 in accordance with the current schedule, which envisions plan adoption before Thanksgiving and publication (searchable pdf and hard copies) thereafter. Additional budgetary resources – and a contract amendment -- would be required if the City Council wishes staff to work with the consultants to develop an interactive, on-line “users guide” as originally envisioned. Timeline/Next Steps Tonight’s hearing is the first of two hearings scheduled for plan adoption. It is expected that the City Council will use this first hearing to review and discuss the PTC’s report and recommendations, discuss any additional changes or corrections that should be included in Attachment E, and take action on EIR certification. A second hearing has been scheduled for November 13 to allow the City Council to consider adoption of the CEQA findings and the Comprehensive Plan Update itself. If the Comprehensive Plan Update is not adopted before the end of the year, a new State requirement will take effect requiring revisions to the Draft Plan to address Environmental Justice (SB 1000), which will further delay adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Update. Staff has also requested the City Council’s direction to prioritize a short list of priority implementation tasks. (See implementation discussion above.) The current schedule for related activities is provided in Table 5 below: Table 5: Schedule of Upcoming Events (Subject to Modification) Priority Actions Next Steps Accept grant and initiate North Ventura (aka “Fry’s”) Coordinated Area Plan process City Council Grant Acceptance Scheduled for November 6. City of Palo Alto Page 21 City Council Initiation/Scope Discussion to Follow (Date TBD). City participation in "On the Table” Community Conversation about Housing sponsored by Silicon Valley Community Foundation (SVCF) November 15 Transportation Nexus Study & Updated Impact Fee Ordinance Finance Committee hearing tentatively scheduled for November 28. City Council housing “retreat” to discuss housing issues and implementation actions. Date TBD at the end of November or early December. Comp Plan Implementing Ordinance #1 (Housing Unit Production & Preservation) PTC and City Council Hearing schedule TBD Initiate Discussions with Stanford University about Housing in the Research Park, Shopping Center, and SUMC vicinity Steps and schedule TBD Source: Planning & Community Environment, October 2017 Environmental Review A Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared and is proposed for certification. The Final EIR responds to substantive comments on the Draft EIR and the Supplement to the Draft EIR and describes the “preferred scenario” based on the Council’s input this spring. Following certification of the Final EIR, the City Council will consider adoption of CEQA findings, including adoption of mitigation measures, a statement of overriding considerations, and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP). Attachments: Attachment A: PTC Report to the City Council on Comprehensive Plan Update Adoption (PDF) Attachment B: RESO Certifying EIR for Comp Plan Update (PDF) Attachment C: RESO Adopting CEQA Findings for Comp Plan Update (PDF) Attachemnt D: RESO Adopting Comp Plan Update (PDF) Attachment E: CompPlan_Errata_20171002 (PDF) Attachment F: Updated School Capacities (PDF) Attachment G: Responses to Comments Received at the PTC Meeting of September 27, 2017 (DOCX) PTC Report to Council September 27, 2017 Page 1 Planning and Transportation Commission Report to the City Council on the Comprehensive Plan Update Adoption, September 27, 2017 On June 12, 2017, the City Council referred the draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update to the Planning and Transportation Commission for a report on the proposed plan. The City Council referenced the 90 day timeframe contained in Section 19.04.080 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code for the PTC review, with the 90 days beginning on June 30, 2017. The PTC held six public hearings and focused its 90 day review on the Land Use and Transportation Elements of the June 30th version of draft Comprehensive Plan Update. The PTC completed its review and recommendation on September 27, 2017, within the 90 day period. At the September 27, 2017 PTC meeting, the PTC adopted a series of motions approving the transmittal of this report to the City Council and: • Recommending the PTC’s highest priority changes to the Transportation and Land Use Elements and the Comprehensive Plan Update as shown in Table 1 below; • Transmitting the PTC General Consensus Comments as shown in Table 2 below; • Transmitting the Minutes from the six PTC hearings on the Comprehensive Plan Update per Table 3 below; • Recommending certification of the Comprehensive Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated August 30, 2017 as completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and reflecting the lead agency’s independent judgment and analysis; • Deferring the PTC’s review of the Transportation and Land Use Sections of the Implementation Plan Table; and • If and when any of the PTC’s 11 Highest Priority recommendations are approved by the Council, recommending and welcoming the City Council to direct that these changes be returned to the PTC to be worked appropriately into the Comp Plan. PTC Report to Council September 27, 2017 Page 2 Table 1: PTC Highest Priority Changes to Transportation and Land Use Elements and the June 30, 2017 Draft Comprehensive Plan Update ORIGINAL PTC COMMENT MOTION VOTE 1 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management We need a strong commitment to creating BMR housing inventory for purchase and rental. It is too tentative appearing at a program level. Suggest we make Program L1.3.1 into a separate policy – perhaps having a quantifiable goal for ten years in the future. The PTC supports a strong commitment to creating BMR housing inventory for purchase and rental. It is too tentative appearing at a program level. The PTC recommends that the Council make Program L1.3.1 into a separate policy consistent with and in support of the quantified goals for housing production in the adopted Housing Element. 7:0 2 Land Use Element Narrative and Maps The distinction between commercial districts and employment districts is a fundamental linchpin of the previous comp plan that largely seems lost in the draft. We need to test the draft commercial district definition to ensure it still provides space in the commercial districts for the sort of walkable services the neighborhoods expect. These include not just retail, but also services like doctors, dentists, veterinarians, accountants, lawyers, therapists, auto repair… Also spaces for not- for-profits, maker spaces, performance spaces, clubs, dance and music schools, gymnastics and other uses catering to the entire age range including families, kids, and seniors. We need to test that retail includes spaces where lower margin and more specialized retail businesses can operate. OR we need to look at some new definitions for mixed use districts so we don’t undermine commercial districts. We also need to discuss whether the land use map contains proper spaces for neighborhood services. The PTC recommends that the Council strengthen policies supporting walkable neighborhoods to ensure that space for professional and personal services as well as retail uses is available near neighborhoods, recognizing that all of these uses are desirable in thriving commercial centers. Similar attention is needed to provide space to accommodate non-profits and small medical offices in our community. 7:0 3 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management Strengthen Policy L-1.3 about infill development to indicate not just that infill should be compatible but that “infill development should be preferred or promoted.” Add the following policy: Identify development opportunities for BMR and more affordable market rate housing on city owned properties, like alleys and parking lots 5:2 4 Land Use Element Overall/ General We need to expand our stock of family- oriented housing. Where do we have spaces to In light of Palo Alto’s traditional family orientation, we need housing policies that encourage building more family- 5:2 PTC Report to Council September 27, 2017 Page 3 ORIGINAL PTC COMMENT MOTION VOTE accommodate this use? How do we ensure new neighborhoods receive full investment in schools, parks, adjacent commercial districts and other services we traditionally offer to neighborhoods. Our current neighborhoods are built out, and don’t provide substantial spaces for new family-oriented development. oriented housing for all demographics. The PTC recommends that the Council add policies to Goals L-4 and L-5 to accommodate larger scale family- oriented housing development in retail and commercial districts, and policies to ensure school and other service impacts are fully mitigated. 5 Land Use Element Goal L-4: Commercial Centers & Hotels Support for Program L4.6.1 to prepare a Coordinated Area Plan for Downtown, which is a huge undertaking. Revise the Program to add that the Coordinated Area Plan should consider converting parts of University Avenue to a pedestrian-only zone. The PTC supports Program L4.6.1 to prepare a Coordinated Area Plan for Downtown, which is a huge undertaking. The PTC recommends that the Council revise the Program to add that the Coordinated Area Plan should study converting parts of University Avenue to a pedestrian-only zone. 5:2 6 Transportation Element Goal T-1: Sustainable Transportation PTC members had different views on the offering incentives for TDM achievements. Some suggested lowering parking requirements for projects with successful TDM programs; other felt that permanent parking reductions are not appropriate for uncertain future trip reductions. The PTC recommends that the Council add language to ensure full participation among Palo Alto employers in TMA. 5:2 7 Land Use Element Overall/General Include stronger emphasis on taking on responsibility for dramatically increasing housing supply in Palo Alto. Both BMR housing and “housing that is affordable,” including housing for the middle class. Recommend that the Council include language that expresses a strong preference for affordable housing and housing that is affordable and a commitment to increasing Housing supply over time consistent with the goals set by the City Council through the Housing Element Process. 5:1:1 8 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management Comments on Goal L-1: Concerns: 1. Why not put vision statement this section by the goal (instead of on page 1) so we know what we are committed to accomplish? 2. Goal does not call for diversity in demographic groups. 3. Neighborhoods are not prioritized as the most important. 4. Passive wording and relegation to project Recommend the following changes: 1. Goal L-1 should read “A compact and resilient city prioritizing diverse and vibrant neighborhoods – and existing compatibly with shopping and services, workplaces, public facilities, parks and open space.” 2. Policies: Swap L1.1 and L1.2 for emphasis on neighborhoods – substituting “prioritize” for “strengthen” in current 1.2 4:1:2 PTC Report to Council September 27, 2017 Page 4 ORIGINAL PTC COMMENT MOTION VOTE level does not suggest COMMITMENT to future action. Suggestions for change: 1. Goal L-1 should read “A compact and resilient city prioritizing diverse and vibrant neighborhoods – and existing compatibly with shopping and services, workplaces, public facilities, parks and open space.” 2. Policies: Swap L1.1 and L1.2 for emphasis on neighborhoods – substituting “prioritize” for “strengthen” in current 1.2 9 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management Strengthen Policy L-1.3 about infill development to indicate not just that infill should be compatible but that “infill development should be preferred or promoted.” Add a sentence at the beginning of Policy L-1.3 stating that Palo Alto has a preference for infill housing 4:2:1 10 Land Use Element Overall/General The Introduction to the Comp Plan describes a different city than the land use element. The introduction describes a walkable suburb oriented around residential neighborhoods. Land Use describes a mini-city-office-park and is largely silent on neighborhoods and neighborhood services. Either the introduction is wrong or the land use element is wrong. How do we reconcile the different views? Reconcile the narratives, description and goals with the policies and programs, where there appear to be contradictions 4:2:1 11 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management Some PTC members felt that the Citywide growth cap on office/R&D development and annual limit on office/R&D development (enacted as a separate ordinance) were appropriate growth management tools. Others expressed that the consensus at the 2015 Our Palo Alto Summit was that a Citywide cap is not the right tool, and policies should manage the impacts of office/R&D growth (such as traffic) rather than setting a cap on square footage. The PTC recommends that the Council keep the growth cap, focus on offsets and quality of life and other indication metrics that are based on the impact of development, including traffic, noise, pollution, etc. Set specific goals for a couple of key quality of life measures and other indication metrics. 4:3 Source: Department of Planning & Community Environment Based on Commission actions at their meetings of September 13 and 27, 2017. PTC Report to Council September 27, 2017 Page 5 Table 2: PTC General Consensus Comments PTC GENERAL CONSENSUS COMMENTS 1. Land Use Element Overall/General The Element should place more emphasis on creating neighborhoods, not just building housing units. 2. Land Use Element Overall/General Goals, policies, and programs throughout should be clear and actionable, and the City should be able to track progress toward achievement. 3. Transportation Element Overall/General Don’t build the Plan around specific technologies. The ultimate consequences of new or emerging trends such as transportation network companies ( TNCs – e.g. Lyft, Uber) or autonomous vehicles may be positive or negative and cannot be predicted. 4. Transportation Element Narrative and Maps Geng Road improvement is too specific for the Comp Plan. Re-state more broadly as an improvement or a policy to reduce traffic on East Bayshore.” 5. Transportation Element Narrative and Maps Support for Caltrain grade separation. 6. Transportation Element Goal T-1: Sustainable Transportation Program T1.2.2: Add reference to stable, sustained funding for the TMA, but don’t be proscriptive or limit the City’s options for funding. 7. Transportation Element Goal T-4: Neighborhood Impacts Policy T4.1: Policy should recognize that residential arterials, along with local and collector streets, are also school commute corridors. Policy should state that safety on residential arterials is also important. 8. Transportation Element Goal T-6: Road Safety Policy T-6.6: Policy and related programs discuss education for bicyclists. Language should be updated to reflect that pedestrian safety is also included. 9. Transportation Element Goal T-8: Regional Collaboration and Coordination Consider adding a policy statement about a potential future High Speed Rail station and/or other aspects of High Speed Rail. Source: Department of Planning & Community Environment; Approved by the Planning Commission on September 27, 2017. Due to the volume of the PTC minutes for the six meetings (around 600 pages total), the minutes have not been attached in a hard copy. Electronic copies are available at the following links: Table 3: PTC Minutes PTC Hearing Date Link July 12, 2017 (Approved) http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/59548 July 26, 2017 (Approved) http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/59549 August 9, 2017 (Approved) http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/59550 August 30, 2017 (Approved) http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/59731 PTC Report to Council September 27, 2017 Page 6 September 13, 2017 (Draft) http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/PTC- 09.13.17-Item-3-Excerpt-Minutes.pdf September 27, 2017 (Draft) www.paloaltocompplan.org/planning-and-transportation-commission/ Not Yet Approved 170901 jb Lee/Planning/LongRange/Comp Plan Resolution No _____ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Certifying Adequacy of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update in Accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act RECITALS A. The City of Palo Alto, a chartered municipal corporation (“City”) has prepared that certain comprehensive update to its general plan, entitled “Our Palo Alto 2030” (referred to herein as the “Comprehensive Plan Update”), proposed for approval and adoption by the City Council. B. Approval of the Comprehensive Plan Update would constitute a project under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, together with related state implementation guidelines promulgated thereunder (“CEQA”). C. The City, in compliance with CEQA, prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to provide an assessment of the potential environmental consequences of adopting and implementing the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update and associated zoning amendments. The environmental review process under CEQA commenced and was undertaken concurrently with the preparation and consideration of the Comprehensive Plan Update. D. A Draft Environmental Impact Report (“Draft EIR”) for the Comprehensive Plan Update was prepared analyzing four alternatives (also referred to as “scenarios”) in equal level of detail, and was circulated for public review from February 5, 2016 to June 8, 2016. The City held several public hearings to receive comments on the Draft EIR. E. During the Comprehensive Plan development and review process, the City Council directed the evaluation of two additional alternatives or scenarios, which were subsequently analyzed in a Supplement to the Draft EIR that was circulated for public review from February 10, 2017 to March 31, 2017, during which time the City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission held additional public hearings to receive comments on the Draft EIR and the Supplement. F. Through its review of the Citizens Advisory Committee’s recommendations over several duly noticed public hearings, the City Council identified the parameters of the preferred alternative for the Comprehensive Plan Update. G. A Final Environmental Impact Report was prepared, which Final Environmental Impact Report is comprised of the Draft EIR dated February 5, 2016, together with the Supplement to the Draft EIR dated February 10, 2017, and the Final Environmental Impact Report dated August 30, 2017 (collectively, all of said documents are referred to herein as the “Final EIR”). H. Prior to the adoption of this Resolution, the Planning and Transportation Commission of the City of Palo Alto, on September 27, 2017, reviewed the Final EIR prepared for the Comprehensive Plan Update (also sometimes referred to herein as the “Project”), held a public hearing, and recommended to the City Council that it certify and find the Final EIR was completed in accordance with the requirements of CEQA. Not Yet Approved 170901 jb Lee/Planning/LongRange/Comp Plan I. Public notice was duly given that on October 23, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 285 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California, the Council would hold a public hearing where interested persons could appear, be heard, and present their views with respect to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update and the Final EIR, and at the noticed date and time, the Council gave all persons full opportunity to be heard and to present their views with respect to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update and the Final EIR. J. The Council is the decision-making body for adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AS FOLLOWS: The City Council (hereinafter the “Council”), in the exercise of its independent judgment as the decision-making body for the City of Palo Alto as Lead Agency, makes and adopts the following findings and certifications in compliance with the requirements of CEQA: 1. The Council has independently reviewed and considered the Final EIR. 2. The Council does hereby find and certify that the Final EIR has been prepared and completed in compliance with CEQA. 3. The Council does hereby find and certify that the Final EIR reflects the City of Palo Alto’s independent judgment and analysis. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________ _____________________________ Assistant City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment Not Yet Approved 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 1 Resolution No _____ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Making Certain Findings Concerning Significant Environmental Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Alternatives, Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Comprehensive Plan Update, For Which an Environmental Impact Report Was Prepared in Accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act RECITALS A. The City of Palo Alto, a municipal corporation (“City”) has prepared that certain comprehensive update to its general plan, entitled “Our Palo Alto 2030” (referred to herein as the “Comprehensive Plan Update”), proposed for approval and adoption by the City Council. B. Approval of the Comprehensive Plan Update would constitute a project under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, together with related state implementation guidelines promulgated thereunder (“CEQA”). C. The City Council, in compliance with CEQA, prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to provide an assessment of the potential environmental consequences of adopting and implementing the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update and associated zoning amendments. D. The environmental review process under CEQA commenced and was undertaken concurrently with the preparation and consideration of the Comprehensive Plan Update, which included the participation of a Citizens Advisory Committee (“CAC”) that met for almost two years and hearings before the City Council to consider the CAC recommendations. This process allowed the Comprehensive Plan Update to take into account any potential environmental impacts identified in the EIR and include policies to address those impacts. E. A Draft Environmental Impact Report (“Draft EIR”) for the Comprehensive Plan Update was prepared analyzing four alternatives (also referred to as “scenarios”) in equal level of detail. The Draft EIR was circulated for public review from February 5, 2016 to June 8, 2016, during which time the City held several public hearings to receive comments on the Draft EIR. F. During the Comprehensive Plan development and review process, the City Council directed the evaluation of two additional alternatives or scenarios, which were subsequently analyzed in a Supplement to the Draft EIR that was circulated for public review from February 10, 2017 to March 31, 2017, during which time the City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission held additional public hearings to receive comments on the Draft EIR and the Supplement. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 2 G. After receiving the CAC’s recommendations on the Comprehensive Plan Update, the City Council identified the parameters of the preferred alternative through several public hearings. H. A Final Environmental Impact Report was prepared, which Final Environmental Impact Report is comprised of the Draft EIR dated February 5, 2016, together with the Supplement to the Draft EIR dated February 10, 2017, and the Final Environmental Impact Report dated August 30, 2017 (collectively, all of said documents are referred to herein as the “EIR”). I. Prior to the adoption of this Resolution, the Planning and Transportation Commission of the City of Palo Alto, on September 27, 2017, reviewed the EIR prepared for the Comprehensive Plan Update (also sometimes referred to herein as the “Project”), held a public hearing, and recommended to the City Council that it certify and find the Final EIR was completed in accordance with the requirements of CEQA. J. On ___________, the Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan Update and EIR, and certified the EIR in accordance with CEQA by adoption of Resolution No. _______. K. The Council is the decision-making body for adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. L. CEQA requires that in connection with approval of a project for which an environmental impact report has been prepared that identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project, the decision-making body of a public agency make certain findings regarding those effects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AS FOLLOWS: The City Council, in the exercise of its independent judgment, makes and adopts the following findings to comply with the requirements of CEQA, including Sections 15091, 15092, and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, based upon the entire record of proceedings for the Project. All statements set forth in this Resolution constitute formal findings of the City Council, including the statements set forth in this paragraph and in the recitals above. 1. The City Council was presented with, and has independently reviewed and analyzed the EIR and other information in the record and has considered the information contained therein prior to acting upon and approving the Project, and bases the findings stated below on such review. 2. The EIR provides an adequate basis for considering and acting upon the Comprehensive Plan Update Project. The City Council has considered all of the evidence and arguments presented during consideration of the Project and the Final EIR. In determining whether the Project may have a significant impact on the environment, and in adopting the findings set forth herein, the City Council certifies that it has complied with Public Resources Code Sections 21081, 21081.5, and 21082.2. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 3 3. The City Council agrees with the characterization of the EIR with respect to all impacts initially identified as “less than significant” and finds that those impacts have been described accurately and are less than significant as so described in the Final EIR. This finding does not apply to impacts identified as significant or potentially significant that are reduced to a less than significant level by mitigation measures included in the EIR. The disposition of each of those impacts and the mitigation measures adopted to reduce them are addressed specifically in the findings below. 4. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) includes all mitigation measures adopted with respect to the Project and explains how and by whom they will be implemented and enforced. 5. The EIR considers a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives, sufficient to foster informed decision making, public participation and a reasoned choice, in accordance with CEQA. 6. The Final EIR contains responses to comments received on a Draft EIR and a Supplement to the Draft EIR. The Final EIR also contains corrections and clarifications to the text and analysis of the Draft EIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR, where warranted. The City Council does hereby find that such changes and additional information are not significant new information under CEQA because such changes and additional information do not indicate that any of the following would result from approval and implementation of the Project: (i) any new significant environmental impact or substantially more severe environmental impact (not already disclosed and evaluated in the DEIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR), (ii) any feasible mitigation measure considerably different from those analyzed in the Draft EIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR that would lessen a significant environmental impact of the Project has been proposed and would not be implemented, or (iii) any feasible alternative considerably different from those analyzed in the DEIR and the Supplement to the Draft EIR that would lessen a significant environmental impact of the Project has been proposed and would not be implemented. The City Council does find and determine that recirculation of the Final EIR for further public review and comment is not warranted or required under the provisions of CEQA. 7. The City Council does hereby make the following findings with respect to significant effects on the environment of the Project, as identified in the EIR, with the understanding that all of the information in this Resolution is intended as a summary of the full administrative record supporting the EIR, which full administrative record should be consulted for the full details supporting these findings. I. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR FINDINGS Significant effects of the Comprehensive Plan Update project were identified in the Draft EIR and the Supplement to the Draft EIR. CEQA §21081 and CEQA Guidelines §15091 require that the Lead Agency prepare written findings for identified significant impacts, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. Less than significant effects (without mitigation) of the project were also identified in the Draft EIR and the Supplement to the Draft EIR. CEQA does not require that the Lead Agency prepare written findings for less than significant effects. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 4 CEQA requires that the Lead Agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur with implementation of the project. Project mitigation or alternatives are not required, however, where substantial evidence in the record demonstrates that they are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the project lies with another agency. Specifically, CEQA Guidelines §15091 states: (a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. The “changes or alterations” referred to in §15091(a)(1) above, that are required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects of the project, may include a wide variety of measures or actions as set forth in Guidelines §15370, including avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, or reducing the impact over time, or compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources. II. FINDINGS ON SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the City Council hereby makes these findings with respect to the potential for significant environmental impacts from adoption and implementation of the Comprehensive Plan Update and Zoning Code amendments ("proposed project") and the means for mitigating those impacts. For the purpose of these findings, the term “Environmental Impact Report” (EIR) means the Draft EIR, Supplement to the Draft EIR, and Final EIR documents collectively, unless otherwise specified. These findings do not attempt to describe the full analysis of each environmental impact contained in the EIR. Instead, the findings provide a summary description of each impact, describe the applicable mitigation measures identified in the EIR and adopted by the City, and state the findings on the significance of each impact after imposition of the adopted mitigation measures. A full explanation of these environmental findings and conclusions can be found in the EIR. These findings hereby incorporate by reference the discussion and analysis in the EIR that support the EIR's determinations regarding significant project impacts and mitigation measures designed to address those impacts. The facts supporting these findings are found in the record as a whole for the project. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 5 In making these findings, the City ratifies, adopts, and incorporates into these findings the analysis and explanation in the EIR, and ratifies, adopts, and incorporates into these findings the determinations and conclusions of the EIR relating to environmental impacts and mitigation measures, except to the extent that any such determinations and conclusions are specifically and expressly modified by these findings. Aesthetics Impact AES-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the area and its surroundings. Mitigation Measure AES-1: To ensure that increased residential densities would not degrade the visual character or quality of the area, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: High-quality building and site design. Compatibility with the neighborhood and adjacent structures. Enhancement of existing commercial centers. Requirements for landscaping and street trees. Preservation and creation of a safe and inviting pedestrian environment. Appropriate building form, massing, and setbacks. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies that collectively ensure implementation of this mitigation measure during the course of development proposals and capital improvement projects. For example: Policy L-2.12: Encourage new development and redevelopment to incorporate greenery and natural features such as green rooftops, pocket parks, plazas and rain gardens. Policy L-3.1: Ensure that new or remodeled structures are compatible with the neighborhood and adjacent structures. Policy L-4.5: Maintain and enhance the University Avenue/Downtown area as a major commercial center 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-4.7: Maintain Stanford Shopping Center as one of the Bay Area’s premiere regional shopping centers. Promote bicycle and pedestrian use and encourage any new development at the Center to occur through infill. Policy L-4.8: Maintain the existing scale, character and function of the California Avenue business district as a shopping, service and office center intermediate in function and scale between Downtown and the smaller neighborhood business areas. Policy L-4.10: Recognize and preserve Town and Country Village as an attractive retail center serving Palo Altans and residents of the wider region. Future development at this site should preserve its existing amenities, pedestrian scale and architectural character while also improving safe access for bicyclists and pedestrians and increasing the amount of bicycle parking. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 6 Policy L-4.15: Encourage maximum use of Neighborhood Centers by ensuring that the publicly maintained areas are clean, well-lit and attractively landscaped. Policy L-5.2: Provide landscaping, trees, sidewalks, pedestrian path and connections to the citywide bikeway system within Employment Districts. Pursue opportunities to include sidewalks, paths, low water use landscaping, recycled water and trees and remove grass turf in renovation and expansion projects. Policy L-6.1: Promote high-quality design and site planning that is compatible with surrounding development and public spaces. Policy L-6.2: Use the Zoning Ordinance, design review process, design guidelines and Coordinated Area Plans to ensure high quality residential and commercial design and architectural compatibility. Policy L-9.3: Treat residential streets as both public ways and neighborhood amenities. Provide and maintain continuous sidewalks, healthy street trees, benches and other amenities that promote walking and “active” transportation. Policy T-3.7: Encourage pedestrian-friendly design features such as sidewalks, street trees, on-street parking, gathering spaces, gardens, outdoor furniture, art and interesting architectural details. Policy T-3.8: Add planting pockets with street trees to provide shade, calm traffic and enhance the pedestrian realm. Policy T-6.1: Continue to make safety the first priority of citywide transportation planning. Prioritize pedestrian, bicycle and automobile safety over motor vehicle level of service at intersections and motor vehicle parking. Policy N-2.8: Require new commercial, multi-unit and single-family housing projects to provide street trees and related irrigation systems. The incorporation of relevant policies into the proposed Plan ensures that future development and capital improvements under the proposed Plan would avoid significant degradation of the existing visual character and quality. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact AES-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to substantially shadow public open space (other than public open streets and adjacent sidewalks) between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. from September 21 to March 21. Mitigation Measure AES-4: The City shall amend its local CEQA guidelines to require development projects of a certain size or location to prepare an analysis of potential shade/shadow impacts. The analysis shall focus on potential impacts to public open spaces (other than public streets and adjacent sidewalks) between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. from September 21 to March 21. The analysis shall identify whether the project would shadow open spaces during these times, explain how the project meets City design requirements and other City policy goals, and describe ways to mitigate substantial shade and shadow impacts through feasible building and site design features. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 7 Rationale for Finding: Mitigation Measure AES-4 would amend the City’s local CEQA guidelines to require project-level analysis of potential shade/shadow impacts, as well as measures to mitigate potential impacts through feasible building and site design features. Implementation of this mitigation measure would ensure the future development projects and capital improvement projects that are subject to CEQA would disclose and avoid potential shade/shadow impacts to the extent feasible. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Air Quality Impact AIR-1: Without inclusion of air quality policies, implementation of the proposed Plan could conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Mitigation Measure AIR-1: To ensure consistency with the 2010 Bay Area Clean Air Plan, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Reduction in emissions of particulates from automobiles, manufacturing, construction activity, and other sources (e.g., dry cleaning, wood burning, landscape maintenance). Support for regional, State, and federal programs that improve air quality. Support for transit, bicycling, and walking. Mix of uses (e.g., housing near employment centers) and development types (e.g., infill) to reduce the need to drive. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies that collectively ensure implementation of this mitigation measure during the course of development proposals and capital improvement projects. For example: Policy L-1.1: Limit future urban development to currently developed lands within the urban service area. The boundary of the urban service area is otherwise known as the urban growth boundary. Retain undeveloped land west of Foothill Expressway and Junipero Serra as open space, with allowances made for very low-intensity development consistent with the open space character of the area. Retain undeveloped land northeast of Highway 101 as open space. Policy L-2.1: Maintain a citywide structure of Residential Neighborhoods, Centers and Employment Districts. Integrate these areas with the City’s and the region’s transit and street system. Policy L-2.2: Enhance connections between commercial and mixed use centers and the surrounding residential neighborhoods by promoting walkable and bikeable connections and a diverse range of retail and services that caters to the daily needs of residents. Policy L-2.3: As a key component of a diverse, inclusive community, allow and encourage a mix of housing types and sizes designed for greater affordability, particularly smaller housing types, such as studios, cohousing, cottages, clustered housing, accessory dwelling units and senior housing. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 8 Policy L-2.4: Use a variety of strategies to stimulate housing near retail, employment, and transit. Policy L-2.6: Create opportunities for new mixed use development consisting of housing and retail. Policy T-1.1: Take a comprehensive approach to reducing single-occupant vehicle trips by involving those who live, work and shop in Palo Alto in developing strategies that make it easier and more convenient not to drive. Policy T-1.6: Encourage innovation and expanded transit access to regional destinations, multi-modal transit stations, employment centers and commercial centers, including those within Palo Alto through the use of efficient public and/or private transit options such as rideshare services, on-demand local shuttles and other first/last mile connections. Policy T-1.16: Promote bicycle use as an alternative way to get to work, school, shopping, recreational facilities and transit stops. Policy T-1.19: Provide facilities that encourage and support bicycling and walking. Policy T-5.12: To promote bicycle use, increase the number of safe, attractive and well- designed bicycle parking spaces available in the city, including spots for diverse types of bicycles and associated equipment, including trailers, prioritizing heavily travelled areas such as commercial and retail centers, employment districts, recreational/cultural facilities, multi- modal transit facilities and ride share stops for bicycle parking infrastructure. Policy T-6.1: Continue to make safety the first priority of citywide transportation planning. Prioritize pedestrian, bicycle and automobile safety over motor vehicle level of service at intersections and motor vehicle parking. Policy N-5.1: Support regional, State, and federal programs that improve air quality in the Bay Area because of its critical importance to a healthy Palo Alto. Policy N-5.2: Support behavior changes to reduce emissions of particulates from automobiles. Policy N-5.3: Reduce emissions of particulates from, manufacturing, dry cleaning, construction activity, grading, wood burning, landscape maintenance, including leaf blowers and other sources. The incorporation of relevant policies into the proposed Plan ensures that future development projects and capital improvement projects under the proposed Plan will support emissions reductions, support air quality improvement programs, support alternative modes of transport, and support reduced driving. In this way, Mitigation Measure AIR-1 would support BAAQMD’s implementation of control measures in the 2010 Bay Area Clean Air Plan. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact AIR-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could violate an air quality standard; contribute substantially to an existing or project air quality violation; and/or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). Mitigation Measure AIR-2a: The City shall amend its local CEQA Guidelines and Municipal Code to require, as part of the City’s development approval process, that future development projects to comply with the current BAAQMD basic control measures for reducing construction emissions of PM10 (Table 8-2, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures Recommended for All Proposed Projects, of the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines). 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 9 Mitigation Measure AIR-2b: The City shall amend its local CEQA Guidelines to require that, prior to issuance of construction permits, development project applicants that are subject to CEQA and have the potential to exceed the BAAQMD screening-criteria listed in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines prepare and submit to the City of Palo Alto a technical assessment evaluating potential project construction-related air quality impacts. The evaluation shall be prepared in conformance with BAAQMD methodology in assessing air quality impacts. If construction- related criteria air pollutants are determined to have the potential to exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance, as identified in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, the City of Palo Alto shall require that applicants for new development projects incorporate mitigation measures (Table 8-3, Additional Construction Mitigation Measures Recommended for Projects with Construction Emissions Above the Threshold, of the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines or applicable construction mitigation measures subsequently approved by BAAQMD) to reduce air pollutant emissions during construction activities to below these thresholds. These identified measures shall be incorporated into all appropriate construction documents (e.g., construction management plans) submitted to the City. Mitigation Measure AIR-2c: To ensure that development projects that have the potential to exceed the BAAQMD screening criteria air pollutants listed in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines reduce regional air pollutant emissions below the BAAQMD thresholds of significance, the proposed Plan shall include policies that require compliance with BAAQMD requirements, including BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. Mitigation Measure AIR-2d: Implement Mitigation Measures TRANS-1a and TRANS-1b. In addition, to reduce long-term air quality impacts by emphasizing walkable neighborhoods and supporting alternative modes of transportation, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections between commercial and mixed-use centers. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Section III, Findings Concerning Alternatives. Rationale for Finding: The City is located in a region that is in “nonattainment” for ozone and particulates. While the mitigation measures listed below would reduce emissions of these pollutants, they cannot eliminate Palo Alto’s contribution to regional air quality problems. Mitigation Measure AIR-2a would require adherence to the current BAAQMD basic control measures for reducing construction emissions of PM10. Mitigation Measure AIR-2b would require implementation of BAAQMD-approved mitigation measures, if future development projects in Palo Alto could generate construction exhaust emissions in excess of the BAAQMD significance thresholds. An analysis of emissions generated from the construction of specific future projects under the proposed Plan would be required to evaluate emissions compared to BAAQMD’s project-level significance thresholds during individual environmental review. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 10 To implement Mitigation Measure AIR-2c, the proposed Plan includes Policy N-5.2 and would apply to future development projects and capital improvements projects that are subject to CEQA. Policy N-5.2 states: “Support the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) in its efforts to achieve compliance with existing air quality regulations by continuing to require development applicants to comply with BAAQMD construction emissions control measures and health risk assessment requirements.” Through Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a and proposed Policy L-2.2, the City would ensure that future development projects and capital improvement projects: “Enhance connections between commercial and mixed use centers and the surrounding residential neighborhoods by promoting walkable and bikeable connections and a diverse range of retail and services that caters to the daily needs of residents.” However, , analysis of post-mitigation conditions in the Supplement to the Draft EIR shows that implementation of transportation mitigation measures would nominally reduce emissions but would not reduce emissions below BAAQMD’s project- level thresholds, which, based on BAAQMD guidance, are generally used to determine if a project generates a substantial increase in emissions. Therefore, no additional mitigation measures are available and the impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Impact AIR-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of air pollution. Mitigation Measure AIR-3a: The City of Palo Alto shall update its CEQA Procedures to require that future non-residential projects within the city that: 1) have the potential to generate 100 or more diesel truck trips per day or have 40 or more trucks with operating diesel-powered TRUs, and 2) are within 1,000 feet of a sensitive land use (e.g., residential, schools, hospitals, nursing homes), as measured from the property line of a proposed project to the property line of the nearest sensitive use, shall submit a health risk assessment (HRA) to the City of Palo Alto prior to future discretionary project approval or shall comply with best practices recommended for implementation by the BAAQMD. The HRA shall be prepared in accordance with policies and procedures of the State Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. If the HRA shows that the incremental cancer risk exceeds the BAAQMD significance thresholds, the applicant will be required to identify and demonstrate that mitigation measures are capable of reducing potential cancer and non-cancer risks to an acceptable level, including appropriate enforcement mechanisms. Mitigation measures and best practices may include but are not limited to: Restricting idling on-site beyond Air Toxic Control Measures idling restrictions, as feasible. Electrifying warehousing docks. Requiring use of newer equipment and/or vehicles. Restricting off-site truck travel through the creation of truck routes. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 11 Mitigation measures identified in the project-specific HRA shall be identified as mitigation measures in the environmental document and/or incorporated into the site development plan as a component of a proposed project. Mitigation Measure AIR-3b: To ensure that new industrial and warehousing projects with the potential to generate new stationary and mobile sources of air toxics that exceed the BAAQMD project-level and/or cumulative significance thresholds for toxic air contaminants and PM2.5 listed in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines reduce emissions below the BAAQMD thresholds of significance, amend the City’s CEQA guidelines to require compliance with BAAQMD requirements. Mitigation Measure AIR-3c: The proposed Plan shall include policies to mitigate potential sources of toxic air contaminants through siting or other means to reduce human health risks and meet the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s applicable threshold of significance. Policies shall also require that new sensitive land use projects (e.g., residences, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, parks or playgrounds, and day care centers) within 1,000 feet of a major stationary source of TACs and roadways with traffic volumes over 10,000 vehicles per day consider potential health risks and incorporate adequate precautions, such as high-efficiency air filtration, into project design. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: Mitigation Measures AIR-3a and AIR-3b would ensure that mobile sources of TACs not covered under BAAQMD permits are considered during subsequent project- level environmental review and development of individual projects would be required to achieve the incremental risk thresholds established by BAAQMD. Mitigation Measures AIR-3c would ensure that potential health risks are considered for new sensitive land uses sited near potential sources of toxic air contaminants, and that adequate precautions are incorporated into such projects. The proposed Plan includes Policy N-5.5 to ensure exposure to pollutants and resulting health risks are considered during the siting of sensitive land uses: “Mitigate potential sources of toxic air contaminants through siting or other means to reduce human health risks and meet the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s applicable threshold of significance. When siting new sensitive receptors such as schools, day care facilities, parks or playgrounds, medical facilities and residences within 1,000’ of stationary sources of toxic air contaminants or roadways used by more than 10,000 vehicles per day, require projects to consider potential health risks and incorporate adequate precautions such as high-efficiency air filtration into project design.” Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact AIR-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan could create or expose a substantial number of people to objectionable odors unless policies are integrated into the proposed Plan. Mitigation Measure AIR-4: To reduce odor impacts, the proposed Plan shall include policies requiring: 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 12 Buffers, mechanical, and other mitigation methods to avoid creating a nuisance. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes Policy N-5.4 to ensure that future development projects and capital improvement projects do not result in objectionable odors: “All potential sources of odor and/or toxic air contaminants shall be adequately buffered, or mechanically or otherwise mitigated to avoid odor and toxic impacts that violate relevant human health standards.” This policy, along with CEQA review of projects using BAAQMD’s odor screening distances and compliance with BAAQMD Regulation 7, would ensure that odor impacts are minimized and reduced to a less-than-significant level. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Cultural Resources Impact CULT-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan could adversely affect a historic resource listed or eligible for listing on the National and/or California Register, or listed on the City’s Historic Inventory. Mitigation Measure CULT-1: To ensure the protection of potentially historic resources, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Process for reviewing proposed demolition or alteration of potentially historic buildings. Protection of archaeological resources. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes the policies that collectively support implementation of this mitigation measure. For example: Policy L-7.2: If a proposed project would substantially affect the exterior of a potential historic resource that has not been evaluated for inclusion into the City’s Historic Resources Inventory, City staff shall consider whether it is eligible for inclusion in State or federal registers prior to the issuance of a demolition or alterations permit. Minor exterior improvements that do not affect the architectural integrity of potentially historic buildings shall be exempt from consideration. Examples of minor improvements may include repair or replacement of features in kind, or other changes that do not alter character-defining features of the building. Policy L-7.14: Protect Palo Alto’s archaeological resources, including natural land formations, sacred sites, the historical landscape, historic habitats and remains of settlements here before the founding of Palo Alto in the 19th century. The incorporation of relevant policies into the proposed Plan ensures that the potential historic resources would be considered for inclusion on State and federal registers prior to demolition or alteration, and that archaeological resources would be protected. Through implementation of 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 13 these measures, the City would ensure the ongoing protection of potential historic and archaeological resources that have not already been identified and protected. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact CULT-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. Mitigation Measure CULT-2: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-1. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: Through implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-1, the City would maintain processes and procedures to ensure the ongoing protection of historic and archaeological resources, including important examples of California’s history and prehistory. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact CULT-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan could cause damage to an important archaeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Mitigation Measure CULT-3: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-1. In addition, to ensure that future development would not damage archaeological resources, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Archaeological surveys and mitigation plans for future development projects. Developer compliance with applicable regulations regarding the identification and protection of archaeological and paleontological deposits, and unique geologic features. Appropriate tribal consultation and consideration of tribal concerns. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies that collectively support implementation of this mitigation measure. For example: Policy L-7.15: Appropriate tribal consultation and consideration of tribal concerns. Policy L-7.16: Archaeological surveys and mitigation plans for future development projects. Policy L-7.17: Developer compliance with applicable regulations regarding the identification and protection of archaeological and paleontological deposits, or unique geologic features. The incorporation of relevant policies into the proposed Plan ensures that the City would require archaeological surveys and mitigation plans for future development projects and capital improvement projects that are subject to CEQA review, as well as compliance with archaeological protection regulations and tribal consultation. Implementation of these policies would avoid significant impacts to archaeological resources. In addition, through implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-1, the City would maintain processes and procedures to ensure the ongoing protection of archaeological resources. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 14 Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact CULT-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Mitigation Measure CULT-5: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-3. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: Mitigation Measure CULT-3 would incorporate policies into the proposed Plan to require compliance with paleontological protection regulations. These policies would ensure that future development projects and capital improvement projects subject to CEQA would avoid significant impacts to paleontological resources and unique geologic features. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact CULT-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in significant cumulative impacts with respect to cultural resources. Mitigation Measure CULT-7: Implement Mitigation Measures CULT-1 and CULT-3. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: Through implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-1, the City would maintain processes and procedures to ensure the ongoing protection of historic and archaeological resources. These processes and procedures would protect historic and archaeological resources. Mitigation Measure CULT-3 would incorporate policies into the proposed Plan to require archaeological surveys and mitigation plans for future development projects and capital improvement projects, as well as compliance with archaeological and paleontological protection regulations and tribal consultation. These policies would ensure that future projects avoid significant impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources and that the City’s contribution to potential cumulative impacts to historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact GHG-3: The proposed Plan would expose people or structures to the physical effects of climate change, including but not limited to flooding, extreme temperatures, public health, wildfire risk, or other impacts resulting from climate change, requiring mitigation. Mitigation Measure GHG-3: To address the potential impacts associated with exposing people to the effects of climate change, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 15 Monitoring and response to flooding risks caused by climate change-related changes to precipitation patterns, groundwater levels, sea level rise, tides, and storm surges. Cooperative planning with federal, State, regional, and local public agencies on issues related to climate change (including sea level rise and extreme storms). Preparation of response strategies to address sea level rise, increased flooding, landslides, soil erosion, storm events, and other events related to climate change. Implementation of adaptive strategies to address impacts of sea level rise on Palo Alto’s levee system. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies and programs that collectively support implementation of this mitigation measure. For example: Policy N-4.12: Encourage Low Impact Development (LID) measures to limit the amount of pavement and impervious surface in new development and increase the retention, treatment and infiltration of urban stormwater runoff. Include LID measures in major remodels, public projects and recreation projects where practical. Policy N-8.2: With guidance from the City’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) and its subsequent updates and other future planning efforts, reduce greenhouse gas emissions from City operations and from the community. Policy N-8.4: Continue to work with regional partners to build resiliency policy into City planning and capital projects, especially near the San Francisco Bay shoreline, while protecting the natural environment. Program N8.4.1: Prepare response strategies that address sea level rise, increased flooding, landslides, soil erosion, storm events and other events related to climate change. Include strategies to respond to the impacts of sea level rise on Palo Alto’s levee system. Policy S-1.9: Design Palo Alto’s infrastructure system to protect the life and safety of residents, ensure resiliency in the face of disaster and minimize economic loss, including in the context of climate change and sea level rise. Program S1.10.3: Implement the mitigation strategies and guidelines provided by the LHMP, including those that address evolving hazards resulting from climate change. Policy S-2.9: Prohibit new habitable basements in the development of single-family residential properties within 100-year flood zones of the FEMA-designated Special Flood Hazard Area. Policy S-2.10: Monitor and respond to the risk of flooding caused by climate change-related changes to precipitation patterns, groundwater levels, sea level rise, tides and storm surges. Policy S-2.11: Support regional efforts to improve bay levees. Program S2.11.1: Work cooperatively with the Santa Clara Valley Water District and the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority to provide flood protection from high tide events on San Francisco Bay, taking into account the impacts of future sea level rise, to provide one percent (100-year) flood protection from tidal flooding, while being sensitive to preserving and protecting the natural environment. Program S2.11.2: Work with regional, State, and federal agencies to develop additional adaptive strategies to address flood hazards to existing or new development and infrastructure, including environmentally sensitive levees. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 16 The incorporation of relevant policies into the proposed Plan ensures that the City considers the impact of climate change when making future decisions about development projects and capital improvement projects. The programs listed above illustrate ways the City is engaging in planning and strategies to reduce the risks associated with the effects of climate change. The policies and programs collectively ensure that the City reduces potential climate change hazards to the extent feasible. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Hydrology Impact HYD-2: The proposed Plan could substantially degrade or deplete ground water resources or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. Mitigation Measure HYD-2: To reduce potential impacts associated with construction dewatering the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Avoidance of the impacts of basement construction for single-family homes on the natural environment and safety. Conservation of subsurface water resources. Construction techniques and recharge strategies to reduce subsurface and surface water impacts. Monitoring of dewatering and excavation projects. Cooperation with other jurisdictions and regional agencies to protect groundwater. Protection of groundwater as a natural resource. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies and programs that collectively support implementation of this mitigation measure. For example: Policy L-3.5: Avoid negative impacts of basement construction for single-family homes on adjacent properties, public resources and the natural environment. Policy N-4.7: Ensure regulation of groundwater use to protect it as a natural resource and to preserve it as a potential water supply in the event of water scarcity. Policy N-4.8: Conserve and maintain subsurface water resources by exploring ways to reduce the impacts of residential basement dewatering and other excavation activities. Program N4.8.1: Research and promote new construction techniques and recharge strategies developed to reduce subsurface and surface water impacts and comply with City dewatering policies. Program N4.8.2: Explore appropriate ways to monitor dewatering for all dewatering and excavation projects to encourage maintaining groundwater levels and recharging of the aquifer where needed. The incorporation of relevant policies into the proposed Plan ensures that the City would continue to work to reduce the environmental effects associated with construction dewatering, 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 17 including impacts to adjacent properties and subsurface water resources. The programs listed above illustrate the City commitment to advancing these policies. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-2 would also ensure cooperation with other agencies to protect groundwater resources and would reduce impacts to groundwater resources to a less-than-significant level. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Land Use Impact LAND-1: The proposed Plan could adversely change the type or intensity of existing or planned land use patterns in the area. Mitigation Measure LAND-1: To ensure that the intensity of future development would not adversely change the land use patterns or affect the livability of Palo Alto neighborhoods, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Strengthening of residential neighborhoods. Vitality of commercial areas and public facilities. High-quality building and site design. Architectural compatibility of new development. Compatible infill development. Avoidance of abrupt changes in the scale of development where residential districts abut more intense uses. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies that collectively support implementation of this mitigation measure. For example: Policy L-1.2: Maintain and strengthen Palo Alto’s varied residential neighborhoods while sustaining the vitality of its commercial areas and public facilities. Policy L-1.3: Infill development in the urban service area should be compatible with its surroundings and the overall scale and character of the city to ensure a compact, efficient development pattern. Policy L-3.1: Ensure that new or remodeled structures are compatible with the neighborhood and adjacent structures. Policy L-6.1: Promote high-quality design and site planning that is compatible with surrounding development and public spaces. Policy L-6.2: Use the Zoning Ordinance, design review process, design guidelines and Coordinated Area Plans to ensure high quality residential and commercial design and architectural compatibility. Policy L-6.7: Where possible, avoid abrupt changes in scale and density between residential and non-residential areas and between residential areas of different densities. To promote compatibility and gradual transitions between land uses, place zoning district boundaries at mid-block locations rather than along streets wherever possible. Policy L-9.4: Maintain and enhance existing public gathering places and open spaces and integrate new public spaces at a variety of scales. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 18 Policy L-9.6: Create, preserve and enhance parks and publicly accessible, shared outdoor gathering spaces within walking and biking distance of residential neighborhoods. The incorporation of relevant policies into the proposed Plan ensures that the City will require development and capital improvements allowed under the proposed Plan to achieve high- quality design, architectural compatibility, and context-sensitive building design, strengthening residential and commercial areas and avoiding adverse effects associated with the type or intensity of land use patterns. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact LAND-2: The proposed Plan would allow development that could be incompatible with adjacent land uses or with the general character of the surrounding area, including density and building height. Mitigation Measure LAND-2: Implement Mitigation Measure LAND-1. In addition, to further reduce potential impacts to visual character and ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Use of City procedures, plans, and requirements to ensure high-quality building design and architectural compatibility. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies that collectively support implementation of this mitigation measure. For example: Policy L-6.2: Use the Zoning Ordinance, design review process, design guidelines and Coordinated Area Plans to ensure high quality residential and commercial design and architectural compatibility. Policy L-6.7: Where possible, avoid abrupt changes in scale and density between residential and non-residential areas and between residential areas of different densities. To promote compatibility and gradual transitions between land uses, place zoning district boundaries at mid-block locations rather than along streets wherever possible. The incorporation of relevant policies into the proposed Plan ensures that the City will require development projects and capital improvement projects to provide appropriate land use transitions and adhere to design requirements for compatibility and high-quality design, and to avoid adverse effects associated with incompatible land uses, effectively avoiding adverse effects associated with the intensity of planned land uses. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact LAND-5: The proposed Plan could physically divide an established community. Mitigation Measure LAND-5: To avoid potential impacts from physically dividing an established community, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Enhanced connections to and from parks, schools, and community facilities for all users. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 19 Safe and convenient pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connections between residential areas and commercial centers. Cooperation with other agencies to improve circulation connections. Grade separation of rail crossings. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies that collectively support implementation of this mitigation measure during the course of development proposals and capital improvement projects. For example: Policy L-1.6: Use coordinated area plans to guide development in areas of Palo Alto where significant change is foreseeable. Address both land use and transportation, define the desired character and urban design traits of the areas, identify opportunities for public open space, parks and recreational opportunities, address connectivity to and compatibility with adjacent residential areas; and include broad community involvement in the planning process. Policy L-2.2: Enhance connections between commercial and mixed use centers and the surrounding residential neighborhoods by promoting walkable and bikeable connections and a diverse range of retail and services that caters to the daily needs of residents. Policy T-1.17: Require new office, commercial and multi-family residential developments to provide improvements that improve bicycle and pedestrian connectivity as called for in the 2012 Palo Alto Bicycle + Pedestrian Transportation Plan. Policy T-1.21: Maintain pedestrian- and bicycle-only use of alleyways Downtown and in the California Avenue area where appropriate to provide connectivity between businesses and parking and transit stops, and consider public art in the alleyways as a way to encourage walking. Policy T-3.2: Enhance connections to, from and between parks, community centers, recreation facilities, libraries and schools for all users. Policy T-3.13: Work with Caltrans, Santa Clara County and VTA to improve east and west connections in Palo Alto and maintain a circulation network that binds the city together in all directions. Policy T-3.15: Pursue grade separation of rail crossings along the rail corridor as a City priority. Policy T-8.12: Support the development of the Santa Clara County Countywide Bicycle System, and other regional bicycle plans. The incorporation of relevant policies into the proposed Plan ensures that future development projects and capital improvement projects will enhance connections with community facilities, improve safety for non-automotive connections, address grade separation of rail crossings, and involve cooperation with other agencies to improve circulation. City action consistent with these policies would improve accessibility throughout the city and ensure that established communities are not physically divided. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 20 Noise Impact NOISE-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to cause the average 24-hour noise level (Ldn) to increase by 5.0 decibels (dB) or more in an existing residential area, even if the Ldn would remain below 60 dB. Mitigation Measure NOISE-1a: To ensure that average 24-hour noise levels associated with long-term operational noise would not increase by 5.0 decibels (dB) or more in an existing residential area, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Location of land uses in areas with compatible noise environments. Use of the guidelines in the “Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environment” table in the proposed Plan to evaluate the compatibility of proposed land uses with existing noise environments. Clear guidelines for maximum outdoor noise levels in residential areas. Adherence to the interior noise requirements of the State of California Building Standards Code (Title 24) and the Noise Insulation Standards (Title 25). Inclusion of a noise contour map in the proposed Plan. Reduction of noise impacts of development on adjacent properties. Evaluation of noise impacts on existing residential, open space, and conservation land. Requirement for new projects in the Multiple Family, Commercial, Manufacturing, or Planned Community districts to demonstrate compliance with the Noise Ordinance. Mitigation Measure NOISE-1b: To reduce potential impacts to new land uses from aircraft noise, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Compliance with the airport-related land use compatibility standards for community noise environments. Prohibition of incompatible land use development within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contours of the Palo Alto airport, as established in the adopted County of Santa Clara Airport Land Use Commission Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for the Palo Alto Airport. Mitigation Measure NOISE-1c: To reduce potential impacts to new land uses from railway noise, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Minimization of noise spillover from rail-related activities into adjacent residential or noise- sensitive areas. Building design that reduces impacts from noise and ground borne vibrations associated with rail operations. Guidelines for interior noise levels. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies that collectively support implementation of this mitigation measure during the course of development proposals and capital improvement projects. For example: Policy N-6.1: Encourage the location of land uses in areas with compatible noise environments. Use the guidelines in Table N-1 to evaluate the compatibility of proposed 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 21 land uses with existing noise environments when preparing, revising, or reviewing development proposals. Acceptable exterior, interior and ways to discern noise exposure include: The guideline for maximum outdoor noise levels in residential areas is an Ldn of 60 dB. This level is a guideline for the design and location of future development and a goal for the reduction of noise in existing development. However, 60 Ldn is a guideline which cannot necessarily be reached in all residential areas within the constraints of economic or aesthetic feasibility. This guideline will be primarily applied where outdoor use is a major consideration (e.g., backyards in single-family housing developments, and recreational areas in multiple family housing projects). Where the City determines that providing an Ldn of 60 dB or lower outdoors is not feasible, the noise level in outdoor areas intended for recreational use should be reduced to as close to the standard as feasible through project design. Interior noise, per the requirements of the State of California Building Standards Code (Title 24) and Noise Insulation Standards (Title 25), must not exceed an Ldn of 45 dB in all habitable rooms of all new dwelling units. Policy N-6.2: Noise exposure(s) can be determined from (a) the noise contour map included in this plan, (b) more detailed noise exposure studies, or (c) on area-specific or project- specific noise measurements, as appropriate. Policy N-6.5: Protect residential and residentially-zoned properties from excessive and unnecessary noise from any sources on adjacent commercial or industrial properties. Policy N-6.7: While a proposed project is in the development review process, the noise impact of the project on existing residential land uses, public open spaces and public conservation land should be evaluated in terms of the increase in existing noise levels for the potential for adverse community impact, regardless of existing background noise levels. If an area is below the applicable maximum noise guideline, an increase in noise up to the maximum should not necessarily be allowed. Policy N-6.8: The City may require measures to reduce noise impacts of new development on adjacent properties through appropriate means including, but not limited to, the following: Orient buildings to shield noise sensitive outdoor spaces from sources of noise. Construct noise walls when other methods to reduce noise are not practical and when these walls will not shift similar noise impacts to another adjacent property. Screen and control noise sources such as parking lots, outdoor activities and mechanical equipment, including HVAC equipment. Increase setbacks to serve as a buffer between noise sources and adjacent dwellings. Whenever possible, retain fences, walls or landscaping that serve as noise buffers while considering design, safety and other impacts. Use soundproofing materials, noise reduction construction techniques, and/or acoustically rated windows/doors. Include auxiliary power sources at loading docks to minimize truck engine idling. Control hours of operation, including deliveries and trash pickup, to minimize noise impacts. Policy N-6.9: Continue to require applicants for new projects or new mechanical equipment in the Multifamily, Commercial, Manufacturing or Planned Community districts to submit an 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 22 acoustical analysis demonstrating compliance with the Noise Ordinance prior to receiving a building permit. Policy N-6.12: Ensure compliance with the airport related land use compatibility standards for community noise environments, shown in Table N-1, by prohibiting incompatible land use development within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contours of the Palo Alto airport. Policy N-6.13: Minimize noise spillover from rail related activities into adjacent residential or noise-sensitive areas. Policy N-6.14: Reduce impacts from noise and ground borne vibrations associated with rail operations by requiring that future habitable buildings use necessary design elements such as setbacks, landscaped berms and soundwalls to keep interior noise levels below 45 dBA Ldn and ground-borne vibration levels below 72 VdB. Mitigation Measure NOISE-1a incorporates policies into the proposed Plan to require adherence to noise guidelines, reduce potential noise impacts for adjacent properties, ensuring that long- term operational noise in residential areas would not increase by unacceptable levels. Mitigation Measure NOISE-1b would incorporate policies into the proposed Plan to require compliance with airport-related compatibility standards and prohibit development within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour of the Palo Alto Airport, ensuring that new sensitive receptors are not exposed to unacceptable levels of noise from operation of the Palo Alto Airport. Mitigation Measure NOISE-1c would incorporate policies into the proposed Plan to address impacts associated with rail operations and require interior noise level guidelines and vibration impact analyses, ensuring that new construction near the rail corridor is adequate to address railway noise and vibration, to the extent feasible. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact NOISE-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to cause the Ldn to increase by 3 dB or more in an existing residential area, thereby causing the Ldn in the area to exceed 60 dB. Mitigation Measure NOISE-2: Implement Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, and NOISE-1c. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, and NOISE-1c would be implemented by including policies in the proposed Plan to ensure that noise levels in residential areas would not increase by unacceptable levels and ensure that new noise sources would be controlled and/or mitigated so as to comply with City standards. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact NOISE-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to cause an increase of 3 dB or more in an existing residential area where the Ldn currently exceeds 60 dB. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 23 Mitigation Measure NOISE-3: Implement Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, and NOISE-1c. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, and NOISE-1c would be implemented by including policies in the proposed Plan to ensure that noise levels in residential areas would not increase by unacceptable levels and would ensure that new noise sources would be controlled and/or mitigated so as to comply with City standards. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact NOISE-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to result in indoor noise levels for residential development to exceed an Ldn of 45 dB. Mitigation Measure NOISE-4a: Implement Mitigation Measure NOISE-1a. Mitigation Measure NOISE-4b: The Land Use Noise Compatibility Guidelines established in the 1998 Comprehensive Plan shall be maintained. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: Mitigation Measure NOISE-1a would be implemented by including policies in the proposed Plan to ensure that long-term operational noise in residential areas would not increase by unacceptable levels by maintaining the City’s Land Use Noise Compatibility Guidelines, which would be used to evaluate new development projects and capital improvement projects. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact NOISE-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to expose persons to or generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels. Mitigation Measure NOISE-5a: To ensure that future development would not result in significant construction-related vibration impacts, the proposed Plan shall include policies that limit the hours of construction around sensitive receptors, and require formal, ongoing monitoring and reporting throughout the construction process for larger development projects, as well as the use of pertinent industry standards and City guidelines to avoid significant vibration impacts during construction or operations. Mitigation Measure NOISE-5b: Implement Mitigation Measure NOISE-1c. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 24 Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes the following policy and program that collectively ensure implementation of this mitigation measure during the course of development proposals and capital improvement projects: Policy N-6.11: Continue to prioritize construction noise limits around sensitive receptors, including through limiting construction hours and individual and cumulative noise from construction equipment. Program N6.11.1: For larger development projects that demand intensive construction periods and/or use equipment that could create vibration impacts, such as the Stanford University Medical Center or major grade separation projects, require a vibration impact analysis, as well as formal, ongoing monitoring and reporting of noise levels throughout the entire construction process, pertinent to industry standards. The monitoring plan should identify hours of operation and could include information on the monitoring locations, durations and regularity, the instrumentation to be used and appropriate noise control measures to ensure compliance with the noise ordinance. The incorporation of this policy and program into the proposed Plan requires vibration analyses and vibration mitigation plans, as well as limits for vibration around vibration-sensitive receptors. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact NOISE-6: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to expose people to noise levels in excess of established State standards. Mitigation Measure NOISE-6: Implement Mitigation Measures NOISE-4a and NOISE-4b. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: Mitigation Measure NOISE-1a would be implemented by including policies in the proposed Plan to ensure that new land uses would be reviewed for compatibility with their surroundings and would not increase noise by unacceptable levels, and Mitigation Measure NOISE-4b would be implemented by maintaining the City’s Land Use Noise Compatibility Guidelines in the proposed Plan. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact NOISE-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to result in the exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Mitigation Measure NOISE-7: Implement Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, NOISE-1c, NOISE-4a, and NOISE-4b. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 25 Rationale for Finding: Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, and NOISE-1c would be implemented by including policies in the proposed Plan to ensure that residential areas would not be affected by new noise sources and would maintain the City’s Land Use Noise Compatibility Guidelines. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact NOISE-8: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in a potentially substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Mitigation Measure NOISE-8: To ensure that future development would not result in significant impacts to sensitive receptors from construction noise, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Construction noise limits around sensitive receptors. Monitoring and reporting plans for construction noise levels of larger development projects. Noise control measures to ensure compliance with the noise ordinance. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes the following policy and program that collectively ensure implementation of this mitigation measure during the course of development proposals and capital improvement projects: Policy N-6.11: Continue to prioritize construction noise limits around sensitive receptors, including through limiting construction hours and individual and cumulative noise from construction equipment. Program N6.11.1: For larger development projects that demand intensive construction periods and/or use equipment that could create vibration impacts, such as the Stanford University Medical Center or major grade separation projects, require a vibration impact analysis, as well as formal, ongoing monitoring and reporting of noise levels throughout the entire construction process, pertinent to industry standards. The monitoring plan should identify hours of operation and could include information on the monitoring locations, durations and regularity, the instrumentation to be used and appropriate noise control measures to ensure compliance with the noise ordinance. The incorporation of this policy and program into the proposed Plan limits construction noise around sensitive receptors, requires monitoring and reporting plans for construction noise of larger development projects, and requires noise control measures, reducing temporary or periodic increases to ambient noise levels to less-than-significant levels. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact NOISE-11: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, may result in significant cumulative impacts with respect to noise. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 26 Mitigation Measure NOISE-11a: Implement Mitigation Measure NOISE-1c. Mitigation Measure NOISE-11b: To address overall community noise impacts from train noise to the extent such noise is within the City’s control and in excess of established State and/or City standards, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Efforts to develop and implement technological methods to reduce train whistle noise from Caltrain. Evaluation of at-grade rail crossings as potential Quiet Zones based on Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) rules and guidelines. Grade separation of rail crossings as a City priority. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies and programs that would collectively implement this mitigation measure during the course of development proposals and capital improvement projects. For example: Policy T-3.15: Pursue grade separation of rail crossings along the rail corridor as a City priority. Policy N-6.13: Minimize noise spillover from rail related activities into adjacent residential or noise-sensitive areas. Program N6.13.1: Encourage the Peninsula Corridors Joint Powers Board to pursue technologies and grade separations that would reduce or eliminate the need for train horns/whistles in communities served by rail service. Program N6.13.2: Evaluate changing at-grade rail crossings so that they qualify as Quiet Zones based on Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) rules and guidelines in order to mitigate the effects of train horn noise without adversely affecting safety at railroad crossings. The incorporation of these policies and programs into the proposed Plan ensures the City’s focus on methods to reduce train whistle noise from Caltrain, evaluation of at-grade crossings as potential Quiet Zones, and the prioritization of grade separation. In addition, Mitigation Measure NOISE-1c would address new sources of noise in existing residential areas. Implementation of Mitigation Measures NOISE-1c and NOISE-11b would minimize the possibility for community-wide ambient noise increases due to cumulative sources to the extent feasible. After implementation of the new policies and mitigation measures, impacts from cumulative noise increases would be considered less than significant. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Public Services Impact PS-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan would result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional parks and recreation facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 27 Mitigation Measure PS-7: To address the potential physical impacts of park construction/improvement, the Comprehensive Plan Update shall include policies that achieve the following: Evaluation and mitigation of the construction impacts associated with park and recreational facility creation and expansion. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes the following policy that ensures implementation of this mitigation measure during the course of development proposals and capital improvement projects: Policy N-1.13: Evaluate and mitigate the construction impacts associated with park and recreational facility creation and expansion. The incorporation of this policy into the proposed Plan requires evaluation and mitigation of construction impacts associated with the creation or expansion of park and recreational facilities. Facility construction projects developed consistent with this policy would avoid adverse physical impacts to the extent feasible. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact PS-8: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to result in substantial cumulative adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks and recreational facilities, need for new or physically altered parks and recreation facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives. Mitigation Measure PS-8: Implement Mitigation Measure PS-7. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure PS-7 would ensure that facility construction projects developed consistent with referenced policies would avoid adverse physical impacts to the extent feasible. Therefore, the creation of new parkland would not contribute to potential significant cumulative impacts associated with new park construction. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Transportation Impact TRANS-1: Implementation of the project would cause an intersection to drop below its motor vehicle level of service standard, or deteriorate operations at representative intersections that already operate at a substandard level of service. Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a: Adopt a programmatic approach to reducing motor vehicle traffic, with the goal of achieving no net increase in peak-hour motor vehicle trips from new 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 28 development, with an exception for uses that directly contribute to the neighborhood character and diversity of Palo Alto (such as ground-floor retail and below-market-rate housing). The program should, at a minimum, require new development projects above a specific size threshold to prepare and implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to achieve the following reduction in peak-hour motor vehicle trips from the rates included in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual for the appropriate land use category and size. These reductions are deemed aggressive, yet feasible, for the districts indicated. 45 percent reduction in the Downtown district 35 percent reduction in the California Avenue area 30 percent reduction in the Stanford Research Park 30 percent reduction in the El Camino Real Corridor 20 percent reduction in other areas of the city TDM Plans must be approved by the City and monitored by the property owner or the project proponent on an annual basis. The Plans must contain enforcement mechanisms or penalties that accrue if targets are not met and may achieve reductions by contributing to citywide or employment district shuttles or other proven transportation programs that are not directly under the property owner’s control. Mitigation Measure TRANS-1b: Require new development projects to pay a Transportation Impact Fee for all those peak-hour motor vehicle trips that cannot be reduced via TDM measures. Fees collected would be used for capital improvements aimed at reducing motor vehicle trips and motor vehicle traffic congestion. Mitigation Measure TRANS-1c: The proposed Plan shall include policies to ensure collaboration with regional agencies and neighboring jurisdictions, and identification and pursuit of funding for rail corridor improvements and grade separation. Policies shall support grade separation of rail crossings along the rail corridor as a City priority, and the undertaking of studies and outreach necessary to advance grade separation of Caltrain to become a “shovel ready” project. Mitigation Measure TRANS-1d: Consistent with State requirements, the City shall adopt a Multimodal Improvement Plan to address impacts to Congestion Management Program facilities. In addition, the proposed Plan shall include policies to engage in regional transportation planning and advocate for specific transit improvements and investments, such as Caltrain service enhancements and grade separations, Dumbarton Express service, enhanced bus service on El Camino Real with queue-jump lanes and curbside platforms, high-occupancy vehicle (HOV)/high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, and additional VTA bus service. Mitigation Measure TRANS-1e: The proposed Plan shall include policies to encourage the PAUSD to analyze decisions regarding school assignments to reduce peak-period motor vehicle trips to and from school sites. Finding: Palo Alto is located in a dynamic region with a transportation network that is often quite congested. In this context, even small changes over time can contribute to significant traffic congestion. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 29 identified in the EIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Section III, Findings Concerning Alternatives. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies and programs that collectively support implementation of this mitigation measure during the course of the City’s review of development proposals and capital improvement projects. For example: Program T1.2.2: Formalize TDM requirements by ordinance and require new developments above a certain size threshold to prepare and implement a TDM Plan to meet specific performance standards. Require regular monitoring/reporting and provide for enforcement with meaningful penalties for noncompliance. The ordinance should also: Establish a list of effective TDM measures that include transit promotion, prepaid transit passes, commuter checks, car sharing, carpooling, parking cash-out, bicycle lockers and showers, shuttles to Caltrain, requiring TMA membership and education and outreach to support the use of these modes. Allow property owners to achieve reductions by contributing to citywide or employment district shuttles or other proven transportation programs that are not directly under the property owner’s control. Provide a system for incorporating alternative measures as new ideas for TDM are developed. Establish a mechanism to monitor the success of TDM measures and track the cumulative reduction of peak hour motor vehicle trips. TDM measures should at a minimum achieve the following reduction in peak hour motor vehicle trips, with a focus on single-occupant vehicle trips. Reductions should be based on the rates included in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual for the appropriate land use category: - 50 percent reduction in the Downtown district - 35 percent reduction in the California Avenue area - 30 percent reduction in the Stanford Research Park - 30 percent reduction in the El Camino Real Corridor - 20 percent reduction in other areas of the city Require new development projects to pay a Transportation Impact Fee for all those peak- hour motor vehicle trips that cannot be reduced via TDM measures. Fees collected would be used for capital improvements aimed at reducing vehicle trips and traffic congestion. Policy T-2.6: Work with PAUSD to ensure that decisions regarding school assignments are analyzed to reduce peak period motor vehicle trips to and from school sites. Policy T-3.15: Pursue grade separation of rail crossings along the rail corridor as a City priority. Program T3.15.1: Undertake studies and outreach necessary to advance grade separation of Caltrain to become a “shovel ready” project and strongly advocate for adequate State, regional and federal funding for design and construction of railroad grade separations. Policy T-8.1: Engage in regional transportation planning and advocate for specific transit improvements and investments, such as Caltrain service enhancements and grade separations, Dumbarton Express service, enhanced bus service on El Camino Real with queue jumping and curbside platforms, HOV/HOT lanes and additional VTA bus service. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 30 Policy T-8.2: Participate in regional planning initiatives for the rail corridor and provide a strong guiding voice. Implementation of the TDM measures and other measures to reduce driving under Mitigation Measures TRANS-1a through TRANS-1e would result in a lower auto mode share, higher number of transit trips, lower VMT, and lower VMT per capita compared to pre-mitigation conditions. However, affected intersections are operating close to or below LOS standards under existing conditions, so even small increases in traffic at these intersections would trigger impacts. Under Mitigation Measure TRANS-1d, the City will prepare and adopt a Multimodal Improvement Plan to address impacts to Congestion Management Program (CMP) facilities. The EIR identifies significant impacts at three intersections included in the County’s CMP: El Camino Real (State Route 82) at San Antonio Road (in Mountain View) (referred to as Intersection #8 in the EIR analysis), Foothill Expressway/Junipero Serra Boulevard at Page Mill Road (Intersection #9), and Foothill Expressway at Arastradero Road (Intersection #10). VTA’s Congestion Management Agency (CMA) guidelines state that, “Deficiency plans should be prepared by the Member Agency in which the deficient CMP System facility or set of facilities is located.” Multimodal Improvement Plan requirements will be met for these three intersections as follows: Intersection #8 (El Camino Real at San Antonio Road) is located in Mountain View and Los Altos. Therefore, planning for the intersection is not under the jurisdiction of the City of Palo Alto. The City of Mountain View is currently drafting a Multimodal Improvement Plan that includes this intersection and can and should adopt the Multimodal Improvement Plan when it is complete. As required by VTA, acting as the Congestion Management Agency (“CMA”), the City of Palo Alto will participate in development of this Multimodal Improvement Plan. Intersection #9 (Foothill Expressway/Junipero Serra Boulevard at Page Mill Road) is located within the city but is under the County’s jurisdiction. This intersection was grandfathered in with an automobile LOS of F in 1991. Freeway segments and congestion management program (CMP) intersections that operated at LOS F when monitoring began in 1991 are considered exempt from meeting the CMP standard. Therefore, it is exempt from the requirement to prepare a Multimodal Improvement Plan. Intersection #10 (Foothill Expressway at Arastradero Road) is located within the city but is under the County’s jurisdiction. The City of Palo Alto will be adopting a new Transportation Nexus Study and Transportation Impact Fee shortly after adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Update and the certification of the Comprehensive Plan Update EIR. This nexus study, and impact fee calculation, will address the City’s share of a full grade-separation at this intersection. Preliminary designs and cost estimates for this grade-separation project have been developed by the Santa Clara County Department of Roads and Airports. With the construction of this project, this intersection should operate at an acceptable level of service, and no longer require the development of a Multimodal Improvement Plan. All of the above traffic mitigation measures would reduce, but not eliminate, Impact TRANS-1. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 31 Impact TRANS-3: Implementation of the project would cause a freeway segment or ramp to drop below its level of service standard, or deteriorate operations that already operate at a substandard level of service. Mitigation Measure TRANS-3a: The City shall require new development projects to prepare and implement TDM programs, as described in TRANS-1a. TDM programs for worksites may include measures such as private bus services and free shuttle services to transit stations geared towards commuters. Mitigation Measure TRANS-3b: The proposed Comprehensive Plan shall include policies that advocate for efforts by Caltrans and the Valley Transportation Authority to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow on existing freeway facilities consistent with Statewide GHG emissions reduction initiatives. Policies shall support the application of emerging freeway information, monitoring, and control systems that provide non-intrusive driver assistance and reduce congestion. Policies shall support, where appropriate, the conversion of existing traffic lanes to exclusive bus and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV)/high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes on freeways and expressways, including the Dumbarton Bridge, and the continuation of an HOV lane from Redwood City to San Francisco. Finding: Palo Alto is located in a dynamic region with a transportation network that is often quite congested. In this context, even small changes over time can contribute to significant traffic congestion. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Section III, Findings Concerning Alternatives. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies that collectively ensure implementation of this mitigation measure during the course of development proposals and capital improvement projects. For example: Policy T-8.6: Advocate for efforts by Caltrans and the Valley Transportation Authority to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow on existing freeway facilities consistent with Statewide GHG emissions reduction initiatives. Policy T-8.7: Support the application of emerging freeway information, monitoring and control systems that provide non-intrusive driver assistance and reduce congestion. Policy T-8.8: Where appropriate, support the conversion of existing traffic lanes to exclusive bus and HOV lanes or Express/HOT lanes on freeways and expressways, including the Dumbarton Bridge, and the continuation of an HOV lane from Redwood City to San Francisco. The TDM measures called for in Mitigation Measures TRANS-1a and TRANS-3b, which include a TDM mitigation program and other measures, would reduce but not eliminate the impacts on freeway segments. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 32 Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Impact TRANS-6: Implementation of the project would impede the operation of a transit system as a result of congestion. Mitigation Measure TRANS-6: The proposed Comprehensive Plan shall include policies to collaborate with transit agencies in planning for and implementing convenient, efficient, coordinated, and effective bus service. Finding: Palo Alto is located in a dynamic region with a transportation network that is often quite congested. In this context, even small changes over time can contribute to significant traffic congestion. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Section III, Findings Concerning Alternatives. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes the following policy that ensures implementation of this mitigation measure: Policy T-1.12: Collaborate with transit agencies in planning and implementing convenient, efficient, coordinated and effective bus service in Palo Alto that addresses the needs of all segments of our population. The incorporation of this policy into the proposed Plan ensures that the City would pursue methods to give priority to buses and transit facilities. Even with implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-6, congestion at all intersections and on all roadway segments where buses operate would not be eliminated. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Impact TRANS-8: Implementation of the project would create the potential demand for through traffic to use local residential streets. Mitigation Measure TRANS-8: The proposed Comprehensive Plan shall include policies to identify specific improvements that can be used to discourage drivers from using local, neighborhood streets to bypass traffic congestion on arterials. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes the following policy that ensures implementation of this mitigation measure: Policy T-4.3: Identify specific improvements that can be used to discourage drivers from using local, neighborhood streets to bypass traffic congestion on arterials. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-8 would ensure that the City pursues improvements to reduce the use of local streets as bypass routes to avoid congestion on 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 33 arterials. The EIR notes that implementation of traffic calming is highly site-specific, depending on the physical characteristics of the street, the circulation pattern of a neighborhood, and whether the residents support specific measures, among many other factors. It is not possible at the Comprehensive Plan level to determine where traffic calming measures would be appropriate or feasible or which specific measures should be implemented along a given roadway or at a given intersection. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact TRANS-9: Implementation of the project would create an operational safety hazard. Mitigation Measure TRANS-9: Implement Mitigation Measure TRANS-8. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: Under Mitigation Measure TRANS-8, the City would pursue improvements to reduce the use of local streets as bypass routes to avoid congestion on arterials. Implementation of this mitigation measure would ensure that safety hazards associated with through traffic are reduced to a less-than-significant level. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Utilities Impact UTIL-15: Without the adoption of policies to promote recycling and conservation, the proposed Plan could potentially fall out of compliance with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Mitigation Measure UTIL-15: To ensure that future development would comply with applicable solid waste regulations, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Ninety-five percent landfill diversion by 2030, and ultimately zero waste. Reduced solid waste generation. Use of reusable, returnable, recyclable, and repairable goods, through enforcement of the 2016 Plastic Foam Ordinance expansion. Enhanced recycling and composting programs for all waste generators. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies that collectively support implementation of this mitigation measure. For example: Policy S-3.8: Strive for 95 percent landfill diversion by 2030, and ultimately zero waste, by enhancing policies and programs for waste reduction, recycling, composting and reuse. Policy S-3.9: Reduce solid waste generation through requiring salvage and reuse of building materials, including architecturally and historically significant materials. Policy S-3.11: Encourage the use of reusable, returnable, recyclable and repairable goods, and discourage the use of single use plastic water bottles and extended polystyrene 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 34 (Styrofoam), through enforcement of the City’s 2016 Plastic Foam Ordinance expansion and continued incentives, education and responsible City purchasing policies. The incorporation of relevant policies into the proposed Plan ensures the City’s ongoing commitment to recycling and conservation in compliance with federal, State, and local laws. Implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-15 would ensure that the City complies with applicable solid waste regulations. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Impact UTIL-17: The proposed Plan would not result in a substantial increase in natural gas and electrical service demands that would require the new construction of energy supply facilities and distribution infrastructure or capacity enhancing alterations to existing facilities. However, without the adoption of policies in support of energy efficiency and conservation, the proposed Plan would result in a potentially significant impact, requiring mitigation. Mitigation Measure UTIL-17: To ensure that future development would maximize energy efficiency and conservation the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Maximized conservation and efficient use of energy. Continued procurement of carbon-neutral energy. Investment in cost-effective energy efficiency and energy conservation programs. Provision of public education programs addressing energy conservation and efficiency. Use of cost-effective energy conservation measures in City projects and practices. Adherence to State and federal energy efficiency standards and policies. Consideration of a transition to a carbon-neutral natural gas supply. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding: The proposed Plan includes policies and programs that collectively support implementation of this mitigation measure. For example: Policy N-7.1: Continue to procure carbon neutral energy for both long-term and short-term energy supplies, including renewable and hydroelectric resources, while investing in cost- effective energy efficiency and energy conservation programs. Policy N-7.4: Maximize the conservation and efficient use of energy in new and existing residences and other buildings in Palo Alto. Program N7.4.1: Continue timely incorporation of State and federal energy efficiency standards and policies in relevant City codes, regulations and procedures and higher local efficiency standards that are cost-effective. Program N7.4.3: Incorporate cost-effective energy conservation measures into construction, maintenance and City operation and procurement practices. Program N7.4.5: Continue to provide public education programs addressing energy conservation and efficiency. Program N7.7.1: Evaluate the potential for a cost-effective plan for transitioning to a completely carbon-neutral natural gas supply. Policy N-7.8: Support opportunities to maximize energy recovery from organic materials such as food scraps, yard trimmings and residual solids from sewage treatment. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 35 Policy S-3.10: Continue to implement the City’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policy and programs to reduce waste, toxic product use, resource consumption and to maximize energy efficiency. The incorporation of relevant policies and programs into the proposed Plan ensures that the City will continue its ongoing commitment to energy efficiency and conservation. Implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-17 would ensure that the City is engaging in planning to reduce natural gas and electricity demands in order to reduce potential impacts associated with the construction of energy supply facilities. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant III. FINDINGS CONCERNING ALTERNATIVES Significant and Unavoidable Impacts CEQA provides that decision-makers should not approve a project as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures that would substantially lessen the significant impacts of the project (CEQA Section 21002). The EIR identified feasible mitigation measures that would reduce several of the potentially significant impacts to less than significant, as further set forth in the Section II findings above. However, the following impacts in the EIR remain significant after mitigation (i.e., significant and unavoidable) and no feasible mitigation or project alternative is identified to reduce impact to less than significant: 1. Impact AIR-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could violate an air quality standard; contribute substantially to an existing or project air quality violation; and/or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). 2. Impact TRANS-1: Implementation of the project would cause an intersection to drop below its motor vehicle level of service standard, or deteriorate operations at representative intersections that already operate at a substandard level of service. 3. Impact TRANS-3: Implementation of the project would cause a freeway segment or ramp to drop below its level of service standard, or deteriorate operations that already operate at a substandard level of service. 4. Impact TRANS-6: Implementation of the project would impede the operation of a transit system as a result of congestion. All of these significant and unavoidable impacts arise from Palo Alto’s place within a growing region where traffic increases are projected due to forces well beyond the City’s control. Evaluations of virtually any long-range plan developed in this region would reach similar conclusions using the thresholds of significance relied upon in the City’s environmental documents. And even if the City does not update its Comprehensive Plan (as represented by EIR Scenario 1), these impacts would remain significant and unavoidable after the City’s best efforts at mitigation. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 36 In compliance with CEQA, the following findings address whether there are any feasible alternatives or any additional feasible mitigation measures available that would reduce the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the EIR for the proposed project to less than significant. Project Alternatives CEQA requires that an EIR "describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project ..." (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a)). “If a project alternative will substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of a proposed project, the decision-maker should not approve the proposed project unless it determines that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, ... make the project alternative infeasible.” (CEQA Sections 21002 and 21081(a)(3), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3).) The City Council hereby makes these findings with respect to alternatives. The project objectives are set forth in Chapter 3 of the Supplement to the Draft EIR. As explained in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR and referenced sections of the February 2016 Draft EIR and the Supplement to the Draft EIR, the City has assessed a “range of reasonable alternatives” throughout the environmental document, in the form of four planning scenarios (in the Draft EIR), two additional planning scenarios (in the Supplement to the Draft EIR), and a hybrid “preferred scenario” (in the Final EIR). In addition, Chapter 6 of the February 2016 Draft EIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR discuss a “No Growth Scenario” and an “Environmentally Superior Alternative,” and both the Draft EIR and the Supplement to the Draft EIR discuss alternatives considered and rejected, with an explanation as to why certain concepts were not carried forward for detailed analysis. As further set forth below, the City Council has considered all of the possible alternatives (including the planning scenarios) identified and analyzed in EIR and has elected to adopt the preferred scenario described in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR. None of the other scenarios and alternatives would eliminate the significant impacts identified above, and the City finds that doing so would be infeasible for specific economic, social, or other considerations pursuant to CEQA Sections 21002 and 21081(a)(3), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3). For CEQA purposes, “feasible” means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, technological, and legal factors. (CEQA Section 21061.1, CEQA Guidelines Section 15364.) 1. No Project Alternative (Scenario 1) CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e) requires that a "No Project Alternative" be evaluated as part of an EIR. Scenario 1 represents a “Business as Usual” scenario that approximates what is expected to occur if the 1998 Comprehensive Plan is not updated and the proposed Plan is not adopted. Thus Scenario 1 represents the “no project alternative” required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e). 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 37 Scenario 1 would be expected to result in less residential development than the preferred scenario, but would result in a higher increase in employment than the preferred scenario. As shown in Table 1-3 of the Supplement to the Draft EIR, Scenario 1 would not avoid any of the significant and unavoidable impacts identified for the scenarios. Scenario 1 would also not include any of the policy adjustments included in the June 30, 2017 Draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update, new innovations in housing or new approaches to address the high cost of housing or high jobs-to-employed-residents balance in the city. Under Scenario 1, the Comprehensive Plan would also not be updated to include new policies related to climate change, transportation demand management (TDM), and transit-oriented development. Without policies to address these key issues, Scenario 1 would not fully achieve the City’s objectives to updates the vision for Palo Alto’s future to reflect current conditions and anticipated trends. Finding: The City Council considered a No Project Alterative and declines to adopt it because it does not reduce the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts and is inconsistent with several of the project objectives including: Provide a legally adequate Comprehensive Plan that updates the vision for Palo Alto’s future to reflect current conditions and anticipated trends. Establish performance standards to ensure that future development contributes to and does not detract from Palo Alto’s quality of life. Identify needed roadway improvements to address congestion related to future development. Enable resiliency and adaptation to respond to the consequences of climate change. Support Palo Alto’s leadership in relationships with neighboring jurisdictions and State and regional agencies. A comprehensive plan is intended to be an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of city policies. State law requires that comprehensive plans be periodically reviewed and revised as necessary (Government Code Sections 65040.5, 65300, 65300.5). Retaining the current comprehensive plan, last comprehensively updated in 1998, without an update to reflect changes in the City’s vision for its development and preservation would not be consistent with State planning law. For all of these reasons, this alternative is infeasible, as supported by the administrative record for the proposed project. 2. No Growth Scenario Appendix H of the Supplement to the Draft EIR provides a discussion and analysis of a “No Growth Scenario,” conducted as a purely hypothetical exercise to highlight the extent to which the proposed Plan’s significant and unavoidable impacts result from regional growth outside of Palo Alto. The No Growth Scenario analysis assumes that the proposed Plan is not adopted and that no growth in population, employment, or square footage would occur in Palo Alto by 2030 beyond the amount of development existing in 2014, plus new growth permitted by fall 2016. Although the No Growth Scenario would result in less development than the preferred scenario, as discussed in Appendix H of the Supplement to the Draft EIR, the No Growth Scenario would not avoid any of the significant and unavoidable impacts identified for the project. This illustrates that, even if Palo Alto were to put measures in place to halt future growth entirely, 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 38 the surrounding region would continue to grow, and as a result many of the impacts identified in the EIR would still occur. The No Growth Scenario is purely hypothetical and would not include strategies to address housing needs, climate change goals, or TDM strategies. Therefore, the No Growth Scenario would not meet the project objectives. Moreover, it is infeasible to implement, as it would be impractical and/or illegal for the City to prevent existing residents from adding to their households or families, and stopping residential growth would violate State housing laws that require local governments to participate in “accommodat[ing] the housing needs of Californians of all economic levels” (California Government Code Section 65580 et seq.). In terms of job growth, while the City could conceivably prevent development of additional non-residential square footage, it would be very difficult to stop employers from adding new employees to existing buildings, and such a moratorium would create intense demand for office space in Palo Alto, increasing commercial rents and creating pressure for non-residential uses such as retail/service business and lower-rent office uses to convert to high-rent, tech-based office and research and development (R&D) uses. Finding: The City Council considered the No Growth Scenario and declines to adopt it because it is infeasible, does not reduce the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts, and is inconsistent with several of the project objectives, including: Provide a legally adequate Comprehensive Plan that updates the vision for Palo Alto’s future to reflect current conditions and anticipated trends. Guide future land use and development decisions and assist staff and decision-makers in balancing sometimes competing interests. Address the needs of a changing population and accommodate additional housing. Establish performance standards to ensure that future development contributes to and does not detract from Palo Alto’s quality of life. Reduce the impacts of cars on the environment and improve options for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit-users. Preserve existing single-family neighborhoods while allowing the development of diverse types of housing affordable to all members of the community. Identify needed roadway improvements to address congestion related to future development. Enable resiliency and adaptation to respond to the consequences of climate change. Enable the City to deliver top-quality community services to all residents. Retain existing businesses, maintain vital commercial areas, and attract quality new businesses. Support Palo Alto’s leadership in relationships with neighboring jurisdictions and State and regional agencies. For all of these reasons, this alternative is infeasible, as supported by the administrative record for the proposed project. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 39 3. Hybrid Alternative Chapter 6 of the February 2016 Draft EIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR provide a discussion of a “Hybrid Alternative.” The discussion of the Hybrid Alternative explains that the scenario adopted by the City as the Comprehensive Plan Update would not be expected to be identical to any of the scenarios analyzed in the February 2016 Draft EIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR, but would rather draw from the scenarios and combine components of various scenarios. The discussion also explains that the Hybrid Alternative would be developed based, in part, on the data and analysis that the February 2016 Draft EIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR provide. Based on the EIR’s conclusions, the Supplement to the Draft EIR states that a Hybrid Alternative would likely be one that combines the moderate rates of housing growth in Scenarios 3 and 5 with the sustainability initiatives tested in Scenarios 4 through 6. The Supplement to the Draft EIR did not predict the number of jobs that would be included in the Hybrid Alternative, but did explain that a lower level of job growth, such as under Scenario 5, would result in fewer GHG emissions. Overall, the Hybrid Alternative would have impacts similar to those of Scenarios 1 through 6. Aesthetics, land use, and population/housing impacts would be similar to Scenarios 3 and 5 if housing sites along San Antonio and South El Camino are eliminated and replaced by higher densities on existing sites closer to transit and services, and if growth control measures are similar to those adopted by the City Council on an interim basis in 2015. The Hybrid Alternative would also have similar less-than-significant impacts to Scenario 2, 3, or 5 in the topic areas of biological resources, cultural resources, geology, hazardous materials, hydrology, public services, and utilities. The Hybrid Alternative could further reduce the transportation, air quality, noise, and greenhouse gas emission impacts associated with Scenario 3 by incorporating some of the sustainability features included in Scenarios 4 through 6 to reduce traffic and vehicle miles traveled. Although, as with Scenarios 1 through 6, proposed mitigation measures could address some of the Hybrid Alternative’s impacts related to transportation, air quality, and noise, some impacts related to transportation and air quality, although reduced, would remain significant even after mitigation measures are applied. The Hybrid Alternative contemplates lower levels of job growth than the preferred scenario, but it also includes lower rates of housing growth than the preferred scenario, so the Hybrid Alternative would be expected to result in a higher jobs-to- employed-residents ratio than the preferred scenario, and therefore would not meet the City’s goals to reduce this ratio. Finding: The City Council considered the Hybrid Alternative and declines to adopt it because it does not reduce the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts and it does not promote as well as the preferred scenario the City’s policy goals and objectives of accommodating anticipated housing growth and improving the City’s jobs to housing (employed resident) imbalance, all as supported by the administrative record for the proposed project. 4. Planning Scenarios 2 Through 6 Scenarios 2 through 6 in the Draft EIR and the Supplement to the Draft EIR are part of the reasonable range of alternatives the City has considered because they present different ways 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 40 that the City could plan for its future and vary in terms of the housing and employment projected to occur by the horizon year of 2030. The preferred scenario that has been selected for adoption shares many characteristics with these other planning scenarios, and was developed by the City Council based on extensive community input and deliberations. As described in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, the preferred scenario is essentially a hybrid of the other Scenarios, and represents the evolution of a long public planning process. There are not substantial differences in the number or extent of environmental impacts among the scenarios evaluated in the February 2016 Draft EIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR. While the majority of potential impacts could be mitigated to a less-than-significant level, all of the scenarios would result in the same significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality and transportation, and the preferred scenario would result in the same significant and unavoidable impacts. However, there are differences of degree among the scenarios, as described below. A. Scenario 2 Although similar to the preferred scenario, Scenario 2 would result in slightly lower motor vehicle trips than the preferred scenario. Scenario 2 would also result in a lower level of population and jobs growth. Therefore, Scenario 2 would result in lower greenhouse gas and air quality emissions than the preferred scenario. However, Scenario 2 would result in a greater jobs/housing imbalance than the preferred scenario and would not meet the City’s goal to expand housing options as well as the preferred scenario. B. Scenario 3 Scenario 3 would result in more motor vehicle trips than the preferred scenario. Scenario 3 would result in a level of population growth equal to the lower end of the preferred scenario, and a higher level of job growth. Therefore, Scenario 3 would result in higher levels of greenhouse gas and air quality emissions than the preferred scenario. Overall, Scenario 3 would result in a greater jobs/housing imbalance than the preferred scenario and would not meet the City’s sustainability goals as well as the preferred scenario. C. Scenario 4 Scenario 4 would result in lower motor vehicle trips than the preferred scenario. Scenario 4 would result in a level of population growth equal to the higher end of the preferred scenario, and a higher level of job growth. Overall, due to its lower motor vehicle trips, Scenario 4 would be expected to result in lower greenhouse gas and air quality emissions than the preferred scenario. However, Scenario 4 would result in a greater jobs/housing imbalance than the preferred scenario, which would conflict with City goals. D. Scenario 5 Scenario 5 would result in the fewest motor vehicle trips of all the scenarios (including the preferred scenario). Scenario 5 would result in a level of population growth equal to the lower end of the preferred scenario, and less jobs growth than the preferred scenario. Overall, Scenario 5 would result in a similar jobs/housing balance as the preferred scenario (slightly higher than the preferred scenario within the city but lower within the city plus Sphere of Influence). In addition, Scenario 5 would include the sustainability measures of Scenarios 4 and 6. Overall, due to its lower motor vehicle trips, lower overall growth, and similar jobs/housing balance, Scenario 5 would be expected to result in lower greenhouse gas and air quality 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 41 emissions than the preferred scenario. By combining the rigorous sustainability initiatives of Scenarios 4 and 6 with the modest housing growth of Scenario 3 and low job growth of Scenario 6, Scenario 5 would be the environmentally preferred scenario. However, Scenario 5 would not meet the City’s goals to expand housing options. E. Scenario 6 Scenario 6 would result in lower motor vehicle trips than the preferred scenario. Scenario 6 would result in more population growth and less jobs growth than the preferred scenario and would achieve the lowest jobs-to-employed-residents ratio of all the scenarios (including the preferred scenario). In addition, Scenario 6 would include the sustainability measures of Scenarios 4 and 5. Overall, due to its lower motor vehicle trips and jobs/housing balance, Scenario 6 would be expected to result in lower greenhouse gas and air quality emissions than the preferred scenario. Scenario 6 would have the highest population growth of any scenario, exceeding regional projections and resulting in the greatest demand for schools, parkland, and services provided to residents. As a result, Scenario 6 would not meet the project objective regarding service delivery as well as the preferred scenario. Finding: The City Council considered Scenarios 2 through 6 and declines to adopt any of these scenarios. Scenario 3 would not reduce the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts. Scenarios 2, 4, 5, and 6 would somewhat lessen, but would not avoid, the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts, but are less responsive to the project objectives than the preferred scenario, particularly to the objective to address the needs of a changing population, accommodating additional housing, and enabling delivery of top-quality community services to all residents. IV. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The City Council of the City of Palo Alto adopts and makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the significant, unavoidable impacts of the Project and the anticipated benefits of the Project. General. The City is considering approval of the Comprehensive Plan Update 2030 (“proposed project”). CEQA requires decision-makers to balance the economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable impacts when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered acceptable, and the agency must state the specific reasons to support the action in a “statement of overriding considerations” supported by substantial evidence in the record. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15903). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the significant and unavoidable impacts of the project in connection with approval of the project. The City Council believes that many of the unavoidable environmental effects identified in the EIR will be substantially lessened by mitigation measures adopted with the EIR and implemented with future development and actions taken under the project. Even with mitigation, the City Council recognizes that the implementation of the project carries with it significant and unavoidable environmental effects, as identified in the EIR. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 42 Adoption of the June 30, 2017 Draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update 2030, with the specific changes included in the City Council’s resolution, would result in the following significant and unavoidable impacts: 5. Impact AIR-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could violate an air quality standard; contribute substantially to an existing or project air quality violation; and/or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). 6. Impact TRANS-1: Implementation of the project would cause an intersection to drop below its motor vehicle level of service standard, or deteriorate operations at representative intersections that already operate at a substandard level of service. 7. Impact TRANS-3: Implementation of the project would cause a freeway segment or ramp to drop below its level of service standard, or deteriorate operations that already operate at a substandard level of service. 8. Impact TRANS-6: Implementation of the project would impede the operation of a transit system as a result of congestion. Overriding Considerations The City Council has carefully considered each significant unavoidable project impact in reaching its decision to approve the project. Even with mitigation, the City Council recognizes that implementation of the project carries with it unavoidable adverse environmental effects, as identified in the EIR. The City Council specifically finds that, to the extent that the identified significant adverse impacts for the project have not been reduced to acceptable levels through feasible mitigation or alternatives, there are specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits that outweigh the project’s significant unavoidable impacts and support approval of the project. Any one of these benefits as set forth below is sufficient to justify approval of the project. The substantial evidence supporting the various benefits is in the record as a whole. The following statement identifies the reasons why, in the City’s judgment, specific benefits of the project outweigh the significant and unavoidable effects. The City finds that each of the project benefits discussed below is a separate and independent basis for these findings. The reasons set forth below are based on the Final EIR and other information in the administrative record. Economic Benefits 1. The proposed Plan strengthens strategies to preserve retail. 2. The proposed Plan includes a cumulative “cap” on the amount of new office/research and development (R&D) space that would allow up to 1.7 million square feet of new office/R&D uses over the life of the plan. 3. The proposed Plan allows the City to remain a competitive and innovative business destination. Legal Benefits 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 43 1. The proposed Plan updates sections of the City’s Comprehensive Plan that are required by State law, and the State recommends that local jurisdictions update their plans every 10 years. Social Benefits 1. The proposed Plan was developed to reflect community priorities and concerns, with extensive input from the general public, a Citizens Advisory Committee, the Planning and Transportation Commission, and the City Council. 2. The proposed Plan responds to community concerns about housing affordability and availability. 3. The proposed Plan would allow a balance of development that would help to reduce the City’s jobs/housing imbalance. 4. The proposed Plan would preserve existing parks, recreational facilities, and open space areas. 5. The proposed Plan would protect and preserve existing residential neighborhoods. Technological Benefits 1. The proposed Plan supports Caltrain modernization, including electrification. Environmental Benefits 1. The proposed Plan updates the City’s policy framework to address important contemporary environmental issues, including as climate change and greenhouse gas emissions. 2. The proposed Plan includes a program to formalize transportation demand management (TDM) requirements. 3. The proposed Plan would protect and enhance the urban forest as natural infrastructure. 4. The proposed Plan concentrates growth in existing corridors and nodes, and thereby results in fewer impacts from the construction of new infrastructure and reduces vehicle miles traveled per capita, which translates into air quality and greenhouse gas emissions benefits and increases in resources and energy efficiency. 5. The proposed Plan includes policies that encourage conservation of water and energy resources in conformance with the City’s sustainability goals. 171003 JB SL/PLANNING/LONGRANGE/COMP PLAN 44 V. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A and incorporated and adopted as part of this Resolution herein is the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) for the Project required under Public Resources Code Section 21081.6. The MMRP identifies impacts of the Project, corresponding mitigation, timing for implementation, and designation for responsibility for mitigation implementation and monitoring. VI. LOCATION AND CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which the City Council based the foregoing findings and approval of the Project are located at the Department of Planning and Community Environment, 285 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. The official custodian of the record is the Planning and Community Environment Director at the same address. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: ______________________________ _________________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________ City Manager _______________________________ Assistant City Attorney _________________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment PLACEWORKS 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the City of Palo Alto is intended to ensure the implementation of mitigation measures identified as part of the environmental review for the proposed project. The proposed project is the adoption and implementation of an updated Comprehensive Plan for the City of Palo Alto, along with associated amendments to the City of Palo Alto Zoning Code. The MMRP includes the following information: A list of mitigation measures. The timing for implementation of each mitigation measure. The agency responsible for monitoring implementation. The monitoring action and frequency. The City of Palo Alto must adopt this MMRP, or an equally effective program, if it adopts the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update and associated Zoning Code amendments with the mitigation measures that were adopted or made conditions of project adoption. EXHIBIT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 2 AUGUST 2017 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Aesthetics and Visual Resources AES-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the area and its surroundings. AES-1: To ensure that increased residential densities would not degrade the visual character or quality of the area, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: High-quality building and site design. Compatibility with the neighborhood and adjacent structures. Enhancement of existing commercial centers. Requirements for landscaping and street trees. Preservation and creation of a safe and inviting pedestrian environment. Appropriate building form, massing, and setbacks. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment (PCE) Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies continue to mitigate this impact. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments AES-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to substantially shadow public open space (other than public open streets and adjacent sidewalks) between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. from September 21 to March 21. AES-4: The City shall amend its local CEQA guidelines to require development projects of a certain size or location to prepare an analysis of potential shade/shadow impacts. The analysis shall focus on potential impacts to public open spaces (other than public streets and adjacent sidewalks) between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. from September 21 to March 21. The analysis shall identify whether the project would shadow open spaces during these times, explain how the project meets City design requirements and other City policy goals, and describe ways to mitigate substantial shade and shadow impacts through feasible building and site design features. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Within twelve months of proposed Comprehensive Plan adoption City of Palo Alto PCE Department Confirm update of CEQA guidelines. Once COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PLACEWORKS 3 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Air Quality AIR-1: Without inclusion of air quality policies, implementation of the proposed Plan could conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. AIR-1: To ensure consistency with the 2010 Bay Area Clean Air Plan, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Reduction in emissions of particulates from automobiles, manufacturing, construction activity, and other sources (e.g., dry cleaning, wood burning, landscape maintenance). Support for regional, State, and federal programs that improve air quality. Support for transit, bicycling, and walking. Mix of uses (e.g., housing near employment centers) and development types (e.g., infill) to reduce the need to drive. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies continue to mitigate this impact. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments AIR-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could violate an air quality standard; contribute substantially to an existing or project air quality violation; and/or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). AIR-2a: The City shall amend its local CEQA Guidelines and Municipal Code to require, as part of the City’s development approval process, that future development projects comply with the current BAAQMD basic control measures for reducing construction emissions of PM10 (Table 8-2, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures Recommended for All Proposed Projects, of the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines). City of Palo Alto PCE Department Within twelve months of proposed Comprehensive Plan adoption City of Palo Alto PCE Department Confirm update of CEQA guidelines and Municipal Code. Once AIR-2b: The City shall amend its local CEQA Guidelines to require that, prior to issuance of construction permits, development project City of Palo Alto PCE Department Within twelve months of proposed City of Palo Alto PCE Department Confirm update of CEQA guidelines. Once COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 4 AUGUST 2017 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency applicants that are subject to CEQA and have the potential to exceed the BAAQMD screening-criteria listed in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines prepare and submit to the City of Palo Alto a technical assessment evaluating potential project construction-related air quality impacts. The evaluation shall be prepared in conformance with BAAQMD methodology in assessing air quality impacts. If construction-related criteria air pollutants are determined to have the potential to exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance, as identified in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, the City of Palo Alto shall require that applicants for new development projects incorporate mitigation measures (Table 8-3, Additional Construction Mitigation Measures Recommended for Projects with Construction Emissions Above the Threshold, of the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines or applicable construction mitigation measures subsequently approved by BAAQMD) to reduce air pollutant emissions during construction activities to below these thresholds. These identified measures shall be incorporated into all appropriate construction documents (e.g., construction management plans) submitted to the City. Comprehensive Plan adoption AIR-2c: To ensure that development projects that have the potential to exceed the BAAQMD screening criteria air pollutants listed in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines reduce regional air pollutant emissions below the BAAQMD thresholds of significance, the proposed Plan shall include policies that require compliance with BAAQMD requirements, including BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies continue to mitigate this impact. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments AIR-2d: Implement Mitigation Measures TRANS-1a and TRANS-1b. In addition, to reduce long-term air quality impacts by emphasizing walkable neighborhoods and supporting alternative modes of Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies continue to mitigate this impact. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PLACEWORKS 5 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency transportation, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections between commercial and mixed-use centers. AIR-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of air pollution. AIR-3a: The City of Palo Alto shall update its CEQA Procedures to require that future non-residential projects within the city that: 1) have the potential to generate 100 or more diesel truck trips per day or have 40 or more trucks with operating diesel- powered TRUs, and 2) are within 1,000 feet of a sensitive land use (e.g., residential, schools, hospitals, nursing homes), as measured from the property line of a proposed project to the property line of the nearest sensitive use, shall submit a health risk assessment (HRA) to the City of Palo Alto prior to future discretionary project approval or shall comply with best practices recommended for implementation by the BAAQMD. The HRA shall be prepared in accordance with policies and procedures of the State Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. If the HRA shows that the incremental cancer risk exceeds the BAAQMD significance thresholds, the applicant will be required to identify and demonstrate that mitigation measures are capable of reducing potential cancer and noncancer risks to an acceptable level, including appropriate enforcement mechanisms. Mitigation measures and best practices may include but are not limited to: Restricting idling on-site beyond Air Toxic Control Measures idling restrictions, as feasible. Electrifying warehousing docks. Requiring use of newer equipment and/or vehicles. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Within twelve months of Plan adoption City of Palo Alto PCE Department Confirm update of CEQA Procedures. Once COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 6 AUGUST 2017 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Restricting off-site truck travel through the creation of truck routes. Mitigation measures identified in the project-specific HRA shall be identified as mitigation measures in the environmental document and/or incorporated into the site development plan as a component of a proposed project. AIR-3b: To ensure that new industrial and warehousing projects with the potential to generate new stationary and mobile sources of air toxics that exceed the BAAQMD project-level and/or cumulative significance thresholds for toxic air contaminants and PM2.5 listed in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines reduce emissions below the BAAQMD thresholds of significance, amend the City’s CEQA guidelines to require compliance with BAAQMD requirements. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies continue to mitigate this impact. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments AIR-3c: The proposed Plan shall include policies to mitigate potential sources of toxic air contaminants through siting or other means to reduce human health risks and meet the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s applicable threshold of significance. Policies shall also require that new sensitive land use projects (e.g., residences, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, parks or playgrounds, and day care centers) within 1,000 feet of a major stationary source of TACs and roadways with traffic volumes over 10,000 vehicles per day consider potential health risks and incorporate adequate precautions, such as high-efficiency air filtration, into project design. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies continue to mitigate this impact. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments AIR-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan could create or expose a substantial number of people to objectionable odors unless policies are AIR-4: To reduce odor impacts, the proposed Plan shall include policies requiring: Buffers, mechanical, and other mitigation methods to avoid creating a nuisance. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies and programs in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PLACEWORKS 7 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency integrated into the proposed Plan. Cultural Resources CULT-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan could adversely affect a historic resource listed or eligible for listing on the National and/or California Register, or listed on the City’s Historic Inventory. CULT-1: To ensure the protection of potentially historic resources, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Process for reviewing proposed demolition or alteration of potentially historic buildings. Protection of archaeological resources. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments CULT-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. CULT-2: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-1. See Mitigation Measure CULT-1. CULT-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan could cause damage to an important archaeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. CULT-3: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-1. In addition, to ensure that future development would not damage archaeological resources, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Archaeological surveys and mitigation plans for future development projects. Developer compliance with applicable regulations regarding the identification and protection of archaeological and paleontological deposits, and unique geologic features. Appropriate tribal consultation and consideration of tribal concerns. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments CULT-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique CULT-5: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-3. See Mitigation Measure CULT-3. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 8 AUGUST 2017 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency geologic feature. CULT-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in significant cumulative impacts with respect to cultural resources. CULT-7: Implement Mitigation Measures CULT-1 and CULT-3. See Mitigation Measures CULT-1 and CULT-3. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change GHG-3: The proposed Plan would expose people or structures to the physical effects of climate change, including but not limited to flooding, extreme temperatures, public health, wildfire risk, or other impacts resulting from climate change, requiring mitigation. GHG-3: To address the potential impacts associated with exposing people to the effects of climate change, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Monitoring and response to flooding risks caused by climate change-related changes to precipitation patterns, groundwater levels, sea level rise, tides, and storm surges. Cooperative planning with federal, State, regional, and local public agencies on issues related to climate change (including sea level rise and extreme storms). Preparation of response strategies to address sea level rise, increased flooding, landslides, soil erosion, storm events, and other events related to climate change. Implementation of adaptive strategies to address impacts of sea level rise on Palo Alto’s levee system. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PLACEWORKS 9 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Hydrology and Water Quality HYD-2: The proposed Plan could substantially degrade or deplete ground water resources or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. HYD-2: To reduce potential impacts associated with construction dewatering the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Avoidance of the impacts of basement construction for single-family homes on the natural environment and safety. Conservation of subsurface water resources. Construction techniques and recharge strategies to reduce subsurface and surface water impacts. Monitoring of dewatering and excavation projects. Cooperation with other jurisdictions and regional agencies to protect groundwater. Protection of groundwater as a natural resource. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments Land Use and Planning LAND-1: The proposed Plan could adversely change the type or intensity of existing or planned land use patterns in the area. LAND-1: To ensure that the intensity of future development would not adversely change the land use patterns or affect the livability of Palo Alto neighborhoods, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Strengthening of residential neighborhoods. Vitality of commercial areas and public facilities. High-quality building and site design. Architectural compatibility of new development. Compatible infill development. Avoidance of abrupt changes in the scale of development where residential districts abut more intense uses. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments LAND-2: The proposed Plan would allow development that could be incompatible with adjacent land uses or with the general character of LAND-2: Implement Mitigation Measure LAND-1. In addition, to further reduce potential impacts to visual character and ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 10 AUGUST 2017 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency the surrounding area, including density and building height. Use of City procedures, plans, and requirements to ensure high-quality building design and architectural compatibility. LAND-5: The proposed Plan could physically divide an established community. LAND-5: To avoid potential impacts from physically dividing an established community, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Enhanced connections to and from parks, schools, and community facilities for all users. Safe and convenient pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connections between residential areas and commercial centers. Cooperation with other agencies to improve circulation connections. Grade separation of rail crossings. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments Noise NOISE-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to cause the average 24-hour noise level (Ldn) to increase by 5.0 decibels (dB) or more in an existing residential area, even if the Ldn would remain below 60 dB. NOISE-1a: To ensure that average 24-hour noise levels associated with long-term operational noise would not increase by 5.0 decibels (dB) or more in an existing residential area, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Location of land uses in areas with compatible noise environments. Use of the guidelines in the “Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environment” table in the proposed Plan to evaluate the compatibility of proposed land uses with existing noise environments. Clear guidelines for maximum outdoor noise levels in residential areas. Adherence to the interior noise requirements of the State of California Building Standards Code (Title 24) and the Noise Insulation Standards (Title 25). Inclusion of a noise contour map in the proposed Plan. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PLACEWORKS 11 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Reduction of noise impacts of development on adjacent properties. Evaluation of noise impacts on existing residential, open space, and conservation land. Requirement for new projects in the Multiple Family, Commercial, Manufacturing, or Planned Community districts to demonstrate compliance with the Noise Ordinance. NOISE-1b: To reduce potential impacts to new land uses from aircraft noise, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Compliance with the airport-related land use compatibility standards for community noise environments. Prohibition of incompatible land use development within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contours of the Palo Alto airport, as established in the adopted County of Santa Clara Airport Land Use Commission Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for the Palo Alto Airport. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments NOISE-1c: To reduce potential impacts to new land uses from railway noise, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Minimization of noise spillover from rail-related activities into adjacent residential or noise- sensitive areas. Building design that reduces impacts from noise and ground borne vibrations associated with rail operations. Guidelines for interior noise levels. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments NOISE-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to cause the Ldn to increase by 3 dB or more in an existing residential area, thereby NOISE-2: Implement Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, and NOISE-1c. See Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, and NOISE-1c. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 12 AUGUST 2017 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency causing the Ldn in the area to exceed 60 dB. NOISE-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to cause an increase of 3 dB or more in an existing residential area where the Ldn currently exceeds 60 dB. NOISE-3: Implement Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, and NOISE-1c. See Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, and NOISE-1c. NOISE-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to result in indoor noise levels for residential development to exceed an Ldn of 45 dB. NOISE-4a: Implement Mitigation Measure NOISE-1a. See Mitigation Measure NOISE-1a. NOISE-4b: The Land Use Noise Compatibility Guidelines established in the 1998 Comprehensive Plan shall be maintained. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments NOISE-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to expose persons to or generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels. NOISE-5a: To ensure that future development would not result in significant construction-related vibration impacts, the proposed Plan shall include policies that limit the hours of construction around sensitive receptors, and require formal, ongoing monitoring and reporting throughout the construction process for larger development projects, as well as the use of pertinent industry standards and City guidelines to avoid significant vibration impacts during construction or operations. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments NOISE-5b: Implement Mitigation Measure NOISE-1c. See Mitigation Measure NOISE-1c. NOISE-6: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to expose people to noise levels in excess of established State standards. NOISE-6: Implement Mitigation Measures NOISE-4a and NOISE-4b. See Mitigation Measures NOISE-4a and NOISE-4b. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PLACEWORKS 13 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency NOISE-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to result in the exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. NOISE-7: Implement Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, NOISE-1c, NOISE-4a, and NOISE-4b. See Mitigation Measures NOISE-1a, NOISE-1b, NOISE-1c, NOISE-4a, and NOISE-4b. NOISE-8: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in a potentially substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. NOISE-8: To ensure that future development would not result in significant impacts to sensitive receptors from construction noise, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Construction noise limits around sensitive receptors. Monitoring and reporting plans for construction noise levels of larger development projects. Noise control measures to ensure compliance with the noise ordinance. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments NOISE-11: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, may result in significant cumulative impacts with respect to noise. NOISE-11a: Implement Mitigation Measure NOISE- 1c. See Mitigation Measure NOISE-1c. NOISE-11b: To address overall community noise impacts from train noise to the extent such noise is within the City’s control and in excess of established State and/or City standards, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Efforts to develop and implement technological methods to reduce train whistle noise from Caltrain. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 14 AUGUST 2017 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Evaluation of at-grade rail crossings as potential Quiet Zones based on Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) rules and guidelines. Grade separation of rail crossings as a City priority. Public Services and Recreation PS-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan would result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional parks and recreation facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards. PS-7: To address the potential physical impacts of park construction/improvement, the Comprehensive Plan Update shall include policies that achieve the following: Evaluation and mitigation of the construction impacts associated with park and recreational facility creation and expansion. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments PS-8: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to result in substantial cumulative adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks and recreational facilities, need for new or physically altered parks and recreation facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives. PS-8: Implement Mitigation Measure PS-7. See Mitigation Measure PS-7. Transportation and Traffic TRANS-1: Implementation of TRANS-1a: Adopt a programmatic approach to City of Palo Alto Within six City of Palo Alto Confirm program adoption. Once COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PLACEWORKS 15 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency the project would cause an intersection to drop below its motor vehicle level of service standard, or deteriorate operations at representative intersections that already operate at a substandard level of service. reducing motor vehicle traffic, with the goal of achieving no net increase in peak-hour motor vehicle trips from new development, with an exception for uses that directly contribute to the neighborhood character and diversity of Palo Alto (such as ground- floor retail and below-market-rate housing). The program should, at a minimum, require new development projects above a specific size threshold to prepare and implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to achieve the following reduction in peak-hour motor vehicle trips from the rates included in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual for the appropriate land use category and size. These reductions are deemed aggressive, yet feasible, for the districts indicated. 45 percent reduction in the Downtown district 35 percent reduction in the California Avenue area 30 percent reduction in the Stanford Research Park 30 percent reduction in the El Camino Real Corridor 20 percent reduction in other areas of the city TDM Plans must be approved by the City and monitored by the property owner or the project proponent on an annual basis. The Plans must contain enforcement mechanisms or penalties that accrue if targets are not met and may achieve reductions by contributing to citywide or employment district shuttles or other proven transportation programs that are not directly under the property owner’s control. PCE Department, Transportation Division (responsible for program adoption) months of proposed Comprehensive Plan adoption PCE Department Project applicants (responsible for TDM plans) Prepare TDM Plan, if required, prior to issuance of occupancy permits. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Property owner or project proponent Review and approve TDM Plans. Monitor enforcement of TDM Plans consistent with Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.34.040(d)(4) Once Annually TRANS-1b: Require new development projects to pay a Transportation Impact Fee for all those peak-hour City of Palo Alto PCE Department Ongoing City of Palo Alto PCE Department Verify collection of fees. Ongoing COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 16 AUGUST 2017 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency motor vehicle trips that cannot be reduced via TDM measures. Fees collected would be used for capital improvements aimed at reducing motor vehicle trips and motor vehicle traffic congestion. TRANS-1c: The proposed Plan shall include policies to ensure collaboration with regional agencies and neighboring jurisdictions, and identification and pursuit of funding for rail corridor improvements and grade separation. Policies shall support grade separation of rail crossings along the rail corridor as a City priority, and the undertaking of studies and outreach necessary to advance grade separation of Caltrain to become a “shovel ready” project. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments TRANS-1d: Consistent with State requirements, the City shall adopt a Multimodal Improvement Plan to address impacts to Congestion Management Program facilities. In addition, the proposed Plan shall include policies to engage in regional transportation planning and advocate for specific transit improvements and investments, such as Caltrain service enhancements and grade separations, Dumbarton Express service, enhanced bus service on El Camino Real with queue-jump lanes and curbside platforms, high-occupancy vehicle (HOV)/high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, and additional VTA bus service. City of Palo Alto PCE Department, Transportation Division (responsible for Multimodal Improvement Plan) See “Monitoring Action” notes regarding Multimodal Improvement Plans. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Three CMP intersections would be affected by this impact. Intersection #8 (El Camino Real at San Antonio Road) is located in Mountain View and Los Altos. The City of Mountain View is currently drafting a Multimodal Improvement Plan that includes this intersection. The City of Palo Alto shall participate in development of this Multimodal Improvement Plan. The other two intersections will not require Multimodal Improvement Plans. Intersection #9 (Foothill Expressway/Junipero Serra Boulevard at Page Mill Road) is grandfathered in with an automobile LOS of F and is therefore exempt from meeting the CMP standard. For Intersection #10 (Foothill Expressway at Arastradero Road), the City shall make a fair share Ongoing COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PLACEWORKS 17 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency contribution toward a full grade separation project. With the construction of the grade- separation project, this intersection should operate at an acceptable level of service, and no longer require the development of a Multimodal Improvement Plan. The City shall monitor the progress of the grade separation project and confirm with the County and VTA that no Multimodal Improvement Plan is required following its completion. Policy implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments TRANS-1e: The proposed Plan shall include policies to encourage the PAUSD to analyze decisions regarding school assignments to reduce peak-period motor vehicle trips to and from school sites. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Ongoing, as part of regular collaboration and communication with the Palo Alto Unified School District City of Palo Alto PCE Department Confirm communication. Ongoing TRANS-3: Implementation of the project would cause a freeway segment or ramp to drop below its level of service standard, or deteriorate operations that already operate at a substandard level of service. TRANS-3a: The City shall require new development projects to prepare and implement TDM programs, as described in TRANS-1a. TDM programs for worksites may include measures such as private bus services and free shuttle services to transit stations geared towards commuters. See Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 18 AUGUST 2017 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency TRANS-3b: The proposed Comprehensive Plan shall include policies that advocate for efforts by Caltrans and the Valley Transportation Authority to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow on existing freeway facilities consistent with Statewide GHG emissions reduction initiatives. Policies shall support the application of emerging freeway information, monitoring, and control systems that provide non-intrusive driver assistance and reduce congestion. Policies shall support, where appropriate, the conversion of existing traffic lanes to exclusive bus and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV)/high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes on freeways and expressways, including the Dumbarton Bridge, and the continuation of an HOV lane from Redwood City to San Francisco. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments TRANS-6: Implementation of the project would impede the operation of a transit system as a result of congestion. TRANS-6: The proposed Comprehensive Plan shall include policies collaborate with transit agencies in planning for and implementing convenient, efficient, coordinated, and effective bus service. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments TRANS-8: Implementation of the project would create the potential demand for through traffic to use local residential streets. TRANS-8: The proposed Comprehensive Plan shall include policies to identify specific improvements that can be used to discourage drivers from using local, neighborhood streets to bypass traffic congestion on arterials. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments TRANS-9: Implementation of the project would create an operational safety hazard. TRANS-9: Implement Mitigation Measure TRANS-8. See Mitigation Measure TRANS-8. Utilities and Service Systems UTIL-15: Without the adoption of policies to promote recycling and conservation, the proposed UTIL-15: To ensure that future development would comply with applicable solid waste regulations, the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR CITY OF PALO ALTO MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PLACEWORKS 19 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsibility Implementation Timing Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Plan could potentially fall out of compliance with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Ninety-five percent landfill diversion by 2030, and ultimately zero waste. Reduced solid waste generation. Use of reusable, returnable, recyclable, and repairable goods, through enforcement of the 2016 Plastic Foam Ordinance expansion. Enhanced recycling and composting programs for all waste generators. UTIL-17: The proposed Plan would not result in a substantial increase in natural gas and electrical service demands that would require the new construction of energy supply facilities and distribution infrastructure or capacity enhancing alterations to existing facilities. However, without the adoption of policies in support of energy efficiency and conservation, the proposed Plan would result in a potentially significant impact, requiring mitigation. UTIL-17: To ensure that future development would maximize energy efficiency and conservation the proposed Plan shall include policies that achieve the following: Maximized conservation and efficient use of energy. Continued procurement of carbon-neutral energy. Investment in cost-effective energy efficiency and energy conservation programs. Provision of public education programs addressing energy conservation and efficiency. Use of cost-effective energy conservation measures in City projects and practices. Adherence to State and federal energy efficiency standards and policies. Consideration of a transition to a carbon-neutral natural gas supply. Implementation is complete with the adoption and implementation of the policies in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. City of Palo Alto PCE Department Review future Comprehensive Plan policy amendments to ensure that relevant policies are not removed or weakened. Prior to Comprehensive Plan policy amendments Not Yet Approved 170901 jb Lee/Planning/LongRange Resolution No _____ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update RECITALS A. The City Council is authorized by Title 19 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and state law to adopt and, from time to time, amend the general plan (known as the Comprehensive Plan in the City of Palo Alto) governing the physical development of the City of Palo Alto. B. In 1998, the City Council adopted the Comprehensive Plan entitled, “Embracing the New Century, Palo Alto 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan,” which Plan has since been amended by the Council. This Plan is referred to herein as the “1998 Comprehensive Plan”. C. Through an extensive and lengthy public process including the convening of a Citizens Advisory Committee (“CAC”) and numerous public hearings held by the CAC, the Planning and Transportation Commission and the City Council, the City of Palo Alto has prepared that certain comprehensive update to the 1998 Comprehensive Plan entitled “Our Palo Alto 2030,” proposed for approval and adoption by the City Council. D. In accordance with Title 19 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, all Comprehensive Plan amendment proposals are referred to the Planning and Transportation Commission of the City of Palo Alto for review and recommendation prior to City Council consideration of the amendments. On June 12, 2017, after receiving the CAC recommendation and holding additional public hearings, the City Council identified a preferred planning scenario and forwarded the draft Comprehensive Plan Update to the Planning and Transportation Commission. The draft Comprehensive Plan Update is referred to herein as the “June 30, 2017 Draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update” which reflects the date that the Plan was transmitted to the Planning and Transportation Commission. E. From July 12, 2017 to September 27, 2017, the Planning and Transportation Commission held five public hearings to consider the draft Comprehensive Plan Update, at which interested persons were given the opportunity to appear and present their views with respect to the Comprehensive Plan Update. F. At the conclusion of the final public hearing on September 27, 2017, the Planning and Transportation Commission transmitted its recommendations to the City Council on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. G. Concurrently with the Planning and Transportation Commission review, City staff prepared a list of minor corrections and clarifications to June 30, 2017 Draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update (the “Errata”). H. An original of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update is on file in the office of the Director of Planning and Community Environment of the City, with a copy submitted to the City Council for its consideration. Not Yet Approved 170901 jb Lee/Planning/LongRange I. Pursuant to Title 19 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, public notice was given that on October 23, 2017, at 5:00 p.m. and November 13, 2017, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 285 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California, the Council would hold a public hearing where interested persons could appear, be heard, and present their views with respect to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. J. The Council held a duly noticed public hearing at the dates and times in Recital I above and gave all persons full opportunity to be heard and to present their views with respect to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. K. On __________, the Council reviewed, considered and certified that certain Final Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update by Resolution No. ________, and on ___________, the Council adopted adopted related findings by Resolution No. _________, all in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Both actions were taken prior to the Council making its determination on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. L. The Council is the decision-making body for adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The Public Hearing Draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update dated June 30, 2017 (referred to herein as the “June 30, 2017 Draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update”) is hereby adopted, subject to the modifications set forth in the Errata document, the modifications recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission, and the additional modifications approved by the Council, all of which modifications are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. [Exhibit A to be prepared upon Council action on the Errata, PTC recommendations, and further Council direction at the plan adoption hearings.] The Council finds and determines that the Final Environmental Impact Report adequately evaluated and provides a sufficient basis to approve the Comprehensive Plan Update including these modifications, and that the modifications, individually and collectively, do not change any of the conclusions of the Final Environmental Impact Report. The Council further finds that the modifications, individually and collectively, do not constitute significant new information under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because such changes and additional information do not indicate that any of the following would result from approval and implementation of the Project: (i) any new significant environmental impact or substantially more severe environmental impact (not already disclosed and evaluated in the DEIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR), (ii) any feasible mitigation measure considerably different from those analyzed in the Draft EIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR that would lessen a significant environmental impact of the Project has been proposed and would not be implemented, or (iii) any feasible alternative considerably different from those analyzed in the DEIR and the Supplement to the Draft EIR that would lessen a significant environmental impact Not Yet Approved 170901 jb Lee/Planning/LongRange of the Project has been proposed and would not be implemented. SECTION 2. The Implementation Table attached to the Comprehensive Plan Update restates the programs in the Comprehensive Plan and identifies the lead department or agency, the relative prioritization and planned timeframe, and the anticipated level of resources and effort for their implementation. While the programs are substantive parts of the Comprehensive Plan Update, the other information in the Implementation Table, including the prioritization of the programs are not intended to be incorporated as substantive elements and may be modified by the City Council without a formal amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 3. City staff may perform minor, non-substantive edits to the Comprehensive Plan Update without additional Council review. These include such things as formatting, illustrations, and acknowledgements. SECTION 4. This Comprehensive Plan Update supersedes the adopted 1998 Comprehensive Plan, except for the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan adopted by the Council in November 2014 (“Housing Element”), which remains in full force and effect and is incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________ _____________________________ Assistant City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment October 2, 2017 1 ERRATA TABLE /COMP PLAN CORRECTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 1 Inside front cover Add City Hall contact information General City Information: (650) 329-2100 Planning & Community Environment Department: (650) 329-2442 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/iwantto/ http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/services/paloalto311/ 2 Table of Contents Inclusion of Housing as Number 4 on table of contents A foot note shall be added: “The Housing Element is incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan and can be found at: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/37935. 3 Regional Commercial Designation Fix reference to software development to accurately reflect Council motion that it should be allowed Downtown only; not in other shopping areas. Regional/Community Commercial: Larger shopping centers and districts that have a wider variety of goods and services than the neighborhood shopping areas. They rely on larger trade areas and include such uses as department stores, bookstores, furniture stores, toy stores, apparel shops, restaurants, theaters and non- retail services such as banks. Examples include Stanford Shopping Center, Town and Country Village and University Avenue/Downtown. Non-retail uses such as medical and dental offices and software development may also locate in this designation; office uses including software development are appropriate Downtown. Examples include Stanford Shopping Center, Town and Country Village and University Avenue/Downtown. In some locations, residential and mixed use projects may also locate in this category. Non-residential FARs range from 0.35 to 2.0. 4 Map L-3: City Structure Show road lines See revised map L-3 5 Map L-6: Land Use Designations Correct map for consistency with actual land use Modify the land use designation for the former Hyatt Rickey’s site to remove the Hotel Overlay (see attached map), so that the property is designated only Multifamily Residential. October 2, 2017 2 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 6 Programs L-2.4.2 and L-2.4.3 Focus Program L2.4.2 on housing in Stanford Shopping Center to reduce confusion. Put all the language about housing in Stanford Research Park in one policy-L-2.4.3. Key language about housing at Stanford Research Park inadvertently left out of 6.30.17 version of L-2.4.3. 1. Reword L-2.4.2 to read: Allow housing on the El Camino Real frontage of the Stanford Research Park and at Stanford Shopping Center, provided that adequate parking and vibrant retail is maintained and no reduction of retail square footage results from the new housing. 2. Reword L-2.4.3 to read: Allow housing on the El Camino Real frontage of the Stanford Research Park. Explore multi-family housing elsewhere in the Stanford Research Park and near Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC). 7 Policy L-2.9 Move policy to Goal L-4 Commercial Centers to be with other retail-related policies. 1. Move Policy L-2.9 to become Policy L-4.2 Preserve ground-floor retail, limit the displacement of existing retail from neighborhood centers and explore opportunities to expand retail. 2. Put programs L4.1.1 and L4.1.2 under this policy and renumber them program LL4.2.1 and L4.2.2 8 Program L4.8.1 Remove reference to “Fry’s site” as the current tenant may not be in this site for the life of the Comp Plan. Reword to “North Ventura area.” Prepare a coordinated area plan for the Fry's site North Ventura area and surrounding California Avenue area. The plan should describe a vision for the future of the Fry's site North Ventura area as a walkable neighborhood with multi-family housing, ground floor retail, a public park, creek improvements and an interconnected street grid. It should guide the development of the California Avenue area as a well-designed mixed use district with diverse land uses and a network of pedestrian-oriented streets. 9 Policy L-5.4 Reword to remove reference to East Meadow Circle Concept Plan because the policies of this concept plan encourage the attraction and expansion of high end technology companies that is not consistent with Comp Plan growth management policies. Maintain the East Bayshore and San Antonio Road/Bayshore Corridor areas as diverse business and light industrial districts with the approved East Meadow Circle Concept Plan (Appendix Y of this Comprehensive Plan). 10 Policy L-6.5 Clarify that policy is about views up City streets, not from a street across private property to the hills Guide development to respect views of the foothills and East Bay hills from along public streets corridors in the developed portions of the City. 11 Program L-6.6.1 Correct wording – City does not have design standards specifically for mixed use developments. Modify design standards for mixed use projects to ensure that mixed use development promotes a pedestrian-friendly relationship to the street, including elements such as screened parking or underground parking, street-facing windows and entries, and porches, windows, bays and balconies along public ways, and landscaping, and trees along the street. Avoid blank or solid walls at street level. October 2, 2017 3 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 12 Policy L-7.17 Revise wording to be consistent with EIR mitigation measure. Add ",and unique geologic features." Require project proponents to meet State codes and regulations regarding the identification and protection of archaeological and paleontological deposits, and unique geologic features. 13 Policy L-9.10 Redundant with Policy N-2.1. Delete. Policy N-2.1: Recognize the importance of the urban forest as a vital part of the city’s natural and green infrastructure network that contributes to public health, resiliency, habitat values, appreciation of natural systems and an attractive visual character which must be protected and enhanced. L-9.10 Recognize the urban forest as City infrastructure to be maintained in accordance with applicable guidelines and requirements. [NEW POLICY] [L138] 14 Program T1.2.2 Revise wording in the last two bullets to be consistent with EIR Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a. Establish a mechanism to monitor the success of TDM measures and track the cumulative reduction of peak hour motor vehicle trips. TDM measures should at a minimum achieve the following reduction in peak hour motor vehicle trips, with a focus on single-occupant vehicle trips. Reductions should be based on the rates included in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual for the appropriate land use category and size: - 50 45 percent reduction in the Downtown district - 35 percent reduction in the California Avenue area - 30 percent reduction in the Stanford Research Park - 30 percent reduction in the El Camino Real Corridor - 20 percent reduction in other areas of the city Require new development projects to pay a Transportation Impact Fee for all those daily peak-hour motor vehicle trips that cannot be reduced via TDM measures. Fees collected would be used for capital improvements aimed at reducing vehicle trips and traffic congestion. October 2, 2017 4 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 15 Program T1.12.3 Revise to start “Work with VTA to…” to clarify that collaboration is needed on any study regarding bus service. Program T1.12.3: Work with VTA to study the feasibility of, and if warranted provide, traffic signal prioritization for buses at Palo Alto intersections, focusing first on regional transit routes. Also, advocate for bus service improvements on El Camino Real such as queue jump lanes and curbside platforms. 16 Program T2.3.1 Clarify that VMT/LOS program is not inconsistent with SB 743 requirements. When adopting new CEQA significance thresholds for VMT for compliance with SB 743 (2013), adopt standards for vehicular LOS analysis for use in evaluating the consistency of a proposed project with the Comprehensive Plan, and also explore desired standards for MMLOS, which includes motor vehicle LOS, at signalized intersections for use in evaluating the consistency of a proposed project with the Comprehensive Plan. 17 Program T4.2.1 Change to a Policy to be consistent with EIR mitigation measure TRANS-8. Program T4.2.1 Policy T4.3: Identify specific improvements that can be used to discourage drivers from using local, neighborhood streets to bypass traffic congestion on arterials. 18 Policy T-5.12 Reword to reference diverse bike types, not just trailers. Policy T-5.12: To promote bicycle use, increase the number of safe, attractive and well-designed bicycle parking spaces available in the city, including spots for diverse types of bicycles and associated equipment, including bicycle trailers, prioritizing heavily travelled areas such as commercial and retail centers, employment districts, recreational/cultural facilities, multi-modal transit facilities and ride share stops for bicycle parking infrastructure. 19 Policies and Programs under Goal T-8, Regional Collaboration and Coordination Revise to eliminate redundancy and improve readability and usability. Policy T-8.1: Engage in regional transportation planning to reduce congestion and reduce single-occupant vehicle trips, and advocate for specific transit improvements and investments, such as Caltrain service enhancements and grade separations, Dumbarton Express service, enhanced bus service on El Camino Real with queue jumping and curbside platforms, HOV/HOT lanes and additional VTA bus service. Program T8.6.21.2.2: Advocate for improved connectivity to transit to serve workers who live in the South Bay and work in Palo Alto. Policy T-8.2 Participate in regional planning initiatives for the rail corridor and provide a strong guiding voice. Policy T-8.3 Collaborate effectively with and engage in October 2, 2017 5 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change regional partnerships and solutions with a range of stakeholders, including regional agencies, neighboring jurisdictions and major employers, on issues of regional importance such as traffic congestion, reduced reliance on single-occupant vehicles and sustainable transportation. Program T8.3.1: Continue to participate in regional efforts to develop technological solutions that make alternatives to the automobile more convenient and thereby contribute to reducing congestion. Policy T-8.4: Coordinate with local and regional agencies and Caltrans to support regional efforts to maintain and improve transportation infrastructure in Palo Alto, including the Multi-Modal Transit Center. Policy T-8.5 Support the efforts of MTC to coordinate transportation planning and services for the Mid-Peninsula and the Bay Area that emphasize alternatives to the automobile. Policy T-8.6: Advocate for efforts by Caltrans and the Valley Transportation Authority to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow on existing freeway facilities consistent with Statewide GHG emissions reduction initiatives. (Comp Plan Draft EIR Mitigation Measure Trans-3b)] Program T8.6.1: Advocate for provision of a new southbound entrance ramp to Highway 101 from San Antonio Road, in conjunction with the closure of the southbound Charleston Road on-ramp at the Rengstorff Avenue interchange in Mountain View. Policy T-8.7: Support the application of emerging freeway information, monitoring and control systems that provide non- intrusive driver assistance and reduce congestion. (Comp Plan Draft EIR Mitigation Measure Trans-3b)] Policy T-8.8: Where appropriate, support the conversion of existing October 2, 2017 6 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change traffic lanes to exclusive bus and HOV lanes or Express/HOT lanes on freeways and expressways, including the Dumbarton Bridge, and the continuation of an HOV lane from Redwood City to San Francisco. (Comp Plan Draft EIR Mitigation Measure Trans-3b)] Policy T-8.9: Support State and federal legislation to reduce motor vehicle emissions, noise and fuel consumption. Policy T-8.10: Support plans for intra-county and transbay transit systems that link Palo Alto to the rest of Santa Clara County and adjoining counties. Ensure that these systems and enhancements do not adversely impact the bay. Program T8.10.1: Work with regional transportation providers, including BART and Caltrain, to improve connections between Palo Alto and the San Francisco International Airport and Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport. Policy T-8.11: Support regional bicycle and pedestrian plans, to complete including development of the Bay Trail, and the Bay-to- Ridge Trail, and the Santa Clara County Countywide Bicycle System. Policy T-8.12 Support the development of the Santa Clara County Countywide Bicycle System, and other regional bicycle plans. 20 Program N4.7.2 Change to a policy for consistency; insert new policy number and renumber subsequent policies and programs under Goal N-4. Program N4.7.2 Policy N-4.9: Work with neighboring jurisdictions and regional agencies to protect groundwater. 21 Program N5.1.2 Change to a Policy to be consistent with EIR mitigation measure AIR-2c. Program N5.1.2 Policy N-5.5: Support the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) in its efforts to achieve compliance with existing air quality regulations by continuing to require development applicants to comply with BAAQMD construction emissions control measures and health risk assessment requirements. October 2, 2017 7 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 22 Policy N-5.5 Add for consistency with EIR mitigation measure AIR-3c. NEW POLICY: Mitigate potential sources of toxic air contaminants through siting or other means to reduce human health risks and meet the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s applicable threshold of significance. When siting new sensitive receptors such as schools, day care facilities, parks or playgrounds, medical facilities and residences within 1,000’ of stationary sources of toxic air contaminants or roadways used by more than 10,000 vehicles per day, require projects to consider potential health risks and incorporate adequate precautions such as high-efficiency air filtration into project design. 23 Program N6.12.1 Add an “also” to separate two ideas in this program. Program N6.12.1: Continue working to reduce noise associated with operations of the Palo Alto Airport. Also, eEnsure compliance with the land use compatibility standards for community noise environments, shown in Table N-1, by prohibiting incompatible land use development within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contours of the airport. 24 Program N6.11.1 Revise to reference pertinent industry standards for consistency with EIR mitigation measure NOISE-5a. For larger development projects that demand intensive construction periods and/or use equipment that could create vibration impacts, such as the Stanford University Medical Center or major grade separation projects, require a vibration impact analysis, as well as formal, ongoing monitoring and reporting of noise levels, throughout the entire construction process, pertinent to industry standards. The monitoring plan should identify hours of operation and could include information on the monitoring locations, durations and regularity, the instrumentation to be used and appropriate noise control measures to ensure compliance with the noise ordinance. [(NEW PROGRAM)(Comp Plan Draft EIR Mitigation Measure NOISE- 1c, 5a)] [N152] October 2, 2017 8 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 25 Safety narrative Add description on location and extent of utilities to narrative UTILITIES In Palo Alto, utility services are provided by The City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU), a city-owned utility. Today, CPAU provides six services that include electric, fiber optic, natural gas, water and wastewater services. Initially formed in 1896 with the installation of a water supply system, CPAU expanded between the years 1898 and 1917 to include wastewater, electric, and natural gas distribution services; in 1996 it began to provide fiber optic services. Through its mission to provide safe, reliable, environmentally sustainable and cost effective services to Palo Alto residents, CPAU offers cost-effective service rates to residents and re-invests proceeds to support other City community services and facilities. For example, CPAU provides financial support to the Palo Alto library and parks system, as well as to support police and fire protection services. 26 Program S-1.10.3 Reword for clarity to: “…including those that address evolving…” Implement the mitigation strategies and guidelines provided by the LHMP, including those that address evolving hazards resulting from climate change. 27 Program S- 2.8.3 Change to Policy since this is a “specific statement of guiding action that implies clear commitment.” Program S-2.8.3 Policy S-2.9: Partner with appropriate agencies to expand flood zones as appropriate due to sea level rise, changes in creek channels, street flooding or storm drain overload due to increased likelihood of extreme storm events caused by climate change. 28 Glossary Update the definition of Infill to cover various types of possible sites, not only vacant land. Infill: Development of vacant or underused lots in built up sites or areas. ERRATA TABLE /EIR CORRECTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS Change ID Figure Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 1 Figure 2-2 (Same as Map L-6) Revise for consistency with Map L-6 in the Comprehensive Plan Update Modify the land use designation for the Hyatt Rickey’s site to remove the Hotel Overlay. RESPONSES TO COMMENT S RECEIVED SEPTEMBER 29, 2017 1 There were a number of comments made at the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) meeting on September 29, 2017 that staff did not have an opportunity to respond to on the record. This attachment provides a brief summary of the comments and staff’s responses. Comment 1: One or more commenters suggested that the proposed Comp Plan would allow a significant increase (or “double”) the rate of office growth and that proposed growth management strategies are inadequate. The proposed Comprehensive Plan lowers the non-residential growth cap in the current Comprehensive Plan to reflect past development and improves on that cap by focusing on Office/R&D rather than uses the City wants, like retail. The Plan does not propose or allow more rapid office growth than the current Comprehensive Plan and includes policies and programs to focus on housing growth, rather than job-generating office uses. More detail is provided below. Currently, the City tracks non-residential square footage under Policy L-8 of the 1998 Comp Plan, which contains a city-wide cap on non-residential development in nine “monitored areas.” Based on the data collected under Policy L-8, there were 24,886,880 square feet of non-residential development in Palo Alto in May 1987. From May 1987 through September 2015, a total of 3,805,020 square feet of non-residential space was added, including both square footage subject to the growth monitoring provisions under Policy L-8 and square footage that was not subject to monitoring, such as the SUMC expansion, which was approved in 2012 under the 1998 Comp Plan and is exempt from Policy L-8. The average rate over the 28 years was about 117,000 sf per year. The proposed Comp Plan would replace Policy L-8 with a new non-residential growth management policy, Policy L-1.9. This policy would establish a Citywide cap of 1.7 million new square feet of office/R&D development, using January 1, 2015 as the baseline. This cap is based on the allowed square footage remaining under the existing Policy L-8 cap; it does not increase the Policy L-8 cap currently in place. The Final EIR Preferred Scenario talks about 3M square feet because it adds the 1.3 M sq. ft. of approved space that is still being built out at SUMC to the new 1.7M cap. Over the 15- year horizon of the Comp Plan (January 2015 to 2030), an allowance of 1.7 million square feet equates to an average of 113,333 sf per year, which is lower than the annual average over 28 years described above. RESPONSES TO COMMENT S RECEIVED SEPTEMBER 29, 2017 2 Actually seeing this much square footage in a year is unlikely because the City Council is also proposing to perpetuate (by ordinance) a 50,000 sq. ft. annual limit on new office/R&D development in parts of the City. In both cases – with the cap in Policy L-1.9 and the annual limit -- the focus is on net new office/R&D space, so any conversion of space from warehouse or retail to office/R&D will count towards the cap/limit, which has not been true in the past. Table 1. Non-Residential Growth Comparison 1998 COMP PLAN (POLICY L-8) PROPOSED COMP PLAN (POLICY L-1.9) Non-residential square footage 3,270,000 1,700,000 Number of years 28 (1987-2015) 15 (2015-2030) Average rate of increase per year 116,786 113,333 Source: Planning & Community Environment, September 2018 There are four important differences between the way growth is monitored under Policy L-8 and how it would be monitored under Policy L-1.9 in the proposed Comp Plan. Specifically: Policy L-8 monitors all types of non-residential development, including uses that might be desirable for the community, such as retail. Policy L-1.9 focuses specifically on office/R&D development as the use the City is most concerned to monitor. Policy L-8 only counts net new non-residential square footage towards the cap. So a project that removes 5,000 square feet of retail and adds 10,000 square feet of office is recorded as an addition of only 5,000 square feet. Policy L-1.9 would count the full 10,000 square feet of office towards the cap. Policy L-8 only applies to the “monitored areas” identified on Map L-6, so the data does not present a full picture of non-residential development in the City. Policy L- 1.9 covers the entire City (but continues the exemption of medical offices associated with SUMC). Policy L-8 is silent on what to do as the growth cap is neared or reached. Policy L-1.9 is supported by a new Program, L1.9.1, to re-evaluate the cap when entitled office/R&D square footage reaches 67% of the allowed increase. Please also see Response to Comment PUB14-02 in the Final EIR (p. 5-93). The commenter suggests a long-term historical average of 94K square feet per year between 1989 and 2015, illustrating that it’s possible to get different annual averages depending on the years used for the analysis. These various calculations does not change the value or effectiveness of Policy L-1.9 in the proposed Comp Plan carries forward the existing non-residential growth cap in Policy L-8 with no increase, while expanding the coverage of the cap Citywide, targeting it to office/R&D development, and making it more restrictive by counting all new square footage rather than only net change. Staff believes the cumulative effect of these policy refinements RESPONSES TO COMMENT S RECEIVED SEPTEMBER 29, 2017 3 will be more aggressive, rather than less aggressive, management of non-residential growth in Palo Alto – particularly when combined with a new annual limit ordinance and with policies and programs aimed at supporting the development of housing. For example, proposed Program L2.4.5 proposes zoning changes to support mixed use with retail and residential -- not office, and Program L2.4.4 proposes converting commercial development potential (floor area ratio or FAR) to residential FAR. Comment 2: One or more commenters suggested that the Comp Plan does not identify funding mechanism to mitigate the traffic impacts of future growth. The proposed Plan (and the EIR) present policies (and mitigation) to require new development to adopt and implement TDM plans aimed at meeting aggressive performance standards specifically targeted to geographic areas of the City. Consistent with Program T- 1.2.2, new development projects would be required to pay a Transportation Impact Fee for all those peak hour motor vehicle trips that cannot be reduced via TDM measures. Fees collected would be used for capital improvements aimed at reducing vehicle trips and traffic congestion. As noted in the staff report, City staff is recommending that the Council direct staff to prioritize implementation of the updated impact fee program (called for in Program T- 1.25.1), and is hoping to bring a draft nexus study forward for review by the Council’s Finance Committee at the end of November. In addition, the proposed Comp Plan includes an entirely new section on funding transportation improvements. Policies T-1.25, T-1.26, and T-1.27 guide the City to pursue a range of funding opportunities; to collaborate with adjacent communities to ensure that Palo Alto and its immediate neighbors receive their fair share of regional transportation funds; and to advocate for transportation regulatory changes, such as an increase in the gasoline tax. The Comp Plan is long-range policy guidance document; the City also does many things outside of the Comp Plan to manage its budget and plan for capital improvements, and transportation funding also comes to the City from federal, State, regional, and County sources. For example, Palo Alto will receive funds from Measure B, a countywide sales tax approved by voters in November 2016 that are anticipated to be used to fund Caltrain grade separation and other transportation projects and programs. Comment 3: One or more commenters suggested that the EIR does not assume an increase in water use, even though it assumes more housing and office development. The EIR shows an increase in water use in the City and Sphere of Influence under all 6 scenarios. However, for the City limits only, the EIR anticipates a decrease in demand from existing conditions by 2030. The EIR analyzes future water use in Chapter 4.14, Utilities and RESPONSES TO COMMENT S RECEIVED SEPTEMBER 29, 2017 4 Service Systems, in both the February 2016 Draft EIR and the February 2017 Supplement to the Draft EIR. The Final EIR includes Table 2-4, which shows future water demand under all 6 scenarios, as well as the Preferred Scenario, at the bottom of page 2-17. Table 2 below is an excerpt of that table. Table 2. Existing and Projected Future Water Use Utilities Impacts 2014 Existing Conditions Preferred Scenario Low End of Range High End of Range City Water Demand (GPD) 3,706,077,880 3,647,353,578 3,647,621,801 City & SOI Water Demand (GPD) 4,230,635,205 4,485,665,218 4,485,933,441 City Water Demand Acre-Feet/Year (AFY) 11,374 11,193 11,194 City & SOI Water Demand AFY 12,983 13,766 13,767 Source: Final EIR, August 2017 Table 2 from the EIR shows an increase in water use in the City and SOI under all 6 scenarios. However, for the City limits only, the EIR anticipates a decrease in demand from existing conditions by 2030. This conclusion may be non-intuitive, but, as is required by law, the projections in the EIR were developed in consultation with City of Palo Alto Utilities staff and are based on the projections of the City’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), adopted unanimously by Council in June 2016 (Resolution 9589). The 2015 UWMP includes data showing the City’s potable water use since 1988 and a projection of water supplies through 2040. Present water consumption at its lowest level in the more than 25-year history covered in the UWMP. The reduction in water consumption is the result of state mandated water reductions and permanent water conservation measures implemented during the past 25 years, and these trends are expected to continue. The 2015 UWMP cites the following reasons for its projections that future water use will remain flat and that per capita water use will continue to decline over time: Many permanent water use changes, including landscape conversion, occurred as a result of rebate programs and public outreach, Public attitudes regarding water use are shifting New construction in every sector is subject to increasingly stringent regulations regarding water‐using appliances and fixtures. Based on these factors, the UWMP anticipates total water demand decreasing from 10,177 acre-feet/year (AFY) in 2015 to 10,108 AFY in 2040. See pages 39 through 42 of the 2015 UWMP for a detailed discussion of future water demand. RESPONSES TO COMMENT S RECEIVED SEPTEMBER 29, 2017 5 Comment 4: In noting that the Comprehensive Plan should support additional affordable housing, one commenter stated that the Council recently lowered housing impact fees. The Council updated housing impact fees earlier this year, adding a fee on market rate rental apartments and increasing the fee on office/R&D from around $20/ft to $35/ft. The earlier fees and the new fees are summarized in Table 3, below. Table 3A: Housing In Lieu and Housing Impact Fees for Residential Uses Table 3B: Non-Residential Housing Impact Fees Prior to 6/19/2017 (per sq. ft.) As of 6/19/2017 (per sq. ft.) Hotel $20.37 $20.37 Retail, Restaurants and Other Non- Residential Uses $20.37 $20.37 Office, Medical Office and Research and Development $20.37 $35 Source: Planning & Community Environment, September 2017 In Lieu Fees (For Residential Ownership Projects) Prior to 6/19/2017 As of 6/19/2017 (per sq ft) Single Family Detached Home 7.5% of the sales price $75 Single Family Attached Home 7.5% of the sales price $50 Condominiums 7.5% of the sales price $50 Impact Fees (For Residential Rental Projects) None $20 1 of 31 2 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT PTC Highest Priority Changes to the Transportation and Land Use Elements PTC Priority 1 The PTC supports a strong commitment to creating BMR housing inventory for purchase and rental. It is too tentative appearing at a program level. The PTC recommends that the Council make Program L1.3.1 into a separate policy consistent with and in support of the quantified goals for housing production in the adopted Housing Element. Program L1.3.1Policy L‐1.4: Commit to creating an inventory of below market rate housing for purchase and rental. Work with neighbors, neighborhood associations, property owners and developers to identify barriers to infill development of below market rate and more affordable market rate housing and to remove these barriers, as appropriate. Work with these same stakeholders to identify sites and facilitate opportunities for below market rate housing and housing that is affordable so that the City consistently attains the quantified goals for housing production in the adopted Housing Element,. PTC Priority 2 The PTC recommends that the Council strengthen policies supporting walkable neighborhoods to ensure that space for professional and personal services as well as retail uses is available near neighborhoods, recognizing that all of these uses are desirable in thriving commercial centers. Similar attention is needed to provide space to accommodate non‐profits and small medical offices in our community. (Note: After an extensive discussion of this item, the Commission approved a motion to have staff prepare a statement that summarized the Commission’s recommendation. At the Commission’s request, this language was developed by staff to reflect the Commission’s discussion.) Revise Program L4.8.2: Program L4.8.2: Explore adding additional Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for non‐profit office, small medical office, or retail uses at Stanford Shopping Center. Move the following policies and programs from the Business and Economics Element to the Land Use Element under Goal L‐4, and re‐number both Elements accordingly: Policy B‐2.1: Support local‐serving retail, recognizing that it provides opportunities for local employment, 1 3 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT reduced commute times, stronger community connections and neighborhood orientation. Program B4.2.1: Revise zoning and other regulations as needed to encourage the preservation of space to accommodate small businesses, start‐ups and other services. Program B4.2.2: Consider planning, regulatory, or other incentives to encourage property owners to include smaller office spaces in their buildings to serve small businesses, non‐profit organizations, and independent professionals. Program B4.6.2: Study the overall viability of ground‐ floor retail requirements in preserving retail space and creating an active street environment, including the types of locations where such requirements are most effective. Program B4.6.3: Maintain distinct neighborhood shopping areas that are attractive, accessible and convenient to nearby residents. PTC Priority 3 Add the following policy: Identify development opportunities for BMR and more affordable market rate housing on city owned properties, like alleys and parking lots New Program L2.4.8: Identify development opportunities for BMR and more affordable market rate housing on city owned properties, such as alleys and parking lots, in a way that is integrated with and enhances existing neighborhoods. PTC In light of Palo Alto’s traditional family orientation, we need housing Although the PTC motion referenced Goals L‐4 and L‐5, which 4 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT Priority 4 policies that encourage building more family‐oriented housing for all demographics. The PTC recommends that the Council add policies to Goals L‐4 and L‐5 to accommodate larger scale family‐oriented housing development in retail and commercial districts, and policies to ensure school and other service impacts are fully mitigated. are about commercial centers and employment districts, staff recommends that these policies and programs will be most effective if consolidated under Goal L‐2 about a sustainable community, and specifically under Policy L‐2.4, which includes a broad range of programs to stimulate housing. Policy L‐2.4: Use a variety of strategies to stimulate housing, in a way that connects to and enhances existing neighborhoods. Program L2.4.1: Amend the Housing Element to eliminate housing sites along San Antonio Road and increase residential densities near retail, employment, and transit in Downtown and the California Avenue area to replace potential units from the sites eliminated. Program L2.4.2: Allow housing on the El Camino Real frontage of the Stanford Research Park and at Stanford Shopping Center, provided that adequate parking and vibrant retail is maintained and no reduction of retail square footage results from the new housing. Program L2.4.3: Allow housing on the El Camino Real frontage of the Stanford Research Park. Explore family‐oriented multi‐ family housing elsewhere in the Stanford Research Park and near SUMC. Add a new Program L2.4.4 and renumber accordingly: 5 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT Encourage building more family‐oriented housing for all demographics. Ensure school and other service impacts are addressed and mitigated. Impacts to schools would be addressed through current Policy L‐2.10, which is not proposed to change: Ensure regular coordination between the City and PAUSD on land development activities and trends in Palo Alto, as well as planning for school facilities and programs. Under State law, impacts on school facilities cannot be the basis for requiring mitigation beyond the payment of school fees or for denying development projects or legislative changes that could result in additional housing units. The City will, however, assess the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts of development projects that result in new school construction or enrollment. Other policies and programs in the draft Element also support this concept and are not proposed for change: Program L2.4.4: Assess non‐residential development potential in the Community Commercial, Service Commercial and Downtown Commercial Districts (CC, CS and CD) and the Neighborhood Commercial District (CN) and convert non‐retail commercial FAR to residential FAR, where appropriate. Conversion to residential capacity should not be considered in Town and Country Village. 6 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT Policy L‐4.5: Maintain and enhance the University Avenue/Downtown area as a major commercial center 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 reinforce its pedestrian character. PTC Priority 5 The PTC supports Program L4.6.1 to prepare a Coordinated Area Plan for Downtown, which is a huge undertaking. The PTC recommends that the Council revise the Program to add that the Coordinated Area Plan should study converting parts of University Avenue to a pedestrian‐only zone. Program L4.6.1: Prepare a Coordinated Area Plan for Downtown. The Coordinated Area Plan should include a study of the feasibility of converting parts of University Avenue to a pedestrian‐only zone. PTC Priority 6 The PTC recommends that the Council add language to ensure full participation among Palo Alto employers in TMA. New Program T1.2.5: Pursue full participation of Palo Alto employers in the TMA. PTC Priority 7 Recommend that the Council include language that expresses a strong preference for affordable housing and housing that is affordable and a commitment to increasing Housing supply over time consistent with the goals set by the City Council through the Housing Element Process. This will be accomplished through the changes to Program L1.3.1, now Policy L‐1.4, in comment PTC Priority 1 above. PTC Priority 8 Recommend the following changes: 1. Goal L‐1 should read “A compact and resilient city prioritizing diverse and vibrant neighborhoods – and existing compatibly with shopping and services, workplaces, public facilities, parks and open space.” 2. Policies: Goal L‐1 has been revised as follows: “A compact and resilient city providing residents and visitors with prioritizing diverse and vibrant neighborhoods and compatibility with workplaces shopping districts and services, work places, public facilities, parks and open spaces.” 7 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT Swap L1.1 and L1.2 for emphasis on neighborhoods – substituting “prioritize” for “strengthen” in current 1.2 Policy L‐1.21: Maintain and strengthenprioritize Palo Alto’s varied residential neighborhoods while sustaining the vitality of its commercial areas and public facilities. Move and renumber Policy L‐1.1 to L‐1.2. No change to policy content. PTC Priority 9 Add a sentence at the beginning of Policy L‐1.3 stating that Palo Alto has a preference for infill housing Policy L‐1.3:Palo Alto has a preference for infill housing. Promote Infill development in the urban service area that is should be compatible with its surroundings and the overall scale and character of the city to ensure a compact, efficient development pattern. PTC Priority 10 Reconcile the narratives, description and goals with the policies and programs, where there appear to be contradictions Revise the Introduction page I‐2 as follows: MAINTAINING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY CHARACTER The community treasures the special qualities of the city, including its historic buildings, pedestrian scale, high‐quality architecture, thriving urban forest and beautiful streets and parks. Maintaining the physical qualities of the city is an overarching consideration, incorporated in all parts of the Plan. The Land Use and Community Design Element includes specific provisions to maintain Palo Alto’s best features in residential neighborhoods, commercial centers, and employment districts, and enhance and improve those areas where these 8 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT features are lacking. Future land use decisions will encourage sustainable development, preserve neighborhoods, foster inviting pedestrian‐scale commercial centers and distinctive employment districts, and focus infill within the Urban Service Area. In addition, see revisions proposed in response to PTC Consensus 1 (to place more emphasis on creating neighborhoods) and PTC Priority 2 (to strengthen policies supporting walkable neighborhoods to ensure that space for professional and personal services as well as retail uses is available) PTC Priority 11 The PTC recommends that the Council keep the growth cap, focus on offsets and quality of life and other indication metrics that are based on the impact of development, including traffic, noise, pollution, etc. Set specific goals for a couple of key quality of life measures and other indication metrics. Add a targeted list of Community Indicators: MEASURE METRIC RECOMMENDED MONITORING FREQUENCY Greenhouse Gas Emissions 80% below 1990 emissions by 2030 (S/CAP goal) Annually as part of Earth Day Report Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per Capita 5% decrease per year Annually as part of Earth Day Report Jobs/Housing Ratio of jobs to Every 4 years 9 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT Balance (Expressed as a Ratio of Jobs to Employed Residents) employed residents Below Market Rate (BMR) Units Number of units Annually as part of report to California Dept. of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Progress toward Housing Element goals Annual Report to State Housing and Community Development Department Annually as part of report to California Dept. of Housing and Community Development (HCD) PTC General Consensus Comments PTC Consensus 1 Land Use Element Overall/General The Element should place more emphasis on creating neighborhoods, not just building housing units. Revise Land Use Element Introduction on Page L‐1: The Land Use and Community Design Element … includes 10 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT policies and programs intended to balance natural resources with future community needs in a way that makes optimal use of available land, to create attractive buildings and public spaces that reinforce Palo Alto’s sense of place and community, to preserve and enhance quality of life and services in Palo Alto neighborhoods and districts, to support thriving commercial areas that meet the needs of local residents, and to maintain Palo Alto's role in the success of the surrounding region. Revise Policy L‐1.6: Use coordinated area plans to guide development to create or enhance cohesive neighborhoods in areas of Palo Alto where significant change is foreseeable. Address both land use and transportation, define the desired character and urban design traits of the areas, identify opportunities for public open space, parks and recreational opportunities, address connectivity to and compatibility with adjacent residential areas; and include broad community involvement in the planning process. [NEW POLICY] [L8] Revise Policy L‐2.3: As a key component of a diverse, inclusive community, allow and encourage a mix of housing types and sizes, integrated into neighborhoods and designed for greater affordability, particularly smaller housing types, such as studios, co‐housing, cottages, clustered housing, accessory dwelling units and senior housing. [(Previous Policy L‐13) (Combined with [L47], which is also about encouraging small 11 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT units/mix of types)] [L18] Revise Policy L‐2.4: Use a variety of strategies to stimulate housing, near retail, employment, and transit, in a way that connects to and enhances existing neighborhoods. [NEW POLICY] [L19] These revisions are consistent with and add support to existing policies, which are not proposed to change: Policy L‐1.2: Maintain and strengthen Palo Alto’s varied residential neighborhoods while sustaining the vitality of its commercial areas and public facilities. Policy L‐2.2: Enhance connections between commercial and mixed use centers and the surrounding residential neighborhoods by promoting walkable and bikeable connections and a diverse range of retail and services that caters to the daily needs of residents. Policy L‐3.1: Ensure that new or remodeled structures are compatible with the neighborhood and adjacent structures. PTC Consensus 2 Land Use Element Overall/General Goals, policies, and programs throughout should be clear and actionable, and the City should be able to track progress toward achievement. Plan’s goals and policies serve as a guide for day‐to‐day decisions on the physical development of Palo Alto. Decisions made by City Council, its advisory boards, and commissions and the staff about the physical development of the City must 12 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT be consistent with the goals and policies of this Plan. These groups will use the Comprehensive Plan when evaluating land use changes and making decisions on development proposals. This is a major, actionable role for these policies and goals. Programs are included when some policies recommend additional actions the City may take, depending on resources. The programs the City wants to implement will be reviewed annually by the PTC and the Council. There will be clarifications to these programs during this annual review. If Council would like to identify specific programs or policies for revision, staff requests that Council provide that direction during adoption hearings and/or during upcoming review of the Implementation Program. 13 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT PTC Consensus 3 Transportation Element Overall/General Don’t build the Plan around specific technologies. The ultimate consequences of new or emerging trends such as transportation network companies (TNCs – e.g. Lyft, Uber) or autonomous vehicles may be positive or negative and cannot be predicted. Revise Transportation Element narrative, page T‐2: Technology has a role to play, whether providing up‐to‐the‐ minute information to inform choices or in delivering new and better modes of travel. Improvements to the bicycling and pedestrian environment will help encourage more people to bike and walk on a regular basis. However, the Transportation Element does not rely on future technological innovations to solve local congestion. Facilitating a shift to alternative modes of transportation will require creative collaboration among transit agencies, employers and local jurisdictions as well as residents and commuters themselves. Revise Policy T‐1.3: Reduce GHG and pollutant emissions associated with transportation by reducing VMT and per‐mile emissions through increasing transit options, supporting biking and walking, and through the use of zero‐emission vehicle technologies to meet City and State goals for GHG reductions by 2030. PTC Consensus 4 Transportation Element Narrative and Maps Geng Road improvement is too specific for the Comp Plan. Re‐state more broadly as an improvement, or a policy, to reduce traffic on East Bayshore Road. Revise the list of transportation investments on Page T‐12 follows: Geng Road extension to Laura Lane Improvements to 14 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT reduce traffic on East Bayshore Road. PTC Consensus 5 Transportation Element Narrative and Maps Support for Caltrain grade separation. The PTC expressed support for the Element’s existing acknowledgement of Caltrain grade separation, as captured in the list of planned transportation investments on page T‐12 and in Policy T‐3.15 and its supporting programs. Policy T‐3.15: Pursue grade separation of rail crossings along the rail corridor as a City priority. No changes are needed to reflect PTC support. PTC Consensus 6 Transportation Element Goal T‐1: Sustainable Transportation Program T1.2.2: Add reference to stable, sustained funding for the TMA, but don’t be proscriptive or limit the City’s options for funding. Add a new bullet to Program T1.2.2: Ensure a stable, sustained funding source to support implementation of TDM measures. PTC Consensus 7 Transportation Element Goal T‐4: Neighborhood Impacts Policy T4.2: Policy should recognize that residential arterials, along with local and collector streets, are also school commute corridors. Policy should state that safety on residential arterials is also important. Although the PTC motion references Policy T‐4.2, staff notes that the policies and programs under Goal T‐6, “Provide a safe environment for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists on Palo Alto streets,” are all related to road safety and are specifically worded to apply to all roadway types in Palo Alto, including residential arterials. 15 of 31 TABLE X: COMP PLAN REVISIONS – NUMBER CORRECTION, PTC COMMENT, OR PTC MOTION PROPOSED REVISED TEXT PTC Consensus 8 Transportation Element Goal T‐6: Road Safety Policy T‐6.6: Policy and related programs discuss education for bicyclists. Language should be updated to reflect that pedestrian safety is also included. Policy T‐6.6: Use engineering, enforcement and educational tools to improve traffic safety for all users on City roadways. Program T6.6.2: Continue to provide educational programs for children and adults, in partnership with community‐based educational organizations, to promote safe walking and the safe use of bicycles, including the City‐sponsored bicycle education programs in the public schools and the bicycle traffic school program for juveniles. PTC Consensus 9 Transportation Element Goal T‐8: Regional Collaboration and Coordination Consider adding a policy statement about a potential future High Speed Rail station and/or other aspects of High Speed Rail. New Policy: Coordinate proactively with the California HSR Authority and Caltrain to minimize negative impacts and maximize benefits to Palo Alto from any future HSR service through Palo Alto. 16 of 31 October 30, 2017 ERRATA TABLE /COMP PLAN CORRECTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 1 Inside front cover Add City Hall contact information General City Information: (650) 329‐2100 Planning & Community Environment Department: (650) 329‐2442 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/iwantto/ http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/services/paloalto311/ 2 Table of Contents Inclusion of Housing as Number 4 on table of contents A foot note shall be added: “The Housing Element is incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan and can be found at: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/document s/37935. 3 Regional Commercial Designation Fix reference to software development to accurately reflect Council motion that it should be allowed Downtown only; not in other shopping areas. Add office back in as an allowed non‐retail service use, consistent with existing uses. Regional/Community Commercial: Larger shopping centers and districts that have a wider variety of goods and services than the neighborhood shopping areas. They rely on larger trade areas and include such uses as department stores, bookstores, furniture stores, toy stores, apparel shops, restaurants, theaters and non‐ retail services such as offices and banks. Examples include Stanford Shopping Center, Town and Country Village and University Avenue/Downtown. Non‐retail uses such as medical and dental offices and software development may also locate in this designation; software development may also locate Downtown. Examples include Stanford Shopping Center, Town and Country Village and University Avenue/Downtown. In some locations, residential and mixed use projects may also locate in this category. Non‐residential FARs range from 0.35 to 2.0. 4 Map L‐3: City Structure Show road lines See revised map L‐3 2 17 of 31 October 30, 2017 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 5 Map L‐6: Land Use Designations Correct map for consistency with actual land use Modify the land use designation for the former Hyatt Rickey’s site to remove the Hotel Overlay (see attached map), so that the property is designated only Multifamily Residential. 6 Land Use Element narrative Fix incorrect reference to Natural Environment Element. Revise page L‐2: The success of the programs in the Natural and Urban Environment and Safety Elements is are largely dependent on land use decisions that protect the environment as well as people and property. 7 Programs L‐2.4.2 and L‐2.4.3 Focus Program L2.4.2 on housing in Stanford Shopping Center to reduce confusion. Put all the language about housing in Stanford Research Park in one policy‐L‐2.4.3. Key language about housing at Stanford Research Park inadvertently left out of 6.30.17 version of L‐ 2.4.3. 1. Reword L‐2.4.2 to read: Allow housing on the El Camino Real frontage of the Stanford Research Park and at Stanford Shopping Center, provided that adequate parking and vibrant retail is maintained and no reduction of retail square footage results from the new housing. 2. Reword L‐2.4.3 to read: Allow housing on the El Camino Real frontage of the Stanford Research Park. Explore multi‐family housing elsewhere in the Stanford Research Park and near Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC). 8 Policy L‐2.9 Move policy to Goal L‐4 Commercial Centers to be with other retail‐related policies. 1. Move Policy L‐2.9 to become Policy L‐4.2 Preserve ground‐floor retail, limit the displacement of existing retail from neighborhood centers and explore opportunities to expand retail. 2. Put programs L4.1.1 and L4.1.2 under this policy and renumber them program LL4.2.1 and L4.2.2 9 Program L4.8.1 Remove reference to “Fry’s site” as the current tenant may not be in this site for the life of the Comp Plan. Reword to “North Ventura area.” Prepare a coordinated area plan for the Fry's site North Ventura area and surrounding California Avenue area. The plan should describe a vision for the future of the Fry's site North Ventura area as a walkable neighborhood with multi‐family housing, ground floor retail, a public 18 of 31 October 30, 2017 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change park, creek improvements and an interconnected street grid. It should guide the development of the California Avenue area as a well‐designed mixed use district with diverse land uses and a network of pedestrian‐oriented streets. 10 Policy L‐5.4 Reword to remove reference to East Meadow Circle Concept Plan because the policies of this concept plan encourage the attraction and expansion of high end technology companies that is not consistent with Comp Plan growth management policies. Maintain the East Bayshore and San Antonio Road/Bayshore Corridor areas as diverse business and light industrial districts with the approved East Meadow Circle Concept Plan (Appendix Y of this Comprehensive Plan). 11 Policy L‐6.5 Clarify that policy is about views up City streets, not from a street across private property to the hills Guide development to respect views of the foothills and East Bay hills from along public streets corridors in the developed portions of the City. 12 Program L‐6.6.1 Correct wording – City does not have design standards specifically for mixed use developments. Modify design standards for mixed use projects to ensure that mixed use development promotes a pedestrian‐ friendly relationship to the street, including elements such as screened parking or underground parking, street‐ facing windows and entries, and porches, windows, bays and balconies along public ways, and landscaping, and trees along the street. Avoid blank or solid walls at street level. 13 Program L7.8.3 This expresses a City requirement and should be a policy in order to be applied consistently in review of development projects. No change to content. Program L7.8.3 Policy L7.11: For proposed exterior alterations or additions to designated Historic Landmarks, require design review findings that the proposed changes are in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. 14 Policy L‐7.17 Revise wording to be consistent with EIR mitigation measure. Add ",and unique geologic features." Require project proponents to meet State codes and regulations regarding the identification and protection of archaeological and paleontological deposits, and unique geologic features. 19 of 31 October 30, 2017 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 15 Policy L‐9.10 Redundant with Policy N‐2.1, N‐2.2, and Program N2.2.1. Delete. Policy N‐2.1: Recognize the importance of the urban forest as a vital part of the city’s natural and green infrastructure network that contributes to public health, resiliency, habitat values, appreciation of natural systems and an attractive visual character which must be protected and enhanced. Policy N‐2.2: Use the UFMP, as periodically amended, to guide City decisions related to all elements of Palo Alto’s urban forest, from its understory habitat to canopy cover. Program N2.2.1: Periodically update the UFMP and Tree Protection Ordinance to ensure policies and regulations set leading standards for tree health practices. L‐9.10 Recognize the urban forest as City infrastructure to be maintained in accordance with applicable guidelines and requirements. [NEW POLICY] [L138] 16 Transportation Element narrative Update to use “transportation network companies” as commonly‐used generic term for “ridesharing” companies, and add “transportation network companies” to Glossary. Revise Transportation Element page T‐3: The use of transportation services is beginning to replace private vehicle ownership in the region, led by a number of prominent ride sharing and e‐hailing car servicestransportation network companies (like Uber and Lyft) that connect passengers to drivers in private vehicles. Revise Glossary page 52: Transportation Network Companies Companies that connect passengers (often via websites and phone applications) with drivers who provide transporation in the driver’s non‐commercial vehicle. 20 of 31 October 30, 2017 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change Also known as “mobility service provders” or “ridesharing companies.” 17 Program T1.2.2 Revise wording in the last two bullets to be consistent with EIR Mitigation Measure TRANS‐1a. Establish a mechanism to monitor the success of TDM measures and track the cumulative reduction of peak hour motor vehicle trips. TDM measures should at a minimum achieve the following reduction in peak hour motor vehicle trips, with a focus on single‐occupant vehicle trips. Reductions should be based on the rates included in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual for the appropriate land use category and size: ‐ 50 45 percent reduction in the Downtown district ‐ 35 percent reduction in the California Avenue area ‐ 30 percent reduction in the Stanford Research Park ‐ 30 percent reduction in the El Camino Real Corridor ‐ 20 percent reduction in other areas of the city Require new development projects to pay a Transportation Impact Fee for all those daily peak‐hour motor vehicle trips that cannot be reduced via TDM measures. Fees collected would be used for capital improvements aimed at reducing vehicle trips and traffic congestion. 21 of 31 October 30, 2017 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 18 Program T1.12.3 Revise to start “Work with VTA to…” to clarify that collaboration is needed on any study regarding bus service. Program T1.12.3: Work with VTA to study the feasibility of, and if warranted provide, traffic signal prioritization for buses at Palo Alto intersections, focusing first on regional transit routes. Also, advocate for bus service improvements on El Camino Real such as queue jump lanes and curbside platforms. 19 Program T2.3.1 Clarify wording to ensure that VMT/LOS program is consistent with SB 743 requirements. When adopting new CEQA significance thresholds for VMT for compliance with SB 743 (2013), adopt standards for vehicular LOS analysis for use in evaluating the consistency of a proposed project with the Comprehensive Plan, and also explore desired standards for MMLOS, which includes motor vehicle LOS, at signalized intersections for use in evaluating the consistency of a proposed project with the Comprehensive Plan. 20 Goal T‐4 Delete “local” to avoid confusion that this goal is only about the City’s “local streets” roadway classification and be clear that the goal applies to all City streets. GOAL T‐4 Protect local streets that contribute to neighborhood character and provide a range of local transportation options. 21 Program T4.2.1 Change to a Policy to be consistent with EIR mitigation measure TRANS‐8. Program T4.2.1 Policy T4.3: Identify specific improvements that can be used to discourage drivers from using local, neighborhood streets to bypass traffic congestion on arterials. 22 Policy T‐5.12 Reword to reference diverse bike types, not just trailers. Policy T‐5.12: To promote bicycle use, increase the number of safe, attractive and well‐designed bicycle parking spaces available in the city, including spots for diverse types of bicycles and associated equipment, including bicycle trailers, prioritizing heavily travelled areas such as commercial and retail centers, employment districts, recreational/cultural facilities, multi‐modal transit facilities and ride share stops for bicycle parking infrastructure. 22 of 31 October 30, 2017 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 23 Program T6.1.1 Reword to include designated school commute corridors. Program T6.1.1: Follow the principles of the safe routes to schools program to implement traffic safety measures that focus on safe routes to work, shopping, downtown, community services, parks and schools including all designated school commute corridors. [NEW PROGRAM] [T135] 24 Policies and Programs under Goal T‐8, Regional Collaboration and Coordination Revise to eliminate redundancy and improve readability and usability. Policy T‐8.1: Engage in regional transportation planning to reduce congestion and reduce single‐occupant vehicle trips, and advocate for specific transit improvements and investments, such as Caltrain service enhancements and grade separations, Dumbarton Express service, enhanced bus service on El Camino Real with queue jumping and curbside platforms, HOV/HOT lanes and additional VTA bus service. Program T8.6.21.2.2: Advocate for improved connectivity to transit to serve workers who live in the South Bay and work in Palo Alto. Policy T‐8.2 Participate in regional planning initiatives for the rail corridor and provide a strong guiding voice. Policy T‐8.3 Collaborate effectively with and engage in regional partnerships and solutions with a range of stakeholders, including regional agencies, neighboring jurisdictions and major employers, on issues of regional importance such as traffic congestion, reduced reliance on single‐occupant vehicles and sustainable transportation. Program T8.3.1: Continue to participate in regional 23 of 31 October 30, 2017 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change efforts to develop technological solutions that make alternatives to the automobile more convenient and thereby contribute to reducing congestion. Policy T‐8.4: Coordinate with local and regional agencies and Caltrans to support regional efforts to maintain and improve transportation infrastructure in Palo Alto, including the Multi‐Modal Transit Center. Policy T‐8.5 Support the efforts of MTC to coordinate transportation planning and services for the Mid‐ Peninsula and the Bay Area that emphasize alternatives to the automobile. Policy T‐8.6: Advocate for efforts by Caltrans and the Valley Transportation Authority to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow on existing freeway facilities consistent with Statewide GHG emissions reduction initiatives. (Comp Plan Draft EIR Mitigation Measure Trans‐3b)] Program T8.6.1: Advocate for provision of a new southbound entrance ramp to Highway 101 from San Antonio Road, in conjunction with the closure of the southbound Charleston Road on‐ramp at the Rengstorff Avenue interchange in Mountain View. Policy T‐8.7: Support the application of emerging freeway information, monitoring and control systems that provide non‐intrusive driver assistance and reduce congestion. (Comp Plan Draft EIR Mitigation Measure Trans‐3b)] 24 of 31 October 30, 2017 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change Policy T‐8.8: Where appropriate, support the conversion of existing traffic lanes to exclusive bus and HOV lanes or Express/HOT lanes on freeways and expressways, including the Dumbarton Bridge, and the continuation of an HOV lane from Redwood City to San Francisco. (Comp Plan Draft EIR Mitigation Measure Trans‐3b)] Policy T‐8.9: Support State and federal legislation to reduce motor vehicle emissions, noise and fuel consumption. Policy T‐8.10: Support plans for intra‐county and transbay transit systems that link Palo Alto to the rest of Santa Clara County and adjoining counties. Ensure that these systems and enhancements do not adversely impact the bay. Program T8.10.1: Work with regional transportation providers, including BART and Caltrain, to improve connections between Palo Alto and the San Francisco International Airport and Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport. Policy T‐8.11: Support regional bicycle and pedestrian plans, to complete including development of the Bay Trail, and the Bay‐to‐Ridge Trail, and the Santa Clara County Countywide Bicycle System. Policy T‐8.12 Support the development of the Santa Clara County Countywide Bicycle System, and other 25 of 31 October 30, 2017 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change regional bicycle plans. 25 Program N4.7.2 Change to a policy for consistency; insert new policy number and renumber subsequent policies and programs under Goal N‐4. Program N4.7.2 Policy N‐4.9: Work with neighboring jurisdictions and regional agencies to protect groundwater. 26 Program N5.1.2 Change to a Policy to be consistent with EIR mitigation measure AIR‐2c. Program N5.1.2 Policy N‐5.5: Support the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) in its efforts to achieve compliance with existing air quality regulations by continuing to require development applicants to comply with BAAQMD construction emissions control measures and health risk assessment requirements. 27 Policy N‐5.5 Add for consistency with EIR mitigation measure AIR‐ 3c. NEW POLICY: Mitigate potential sources of toxic air contaminants through siting or other means to reduce human health risks and meet the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s applicable threshold of significance. When siting new sensitive receptors such as schools, day care facilities, parks or playgrounds, medical facilities and residences within 1,000’ of stationary sources of toxic air contaminants or roadways used by more than 10,000 vehicles per day, require projects to consider potential health risks and incorporate adequate precautions such as high‐efficiency air filtration into project design. 28 Program N6.12.1 Add an “also” to separate two ideas in this program. Program N6.12.1: Continue working to reduce noise associated with operations of the Palo Alto Airport. Also, eEnsure compliance with the land use compatibility standards for community noise environments, shown in Table N‐1, by prohibiting incompatible land use development within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contours of the airport. 26 of 31 October 30, 2017 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change 29 Program N6.11.1 Revise to reference pertinent industry standards for consistency with EIR mitigation measure NOISE‐5a. For larger development projects that demand intensive construction periods and/or use equipment that could create vibration impacts, such as the Stanford University Medical Center or major grade separation projects, require a vibration impact analysis, as well as formal, ongoing monitoring and reporting of noise levels, throughout the entire construction process, pertinent to industry standards. The monitoring plan should identify hours of operation and could include information on the monitoring locations, durations and regularity, the instrumentation to be used and appropriate noise control measures to ensure compliance with the noise ordinance. [(NEW PROGRAM)(Comp Plan Draft EIR Mitigation Measure NOISE‐1c, 5a)] [N152] 30 Safety Element narrative Add description on location and extent of utilities to narrative UTILITIES In Palo Alto, utility services are provided by The City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU), a city‐owned utility. Today, CPAU provides six services that include electric, fiber optic, natural gas, water and wastewater services. Initially formed in 1896 with the installation of a water supply system, CPAU expanded between the years 1898 and 1917 to include wastewater, electric, and natural gas distribution services; in 1996 it began to provide fiber optic services. Through its mission to provide safe, reliable, environmentally sustainable and cost effective services to Palo Alto residents, CPAU offers cost‐effective service rates to residents and re‐invests proceeds to support other City community services and facilities. For example, CPAU provides financial support to the Palo Alto library and parks system, as well as to support police and 27 of 31 October 30, 2017 Change ID Policy/ Program Number Error to Be Corrected Recommended Change fire protection services. 31 Program S‐1.10.3 Reword for clarity to: “…including those that address evolving…” Implement the mitigation strategies and guidelines provided by the LHMP, including those that address evolving hazards resulting from climate change. 32 Program S‐ 2.8.3 Change to Policy since this is a “specific statement of guiding action that implies clear commitment.” Program S‐2.8.3 Policy S‐2.9: Partner with appropriate agencies to expand flood zones as appropriate due to sea level rise, changes in creek channels, street flooding or storm drain overload due to increased likelihood of extreme storm events caused by climate change. 33 Glossary Update the definition of Infill to cover various types of possible sites, not only vacant land. Infill: Development of vacant or underused lots in built up sites or areas. 28 of 31 Responses to Comments Received October 23, 2017 Regarding the Comprehensive Plan EIR* *Please see written communications and the video from October 23, 2017 for the full text of comments paraphrased here. Responses supplement those already provided in the Final EIR and Attachment F to the staff report.Page 1 Comment 1: EIR Baseline should be updated to reflect the GUP and other recent plans/development. (Bill Ross) Response 1: Please see Master Response 2 in the Final EIR. The EIR includes a robust cumulative analysis based on regional projections that are large enough to encompass anticipated development, including development under the proposed Stanford GUP and other recently approved plans/projects, by the year 2030. There is no need for additional analysis. Comment 2: The plan should reference the updated map of wildland fire severity zones in the recently‐ adopted Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. (Bill Ross) Response 2: The map referenced in this comment will be added to the list of corrections and changes to the proposed plan in Attachment E to the staff report. While the map included in the draft Comp Plan (Map S‐8) does not show any Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone areas within the city limit, updated mapping shows several Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone areas within the city limits, west of I‐280. Inclusion of an updated map does not alter the conclusions of the EIR because no additional development or changes in land use are proposed west of I‐280 where the updated map will include wildland fire severity zones. Comment 3: I was concerned to read of the change in the FEIR so that avoidance of "dewatering impacts on adjacent properties and public resources" has been eliminated. Many neighbors of dewatering projects have had expensive damage as a result. Public infrastructure such as water mains and sewer lines can be damaged too. (Penny Proctor & Rita Vrhel) Response 4: While this language was removed from the EIR mitigation measure, it remains in Comp Plan Policy L‐3.5: “Avoid negative impacts of basement construction for single‐family homes on adjacent properties, public resources and the natural environment.” The change to the Final EIR was to focus the mitigation measure on the CEQA significance threshold being used, which considers whether the project would "substantially degrade or deplete ground water resources or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level." Said another way, impacts to groundwater are a CEQA threshold; damage to adjacent properties is not. But damage to private properties is an important issue in Palo Alto and would be addressed in Comp Plan Policy L‐3.5 going forward. Comment 5: The mitigation monitoring plan is weak because it simply says that many measures will be implemented through review of projects. (Annette Glanckopf) Response 5: The language in the proposed mitigation monitoring and reporting plan (MMRP) reflects the function of the Comprehensive Plan, which is to guide future decision making about land use and development issues. When City decision‐makers consider proposed developments, new regulations, or capital investments, they must ensure they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. By incorporating EIR mitigation measures as policy language in the Comp Plan, the City is ensuring these measures will be front and center as decisions are made, and that any related impacts are dealt with appropriately. 3 29 of 31 Responses to Comments Received October 23, 2017 Regarding the Comprehensive Plan EIR* *Please see written communications and the video from October 23, 2017 for the full text of comments paraphrased here. Responses supplement those already provided in the Final EIR and Attachment F to the staff report. Page 2 Comment 6: The EIR is inadequate because it needs to analyze the 15 housing bills just approved by the Legislature and signed by the Governor. (Herb Borock) Response 6: The State’s adoption of new regulations is not part of the project being analyzed in the EIR and has no bearing on the City’s CEQA analysis. The City Council may consider the new State laws as context for their decision on Comprehensive Plan policies and programs or for future implementing actions. Comment 7: The EIR needs to analyze grade separations instead of assuming that will be subject to separate environmental review. (Herb Borock) Response 7: The EIR is a program‐level EIR that analyzes potential impacts based on growth projections and potential infrastructure investments. One of those investments will involve grade separation of existing rail crossings and this was factored into the traffic analysis of some of the EIR scenarios. More specific review of the impacts of grade separation project(s) cannot be conducted until a preferred alternative is identified and preliminary engineering has been completed. Please see Response GOV‐2‐ 04 in the Final EIR. Comment 8: The additional 3M square feet of non‐residential development will have an impact throughout the region. (Liang Chao) Response 8: The proposed Comp Plan does not allow an additional 3M square feet of growth. Policy L‐ 1.9 allows up to 1.7 M sf of new office/R&D growth. The proposed plan perpetuates and updates the overall cap on non‐residential development contained in the City’s current Comprehensive Plan. The current plan was adopted in 1998 and capped non‐ residential development at 3.2 Million square feet in “monitored areas” of the City (Policy L‐8). The new plan updates this cap by referencing the square footage remaining (i.e. 1.7 Million square feet are remaining from the original 3.2 Million). In doing so, the plan (Policy L‐1.9) makes two important changes: it applies the cap to the entire city, excluding only the SUMC area, and it focuses the cap on office/R&D so, for the first time, conversion of retail or warehouse space to office use would count as new office space under the cap. The speaker’s reference to 3M square feet does not acknowledge that 1.3M square feet has already been approved and is under construction at SUMC. The EIR is required to analyze the amount of development that is reasonably foreseeable during the life of the Comp Plan, between the date of the NOP in 2014 and the horizon of the Comp Plan in 2030. Therefore, the Final EIR lists 3M square feet to acknowledge the total amount of office/R&D space, including the SUMC expansion, but that number is not contained within the plan proposed for adoption. It is also important to recognize Palo Alto’s place in a growing region. Master Response 2 in the Final EIR explains the use of regional growth projections, as well as some of the pending projects in Menlo Park, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, Redwood City, Stanford, and East Palo Alto, that will contribute to this growth. The projects listed in Master Response 2 – over which the City of Palo Alto will have little or no 30 of 31 Responses to Comments Received October 23, 2017 Regarding the Comprehensive Plan EIR* *Please see written communications and the video from October 23, 2017 for the full text of comments paraphrased here. Responses supplement those already provided in the Final EIR and Attachment F to the staff report. Page 3 say – represent approximately 25,000 housing units, 38,000 jobs, and 11.7 million square feet of non‐ residential development near the City of Palo Alto and dwarf the potential development analyzed in the EIR as potentially foreseeable within the City itself. Comment 9: Development should mitigate its impacts; 1.7 M square feet is a lot of development. (Arthur Keller) Response 9: As noted above, the EIR identifies mitigation measures to reduce or avoid impacts of projected future growth. Some of these, like the new requirement that projects implement enforceable TDM plans to achieve quantitative neighborhood‐specific trip reduction standards, will require new development to do substantially more than existing development/uses. The four impacts identified in the EIR that cannot be fully mitigated are a direct result of Palo Alto’s place in a growing region, reflecting contributions to cumulative traffic problems that will actually be worse under the No Action Alternative (Scenario 1). Comment 10: The EIR should consider maximum build out of the City, not just projected growth by 2030. (Arthur Keller) Response 10: Determining the hypothetical future build out of the City is not a CEQA requirement and the EIR appropriately focuses on an assessment of impacts anticipated in the year 2030, the horizon year of the proposed plan, based on growth and development that is projected (i.e. reasonably foreseeable) by that date. Comment 11: The EIR or the plan should quantify and monitor school enrollment and zone for new schools. (Jennifer Hetterly) Response 11: Please see Master Response 3 in the Final EIR for an expanded discussion of school enrollment, school capacities, and how school impacts are assessed under CEQA. Also, please see Policy L‐2.11, which was added to the draft Comprehensive Plan Update at the City Council’s request: “Ensure regular coordination between the City and PAUSD on land development activities and trends in Palo Alto, as well as planning for school facilities and programs. Under State law, impacts on school facilities cannot be the basis for requiring mitigation beyond the payment of school fees or for denying development projects or legislative changes that could result in additional housing units. The City will, however, assess the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts of development projects that result in new school construction or enrollment.” The Council could consider adding a program to work with PAUSD to identify new school sites, although identifying potential sites in advance may drive up the cost of those sites. 31 of 31 City of Palo Alto (ID # 8496) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 10/30/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 285 Hamilton: Prescreening Request for a Zoning Text Amendment Title: 285 Hamilton [17PLN-00309]. Applicant Requests a Prescreening Discussion for a Possible Text Amendment That Would Allow Development Exceptions for Rooftop Decks Within the Downtown Area, Including the Subject Property. Environmental Assessment: The Subject Request is Not a Project in Accordance With the California Environmental Quality Act From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council conduct a prescreening review of the applicant’s proposed concept for a zoning text amendment to allow roof deck patios on top of nonconforming buildings in the Downtown Commercial (CD) district. Background Applicant is interested in establishing a roof deck at the subject address. Roof decks are mentioned twice in the municipal code as it pertains to residential development. Roof decks have been allowed in the past for residential and commercial buildings, subject to meeting applicable development standards, including height, floor area, and parking. The subject building exceeds current height limit and floor area for the district. The applicant requests the City Council consider a future ordinance that would permit roof decks on nonconforming commercial buildings Downtown, subject to a discretionary review process, and with certain performance standards related to the proximity of residential development, height of railings, landscaping and other features. (see Attachment B) The applicant also suggests, as an alternative, that the subject property could serve as a case study for such an ordinance that could be repealed if later determined necessary. The subject property was constructed in 1971, is five stories and 82'-6" tall in a district with a current height limit of 50-feet. The building has 48,585 square feet of office floor area (FAR 3.88:1). The roof surface is approximately 9,750 square feet; however, the applicant is City of Palo Alto Page 2 considering a roof deck of approximately 2,650 square feet. Establishing a roof deck on the subject building would incrementally increase the building volume height and floor area for the nonconforming structure. It is anticipated the roof deck system would result in a slightly raised roof surface and include the addition of guard railings, elevator enclosures, trellises, and fixed or moveable furniture. The elevator would contribute to floor area, which may require review of parking requirements. Any increase in the nonconforming height or floor area could not be accomplished based on current codes. Additionally, the City Council in 2016 reinforced a provision related to the building envelope of nonconforming buildings, which established a more restrictive view on changes to nonconforming buildings. This code section would also require modification with a future roof deck ordinance. Aerial View: Existing Building Source: Google Image Photo Simulation: Possible Roof Deck Discussion Rooftop decks in a climate such as Palo Alto can offer a nice amenity to building occupants and take advantage of outdoor space that may be underutilized. Roof decks provide an opportunity for outdoor breakout space, employee break areas, outdoor lunch space, and employee events. Roof decks may result in building upgrades that make older buildings more attractive and increase value. Depending how the space is used, adjacent building tenants and owners and the general neighborhood could be impacted by excessive noise, light and glare, privacy and potentially parking. Regulations, or performance standards, could be established to limit some of these impacts, such as precluding use of the space for anyone other than building occupants. Time restrictions could also be established and lighting and privacy could be ameliorated with shields and landscaping. Additionally, having some form of a review process, such as review by the Architectural Review Board would provide the public an opportunity to comment on a proposed design. While the subject application is driving this discussion, staff recommends that any policy on City of Palo Alto Page 3 roof decks be considered on a district-wide basis, if there is even interest in pursuing the topic. Commercial corridors such as El Camino Real, which has stretches of commercial zoning abutting residential districts, may be more problematic than in Downtown or the Research Park. Roof decks on nonconforming buildings near residential land uses, especially single family zoned properties are inappropriate. It should be noted, however, that a conforming roof deck on a commercial property does not currently have performance standards to minimize potential impacts; only through the architectural review process are these potential conflicts addressed. If a policy on roof decks is ultimately developed, there should also be some consideration given to presently conforming buildings and the opportunities potentially granted to nonconforming buildings. There may be examples of conforming buildings today whose owners or tenants may want to create a rooftop deck but may now be limited by height or floor area. Next Steps Allowing roof decks on nonconforming buildings downtown or in other portions of the city would be a shift in policy requiring a text amendment. The city’s municipal code provides that such amendments require prescreening review before the City Council. Comments made by councilmembers are non-binding and the applicant may choose to file an application or not. Importantly, no action or decision is made during a prescreening study session discussion. The purpose of this prescreening is to gauge the Council’s interest in considering an ordinance that would permit roof decks and roof deck amenities (such as canopies, trellises, seating area, landscaping and similar features) on the roof of nonconforming and/or conforming buildings. If there is interest and an application for a zoning amendment is filed, staff can work with the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) to develop an appropriate application type, review process and performance standards to allow exceptions to the height limit, floor area and potentially other development standards for the purposes of establishing a roof deck. Council guidance on any of the topics highlighted above and other interest areas would help frame that discussion with the PTC. If there is a lack of interest in exploring such policies, that guidance can be provided to the applicant and the city will continue to regulate roof decks under existing codes, which would only permit such features if it met all applicable development standards. While the prescreening applicant could still apply for a zoning amendment, the City Council would have the final say over such a legislative request. Environmental Review This preliminary review is not a project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and therefore, no review is required at this time. Attachments: Attachment A: Location Map Attachment B: Applicant Narrative City of Palo Alto Page 4 Attachment C: Project Plans Attachment C Project Plans Hardcopies of project plans are provided to Council. 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 “285 Hamilton Av” 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 “285 Hamilton Ave – Initial Plans – 8 23 17.pdf” CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK October 30, 2017 The Honorable City Council Attention: Finance Committee Palo Alto, California Approval of Action Minutes for the October 16, 2017 Council Meeting Staff is requesting Council review and approve the attached Action Minutes. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: 10-16-17 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOCX) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 5 Special Meeting October 16, 2017 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 5:12 P.M. Present: DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Holman, Kniss, Kou, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Absent: Study Session 1. Presentation and Discussion Regarding Santa Clara County's Review of Stanford's General Use Permit (GUP) Proposal. Special Orders of the Day 2. Resolution 9713 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to James F. Cook Upon Completion of his Term as a Utilities Advisory Commissioner.” MOTION: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to adopt the Resolution of appreciation to James F. Cook. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions None. Minutes Approval 3. Approval of Action Minutes for the September 18 and October 2, 2017 Council Meetings. MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to approve the Action Minutes for the September 18 and October 2, 2017 Council Meetings. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Kou abstain DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/16/17 Consent Calendar MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Tanaka, third by Council Member Kou to pull Agenda Item Number 7- Approve and Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Five-year General Services Agreement With Valley Oil Company… to be heard as Agenda Item Number 14. MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to approve Agenda Item Numbers 4-6, 8-9. 4. Annual Review of Williamson Act Contract Renewals Within the City of Palo Alto. 5. Approval of a Blanket Purchase Order With Granite Rock Company for $380,760 Each Year and Granite Construction Company for $90,000 Each Year, Both for a Three-year Term, From October 17, 2017 Through June 30, 2020 for Asphalt Concrete Products. 6. Resolution 9714 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and Approval of Three Additional Emergency Management Plans.” 7. Approve and Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Five-year General Services Agreement With Valley Oil Company in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $3,256,164 for the Purchase of Unleaded and Diesel Fuels to Supply the City's Fleet. 8. Approve and Authorize the City Manager to Execute Contract Amendment Number One to Contract Number C17165053 With Salas O'Brien Adding Construction Administration to the Scope of Services and Increasing Compensation by $35,000 for the Zero Waste Office Renovation, for a Not-to-Exceed Total Contract Amount of $252,800 for the Municipal Services Center Improvements and Zero Waste Office Renovation Project (CIP PF-16006). 9. Approval of Amendment Number Three to Contract Number C14152025 With SP Plus for Valet Parking Services to Extend the Contract Term to March 2, 2018 (Continued From October 2, 2017). MOTION PASSED: 9-0 MOTION: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to hear Agenda Item Number 14 (Former Agenda Item Number 7)- Approve and DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/16/17 Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Five-year General Services Agreement With Valley Oil Company… after Agenda Item Number 11- Fire Department Deployment Changes and the Conclusion of Meet and Confer Negotiations With IAFF… and continue Agenda Item Numbers 10- Adoption of an Ordinance to Increase the Posted Speed Limit on Deer Creek Road and a Segment of East Bayshore Road… and 12- Direct Staff to Return to the Policy and Services Committee With Amendments to the Municipal Code for the Regulation of Seismic Vulnerable Buildings… to a date uncertain. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Action Items 13. Colleagues’ Memo From Council Members DuBois, Holman, and Kou Regarding Strengthening Renter Protection for Palo Alto Residents. MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to refer this proposal to Staff to bring back to Council for one or more discussions of an Ordinance to increase renter protections that considers the following: A. An annual percentage cap on rent increases for buildings of 5 or more housing units built before February 1, 1995 (to remove any disincentive for new construction); and B. Measures to protect residents against termination without just cause while protecting the fair rights of property owners; and C. Other updates to our existing renter protections as needed to continue a healthy community; and D. Include the Human Relations Commission as part of the review process. MOTION FAILED: 3-6 DuBois, Holman, Kou yes Council took a break from 11:23 P.M. to 11:28 P.M. 10. Adoption of an Ordinance to Increase the Posted Speed Limit on Deer Creek Road and a Segment of East Bayshore Road to Enable Radar Enforcement and to Reduce the Posted Speed Limit in School Zones Consistent With State Law; and Adoption of a Resolution Establishing Target Speeds for Certain Arterials and Residential Arterials. Environmental Assessment: Exempt Under CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) Guidelines Section 15301. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/16/17 11. Fire Department Deployment Changes and the Conclusion of Meet and Confer Negotiations With IAFF (International Association of Firefighters, Local 1319) Related to Impacts From the Stanford Fire Contract Revenue Reduction; Approve a Budget Amendment in the General Fund; and Approve an Amendment to the Table of Organization by Eliminating 7.0 Firefighter and 4.0 Apparatus Operator Positions. MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to: A. Amend the Table of Organization by eliminating 4.0 FTE Apparatus Operators and 7.0 FTE Firefighter (Paramedics) positions; and B. Amend the FY 2018 Appropriation Ordinance for the General Fund by: i. Increasing the Fire Department appropriation in the amount of $70,000; and ii. Decreasing the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve in the amount of $70,000; and C. Acknowledge completion of the meet and confer process with IAFF over impacts related to the reduction in Stanford Fire Contract revenue. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 12. Direct Staff to Return to the Policy and Services Committee With Amendments to the Municipal Code for the Regulation of Seismic Vulnerable Buildings and Receive a Summary Presentation of the Vulnerable Buildings Seismic Risk Assessment Study Previously Transmitted to the City Council on April 17, 2017. 14. (Former Agenda Item Number 7) Approve and Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Five-year General Services Agreement With Valley Oil Company in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $3,256,164 for the Purchase of Unleaded and Diesel Fuels to Supply the City's Fleet. MOTION: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Mayor Scharff to approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a General Services Agreement in an amount not-to-exceed $3,256,164 with Valley Oil Company for the purchase of unleaded and diesel fuels to supply the City’s fleet for a term of five years effective October 16, 2017; including a total of $500,124 for AB 398 price increases for the 5-year contract term, $29,380 annually for SB 1 price increases, $17,252 annually for Golf Course DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/16/17 operations, and $53,899 annually for fluctuating fuel costs; subject to the annual appropriation of funds. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs None. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Council Member Wolbach reported his attendance at the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Policy Advisory Board meeting last week. Representatives from Cupertino, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, and other cities reiterated the need for mobility improvements across the entire County. Council Member Kou shared her participation at the Palo Alto Weekly Moonlight Run and Walk. She completed the 5K. Mayor Scharff shared his participation at the Heidelberg half-marathon. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 12:27 P.M. City of Palo Alto (ID # 8544) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 10/30/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Delivery Robot Permitting Title: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Regulate Operation of Personal Delivery Devices, also known as Autonomous Robots within the City of Palo Alto for an Approximately 1-year Period From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) authorizing the City Manager to create a pilot program to allow the use of autonomous robots, also known as personal delivery devices (PDDs), in the City of Palo Alto by issuing Encroachment Permits to PDD operators. These Encroachment Permits will be issued by the Public Works Department through the Development Center, and will permit the operation of PDDs within the City right-of-way, subject to terms and conditions set by the City Manager or his designee. This pilot program would expire on December 31, 2018, or upon adoption of permanent regulations by the City Council. Background A handful of companies have launched autonomous delivery robots, also known as personal delivery devices (PDDs), in cities throughout the United Kingdom, Germany and United States. In the San Francisco Bay Area, pilot delivery robot programs are underway in Concord, Foster City, Redwood City, San Carlos, Sunnyvale and Walnut Creek. PDDs typically deliver groceries, restaurant take-out items, and other items. They can carry approximately three-grocery-bags- worth of goods and weigh about 50 pounds, when fully loaded. PDDs are autonomous, using on-board cameras to assist in travels along the sidewalks at no more than four miles per hour, which is estimated to be a fast walk. Many PDDs have a human attendant to ensure proper functionality and safety. Over time, they will likely transition to 100% autonomous delivery, with remote human monitoring. PDDs generally run on electric power and have zero emissions. A photo of a typical PDD is included as Attachment C. City of Palo Alto Page 2 At street crossings, PDDs can be assisted by human attendants, if needed. The attendant is able to ensure it is safe for the robot to cross the street and that it will not impede traffic. PDDs are generally capable of traveling within a five-mile radius of their docking points. The actual areas of operation will be approved through the encroachment permit process, but is anticipated to be primarily in business districts. Customers can establish their delivery times, track their items while in transit on a mobile application, and securely retrieve their items with their unique code that opens the robot. Payment for the PDD delivery service is conducted online, similar to Lyft or Uber, so no cash is involved in the delivery transaction. Discussion More than one PDD operator has expressed an interest in piloting their devices in the City of Palo Alto. These operators plan to work with existing food delivery service partners to bring goods directly to employees and residents. The operators will assume all liability for the use of the PDDs on City sidewalks and streets. The operators will be permitted through the City’s existing Encroachment Permit process, which requires insurance coverage, and will be subject to operating regulations established by the City Manager pursuant to the attached resolution. A draft policy establishing regulations is included as Attachment B. The Encroachment Permits will be issued by the Public Works Department at the Development Center, with review by other departments as necessary. Staff recommends that all Encroachment Permit issued to PDD operators include the following conditions on the operators: Assume all liability associated with the use of PDDs Provide no less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence or four million dollars ($4,000,000) annual aggregate limit for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage in insurance Monitor PDDs at all times they are operating within the City right-of-way, either through an accompanying robot attendant or remotely Report any significant collisions or other operational safety issues to the City within 24 hours PDDs cannot travel faster than 3.5 feet per second when on sidewalks, on ADA ramps, or within crosswalks PDDs cannot block accessible path of travel for disabled individuals using mobility devices PDDs must include the operator’s name and phone number in a location visible to the public when in operation PDDs may be temporarily prohibited from sidewalks and crosswalks within specific construction and special event areas by the City Manager or his designee at any time (with notice) PDDs may be permanently prohibited from sidewalks and crosswalks within business districts by the City Manager or his designee at any time (with notice) City of Palo Alto Page 3 PDDs would be primarily limited to sidewalks, crosswalks and other areas typically used for pedestrian travel rather than streets or areas used for bicycle or motor vehicle travel. The City would retain the ability to cancel the Encroachment Permits with no notice. Staff has outreached to Redwood City and Sunnyvale to determine how the PDDs have been received. Staff from both cities reported no major issues with the operation of PDDs. However, Redwood City has experienced minor issues with robot-pedestrian and robot-motorist interactions, where the robots failed to take the right-of-way when appropriate. Policy Implications The following Comprehensive Plan goals, programs and policies are relevant to the permitting of PDDs: POLICY T-39: To the extent allowed by law, continue to make safety the first priority of citywide transportation planning. Prioritize pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile safety over vehicle level-of-service at intersections. POLICY B-4: Nurture and support established businesses as well as new businesses. POLICY B-7: Encourage and support the operation of small, independent businesses. POLICY B-9: Encourage new businesses that meet the City’s business and economic goals to locate in Palo Alto. POLICY B-10: Promote Palo Alto’s image as a business-friendly community. Assume an active role in fostering new business, particularly small, start-up businesses in emerging industries. POLICY B-16: Encourage streamlining of City administrative and regulatory processes wherever possible. Reduce inefficiencies, overlap, and time delays associated with these processes. Resource Impact The issuance of Enchroachment Permits for PDDs will be done through the Development Center, and require resources from the Development Services Department, Public Works Department, Planning and Community Environment Department, Police Deaprtment and other departments. Ongoing monitoring for compliance will also require the use of existing departmental resources. A portion of these costs can be recouped through the Encroachment Permit application fee. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Timeline Staff recommends an initial pilot period of approximately one year, during which staff will evaluate the possibility of more permanent regulation in the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Environmental Review This program is 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 this program may have a significant effect on the environment and Section 15301 in that this proposed resolution will have a minor impact on existing facilities. Attachments: Attachment A - Draft Resolution Authorizing Personal Delivery Devices Pilot Program (PDF) Attachment B - Draft Personal Delivery Devices Policy (PDF) Attachment C - Stock Photo of Personal Delivery Device (PDF) Resolution No. ________ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the City Manager to Establish a Pilot Program for the Operation of Personal Delivery Devices, also known as Autonomous Robots in the Public Rights of Way The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. a. The City of Palo Alto desires to implement a pilot program to temporarily allow the use of Personal Delivery Devices (PDDs), also known as Autonomous Robots for the purpose of delivering goods from Palo Alto businesses to Palo Alto customers. b. The use of the PDDs, activated by customers’ smartphones, will initiate the delivery of purchases when convenient for the customer and the robots will deliver the items directly to the customer’s location. c. PDD technology may reduce the inefficiencies associated with failed deliveries, facilitate the return of unwanted goods, and reduce the number of vehicle trips and the resultant emissions associated with the delivery of goods from local establishments. d. Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 12.09 sets forth regulations applicable to the operation and maintenance of equipment in the public rights of way and Chapter 12.12 authorizes the City Manager to issue permits for structures encroaching on public rights of way, but the City does not currently have a regulation that specifically addresses the operation of PDDs on City sidewalks, crosswalks and other public rights-of-way. e. PDDs are an emerging technology with an unproven track record with respect to public safety and impacts on the flow and circulation of pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle traffic. Additional regulation is necessary to ensure the safe and harmonious use of sidewalks and public rights of way in the City of Palo Alto consistent with the public health and welfare. SECTION 2. Pilot Program Regulations. a. PDD means a motorized device used to transport items, products, or any other materials, and that is guided or controlled without a human operator sitting or standing upon and actively and physically controlling the movements of the device. b. The City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to adopt, and from time to time amend, regulations governing the operation of PDDs within the City of Palo Alto. Such regulations shall address, at a minimum, the following topics: 1. Maximum speed; 2. Areas of operation; 3. Paths of travel; 4. Additional precautions to ensure safe and convenient pedestrian circulation. SECTION 3. Environmental Review. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility of a significant effect on the environment as a result of the PDD pilot program. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________ _____________________________ Deputy City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Director of Development Services _____________________________ Director of Public Works Page 1 of 2 INTERIM AUTONOMOUS ROBOT REGULATIONS I. Scope Consistent with Palo Alto City Council Resolution No. _____, this policy applies to any proposed deployment of an autonomous robot in public spaces, sidewalks, and public rights of way within the City of Palo Alto’s jurisdictional boundaries. For the purposes of this policy, autonomous robot means a motorized device used to transport items, products, or any other materials, and that is guided or controlled without a human operator sitting or standing upon and actively and physically controlling the movements of the device. II. Procedures a. Any person seeking to operate an autonomous robot within the City of Palo Alto shall first obtain an encroachment permit conditioned on compliance with the Operating Regulations contained in this policy. No person shall operate an autonomous robot in public spaces or in public rights of way within the City except pursuant to such permit. b. The City Manager, in consultation with the City Engineer and Chief Transportation Official, shall establish Operating Regulations governing the operation of autonomous robots. All Permittees shall be required to comply with these regulations as they may be amended from time to time. III. Operating Regulations a. Maximum speed. When operating on public sidewalks, ADA ramps or within crosswalks, robots shall not travel faster than 3.5 feet per second. b. Paths of Travel. Autonomous robots shall yield to pedestrians and other users of sidewalks and public rights of way. Robots shall not block accessible paths of travel for disabled individuals using mobility devices or otherwise interfere with accessibility features in the public rights of way. Robots shall not travel on roadways except in designated crosswalks. c. Area of operation. Permittees shall operate autonomous robots only within the operating areas described and shown in Exhibit A. These operating areas are subject to change by the City Manager or his designee upon 24 hours’ notice. In addition, robots may be temporarily prohibited from sidewalks and crosswalks within business districts, specific construction areas, and special event areas at any time. d. Visibility. Permittees shall ensure adequate visibility of all autonomous robots during daytime and nighttime hours of use, including but not limited to, the use of flags and flashing lights in order to increase the visibility of the robot. During night time operations robots shall have reflectors at least in front and back, and lights that cover the direction of movement, including white lights in front and red lights in the back, that are is visible up to 300 feet away under normal weather and operating conditions. Robots must include the operator’s name and phone number in a location visible to the public when in operation. e. Human Monitor or Attendant. Permittees shall monitor autonomous robots at all times that they are operating in the public rights of way, either through an attendant who accompanies the robot or through real-time, remote monitoring. For first 30 days that Page 2 of 2 any model of robot is operated in the City of Palo Alto, Permittees shall provide a human attendant to travel with the robot. f. Reporting. Permittees shall report any significant collisions or other operational safety issues to the City within 24 hours of the incident. IV. Effective Dates This Interim Autonomous Robot Policy shall be effective from the date of its approval by the City Manager and shall terminate upon the earlier of December 31, 2018 or the adoption of an ordinance regulating autonomous robots by the Palo Alto City Council. Approved: ___________________________ _______________ City Manager James Keene Date University Avenue Embarcadero Road El Camino Real Alma Street Alma Street Middlefield Road U niversi A l m a S t E m ba r c a de r o R o a Oxford Avenue Harvard enue Wellesley Street Princeton StreetOberlin Street Cornell Street Cambridge Avenue College AvenueWilliams Street Yale Street Staunton Court Oxford AvenueEl Ca mino R eal Churchill Avenue P ark B o ule v ar d Park Avenue E scobita Avenue Churchill Avenue S e q u oia A v e n u e Maripos a Avenue Castilleja Avenu e Mira m o nte A v en ue M adrono Avenue P ortola A venue Manzanita Avenue Coleridge Avenue Leland Avenue Stanford Avenue Birch Street Ash Street Lowell Avenue Alma Street Tennyson Avenue Grant Avenue Sheridan Avenue Jacaranda Lane El Camino Real Sherman Avenue Ash Street Page Mill Road Mimosa Lane Pepper Avenue Olive Avenue AcaciaA Page Mill Road Ash Street College Avenue Cambridge Avenue New Mayfield Lane Birch Street California Avenue Park Boulevard Nogal Lane Rinconada Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Park Boulevard Seale Avenue Washington Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Waverley Stree Bryant Street High Street Emerson Street Alma S treet Hig t Waverley Oaks Emerson Street Nevada Avenue North California Avenue Santa Ramona S High Street North California Av Oregon Expresswa Homer Avenue Lane 8 West M e d i c al F o u n d a tio n W ay Lane 7 West Lane 7 East E mb a r c a de ro R o a d E n cin a A ve n u e El C a mino R eal U r b a n L a n e W ells A v en ue Forest Avenue High Street Emerson Street Channing Avenue Alma Street Alma Street El Camino Real Mitchell Lane enue Everett Avenue Lytton Avenue Lane 15 E High Street t Bryant Street Lan e 6 E Lane 11 W Lane 21 High Street Gilman Street Hamilton Avenue University Avenue Bryant Court Lane 30 Florence Street Kipling Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Ruthven Avenue Hawthorne Avenue Lane 33 PaloAltoAvenue Everett Avenue Poe Street Waverley Street Tasso Street Cowper Street alo Alto Avenue Webster Street Everett Court Lytton Avenue Byron Street Street Middlefield Road Churchill Avenue Lowell Avenue Seale AvenueTennyson Avenue Melville Avenue Cowper Street Tasso Street Webster Stre Byr Coleridge Avenue Waverley Street Bryant Street Emerson Street Kellogg Avenue Kingsley Avenue Lane A West Lane B West Lane B East Lane D West Lane 59 East Whitman Court Kellogg AvenueEmbarcadero R o a d Kingsley Avenue Lincoln AvenueAddison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Forest Avenue Downing Lane Homer Avenue Lane D East Lane 39 Lane 56 Hamilton Avenue Webster Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant StreetRamona Street Addison Avenue Scott Street Byron Street Seneca Street Lytton Avenue Guinda Street aloAltoAve Fulton StreetMiddlefield Road Forest Avenue Webster Street Kellogg Avenue Middlefield Road Byron Street Webster Street Cowper Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Boyce Avenue Forest AvenueHamilton Avenu Homer Avenue Guinda Street Middlefield Road Channing Avenue Un Channing Avenue Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Regent Pl Guinda Street Lincoln Avenue Fulton Street Melville Avenue Byron Street Kingsley Avenue Melville Avenue Forest AvenueForest Somerset Pl Pitman Avenue Fife Avenue Forest Avenue Linco Coleridge Avenue Lowell Avenue Fulton StreetCowper Street Tennyson Avenue Middlefield Road Guind Webster Street Kirby Pl Kent Place Tevis Pl Martin Avenue Center Drive Harriet Street Wi l s o n S t r e e t Cedar Street Harker Avenue Greenwood Avenue Hutchinson Avenue Channing Avenue Hopkins Avenue E mb a r cad e r o R oad Ashby Drive Dana Pitman Avenue Arcadia Place New Sharon Ct W Newell Road Parkinson Avenue Pine Street Kings La Ramona Street Addison AvenueChanning Avenue Waverley Street Tennyson Avenue Seale Avenue M Sedro Lane Peral Lane Paulsen Ln Community Lane Lane 15 E Sheridan Avenue Emerson Street Lane 20 WLane 20 E University Avenue CalTrain RO W CalTrain RO W Emerson Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant Street Ramona Street Stanford Avenue Lane 12 WLane 5 E Lasuen Street Escondido Road Olmst e d Road L a n e B L a n e C Everett Avenue Homer Avenue Community Lane Greenwood Avenue Harker Avenue Parkinson Avenue Byron Street Emerson Street z Mall Abrams Court A ngell C ourt Arguello Way Arguello Way Avery M all Ayrshire Farm Lane Barnes CourtBonair Sidin g Bo wdoin S C a m pus Drive Cam pus Drive Ca m pus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Dr i v es D riv e C hurchill M all Comstock Circle Aboretum Road Blackwelder Court Cowell Ln ay Dud l ey Lane Escondido Road Escondido Road Escondido Road Galvez Mall G alv e z S tr e e t Galvez Street Galvez Street Hoskins Court Hulme Court Jen k insCour t Knight Way M asters M all McFarland Court Memorial Way N elson M all Nelson Road Oberlin St Comstock Circle Escondido Mall Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted R o ad Olmsted Road Olms ted Road Palm Drive P a m pas Lane Quillen Ct Rosse Lane Running Farm Lane err a eet Serra Street S erra Street Serra Street Thoburn Court Wellesley St Wilbur Way Yale St Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Hawthorne Avenue Lytton Avenue Sa m M c D onald R o ad Sa m M cD onald M all Bowdoin Lane Arguello Way Birch Street California AveBusiness District Downtown Palo Alto EvergreenMayfield RPP Downtown RPP This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend City Jurisdictional Limits Cal Ave Business District Downtown Palo Alto Assessment Parcel 0'800' Palo Alto Business DistrictsCITYOF 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 Altortong, 2017-10-17 16:47:54 (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Personal\rtong.mdb) EXHIBIT A City of Palo Alto (ID # 8454) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 10/30/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Amendment to Contract with Dixon Resources to Conduct California Avenue Parking Management Study Title: Approval of Amendment Number 1 to Contract Number S18169410 With Dixon Resources Unlimited in the Amount of $69,862 for a Total Not-to- Exceed Amount of $100,762 to Conduct the California Avenue Parking Management Study and Approval of a Budget Amendment in the California Avenue Parking Permit Fund From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager or designee to approve Amendment One to contract S18169410 with Dixon Resources Unlimited in the amount of $69,862 for the California Parking Management Study, for a total contract amount not to exceed $100,762, and to extend the contract term to December 31, 2018; and, 2. Amend the Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Appropriation Ordinance for the California Avenue Parking Permit Fund by: a. Increasing the appropriation for contracts by $69,862; and, b. Decreasing the fund balance by $69,862. Background and Discussion As part of the integrated strategy to address Downtown traffic and parking concerns, staff conducted a competitive RFP process for the Downtown Parking Management Study and selected Dixon Resources. Dixon Resources completed a comprehensive study of parking conditions and assessed potential parking management strategies, including paid parking for the Downtown core. Following this study, the City Council directed staff to evaluate the opportunities for implementation of the study’s recommendations. Due to their detailed knowledge of the study, Dixon Resources was again retained under a separate $30,900 contract City of Palo Alto Page 2 (S18169410) to assist with developing implementation scenarios based on the study recommendations. This existing contract is included as Attachment A. Staff requests approval of Amendment One to extend this contract and add completion of a comprehensive parking management study for the California Avenue parking study area, similar to the parking study that the consultant did for Downtown Palo Alto. Staff believes an additional solicitation for the California Avenue Management Study would not produce any advantage for the City, as Dixon Resources was identified as the most qualified proponent as part of a formal solicitation for the Downtown study, Dixon has significant knowledge of and experience with Palo Alto parking issues, and the scope of work is very similar to the Downtown Parking Management Study. Staff has been satisfied with the performance of Dixon Resources. Timing is also a consideration, in order to begin data collection before the holiday season and coordinate with the ongoing public safety building development activities. Currently, parking in the California Avenue Business District is free for visitors for two hours on- street and in surface lots, and for three hours in the garages. Residential streets surrounding the California Avenue Business District are included in a Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program with unlimited permits for residents and a limited supply of permits for employees with businesses in the area. The California Avenue parking management study will gather updated information about parking conditions (supply and demand) in the business district and RPP district, and will evaluate parking management strategies aimed at ensuring the overall parking environment functions as a system to support short-term parking for customers, long term parking for employees and resident parking in neighborhoods. This study will also examine opportunities to augment the existing parking supply and take steps to reduce demand by evaluating programs to support residents, customers, courthouse/County business patrons, and commuters. The project scope includes the following components: 1. Identification of City goals related to parking management in the California Avenue California Avenue parking study area in Palo Alto 2. Inventory and analysis of existing on- and off-street parking demand, including mapping, user feedback, and usage trends for the streets in and around the Business District core. 3. Evaluation of existing parking policies and regulations, including time restrictions, pricing, and relevant zoning restrictions. 4. Conducting user surveys and stakeholder interviews to assess parking issues and usage. 5. Evaluation of how to best use the City’s existing parking supply and recommend comprehensive parking strategies in the California Avenue parking study area. 6. Develop strategies to manage parking during construction of the planned public safety building and associated parking facilities. City of Palo Alto Page 3 7. Development of draft findings and recommendations for review by California Avenue stakeholders, the Planning & Transportation Commission, and the City Council, followed by preparation of a final report. Policy Implications Regulating parking is consistent with the City’s three-pronged approach to reduce traffic and parking demand, better manage existing parking, and enhance the parking supply where needed. In addition, existing Comprehensive Plan policies also support the work: Policy T-3: Support the development and expansion of comprehensive, effective programs to reduce auto use at both local and regional levels Policy T-2: Consider economic, environmental and social cost issues in local transportation decisions Goal T-8: Attractive, Convenient Public and Private Parking Facilities Policy T-45: Provide sufficient parking in the University Avenue/Downtown and California Avenue Business Districts to address long-range needs 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 business districts. Resource Impact Staff requests Council approval of a budget amendment to the California Avenue Parking Permit Fund in the amount of $69,862 for the cost of the contract amendment. The fund balance will be decreased correspondingly. Timeline Once the contract is amended, Dixon’s work will take approximately four to six months to complete, depending on the number of stakeholder discussions and the recommendations delivered as part of the work. Environmental Planning studies are exempt from review under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) City of Palo Alto Page 4 Guidelines Section 15262. Attachments: Attachment A - S18169410 Dixon Contract (PDF) Attachment B - Cal Ave Amendment 1 (PDF) Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 1 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. S18169410 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND DIXON RESOURCES UNLIMITED FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this 10th day of August, 2017, (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and DIXON RESOURCES UNLIMITED, a California corporation, located at 3639 Midway Drive, Suite B345, San Diego, California, 92110 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to perform a comprehensive evaluation and plan for parking in Downtown Palo Alto, (“Project”) and desires to engage a consultant to provide 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 December 31, 2017 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 not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 2 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 Thirty Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($30,900.00). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out at Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. 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 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 DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 3 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. CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the work to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the city manager or designee. 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 Julie Dixon as the Principal to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and Patrick Smith as the project Senior Associate 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 Philip Kamhi, Planning & Community Environment Department, Transportation Division, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone: (650) 329- 2453. The project manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 4 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. 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. DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 5 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. 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 DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 6 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 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” DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 7 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 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. DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 8 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 CONSULTANT is not required to pay prevailing wages in the 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 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. DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 9 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: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 10 CONTRACT No. S18169410 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 APPROVED AS TO FORM: DIXON RESOURCES UNLIMITED 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: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F President Julianne Dixon Albert Yang Senior Deputy City Attorney Christopher Anastole Contract Administrator Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 11 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES The City of Palo Alto contracted with CONSULTANT to complete a comprehensive evaluation and plan for parking in Downtown Palo Alto, including the development of an effective pricing and management strategy to maximize the utility of existing parking and to better serve visitors, residents and employees. In order to provide for public discussion and support decision-making, CONSULTANT will assist CITY in developing and presenting an implementation plan containing the findings of the final report. Task: CONSULTANT will support staff in the providing details on the final report and in developing implementation plans including: preparation of materials and meeting support for up to four Finance Committee and/or Planning and Transportation Committee meetings/work sessions and one additional City Council meeting between now and December 2017. DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 12 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 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. Milestones Completion No. of Days/Weeks From NTP TASK 1. Four Finance Committee and/or Planning and TBD Transportation Committee meetings/work sessions and one additional City Council meeting between now and December 2017 DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 13 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement based on the hourly rate schedule attached as Exhibit C-1. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services, additional services, and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed the amount(s) stated in Section 4 of this Agreement. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Services and Additional Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this/these amount(s). Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth in this Agreement shall be at no cost to the CITY. 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. All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $2,000.00 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 expenses, 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: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 14 EXHIBIT “C-1” SCHEDULE OF RATES Deliverables Associate Sr. Associate Principal To Total Hours Cost Task 1: Additional Project Support Preparation of materials and meeting support for up to four (4) Finance Committee (FC) and/or Planning and Transportation Committee (PTC) meetings/work sessions PTC#1: General support hours and consultation including pre-meeting calls, presentation review, and QA/QC and presentation to PTC Committee 4 12 10 26 $4,090.00 PTC#2: General support hours and consultation including pre-meeting calls, presentation review, and QA/QC 4 10 10 24 $3,800.00 FC#1: Preparation of Financial Workbook cost revenue and expense scenarios; comparable cities permit review; cost inflation considerations; spare parts analysis 4 30 12 46 $7,070.00 FC#2: Preparation of Financial Workbook cost revenue and expense scenarios; comparable cities permit review; cost inflation considerations; spare parts analysis 4 12 12 28 $4,460.00 One (1) additional City Council meeting between now and December 2017. Preparation of presentation and recommendations; QA/QC; pre-meeting calls and support 4 12 10 26 $4,090.00 TOTAL $23,510.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 15 Additional Support Services Travel Item Cost/person Total Cost Taxi $30.00 $60.00 Airfare $300.00 $600.00 Hotel (per night) $206.00 $412.00 Car $100.00 $100.00 Gas $50.00 $50.00 Sub/trip $1,222.00 *GSA Per Diem (per person $64.00 $256.00 TOTAL $1,478.00 PTC#1 $1,478.00 PTC#2 $1,478.00 FC#1 $1,478.00 FC#2 $1,478.00 Council $1,478.00 TOTAL $7,390.00 Principal $195 Sr. Associate $145 Associate $125 Jr. Associate $ 85 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET (NTE) $30,900.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 16 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 YES 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. 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. B. CROSS LIABILITY DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 17 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 ISSUING COMPANY 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 ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303 DocuSign Envelope ID: FBAC642A-77C4-4CA0-8502-830E08D6328F 1 of 11 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. S18169410 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND DIXON RESOURCES UNLIMITED This Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. S18169410 (“Contract”) is entered into September 25, 2017, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and DIXON RESOURCES UNLIMITED, a California corporation, located at 3639 Midway Drive, Suite B345, San Diego, California, 92110 ("CONSULTANT"). R E C I T A L S A. The Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of performing a comprehensive evaluation and plan for parking in Downtown Palo Alto. B. CITY intends to extend the term and increase the compensation by $69,862.00 from $30,900.00 to $100,762.00 for additional services per 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 December 31, 2018 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 One Hundred Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Two Dollars ($100,762.00). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out at Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. 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”.” DocuSign Envelope ID: FA379FE4-08A6-429F-B0E3-736223849C1F 2 of 11 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 “B” entitled “SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE”. c. Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION”. d. 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 hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVED AS TO FORM: DIXON RESOURCES UNLIMITED Attachments: Exhibit “A” entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”. Exhibit “B” entitled “SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE”. Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION”. Exhibit “C1” entitled “RATE SCHEDULE”. DocuSign Envelope ID: FA379FE4-08A6-429F-B0E3-736223849C1F President Julianne Dixon 3 of 11 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES The City of Palo Alto contracted with CONSULTANT to complete a comprehensive evaluation and plan for parking in Downtown Palo Alto, including the development of an effective pricing and management strategy to maximize the utility of existing parking and to better serve visitors, residents and employees. In order to provide for public discussion and support decision-making, CONSULTANT will assist CITY in developing and presenting an implementation plan containing the findings of the final report. Task: CONSULTANT will support staff in the providing details on the final report and in developing implementation plans including: preparation of materials and meeting support for up to four Finance Committee and/or Planning and Transportation Committee meetings/work sessions and one additional City Council meeting between now and December 2017. AMENDMENT NO 1. CONSULTANT will complete a comprehensive evaluation and plan for parking in the California Avenue Business District, including the development of an effective pricing and management strategy to maximize the utility of existing parking and to better serve visitors, residents and employees. The project will include the following components: Completion of a California Avenue Parking Management Study, with all associated data collection and intercept surveys. • CONSULTANT will inventory existing parking conditions, including on- and off-street parking, using information and field studies provided by CITY • CONSULTANT will identify the user(s) and their specific needs relating to parking • CONSULTANT will conduct field surveys of parking occupancy and utilization for all identified on- and off-street parking within the parking study area. Surveys will be conducted on CONSULTANT’s first data collection effort and thereafter will be constructed and developed in an online response form for which the survey link will be provided to City staff for distribution. • CONSULTANT will evaluate and analyze current parking demand in designated study area. • CONSULTANT will evaluate current parking policies and regulations, including time restrictions and pricing. • CONSULTANT will make evaluate the feasibility of implementing paid parking in the DocuSign Envelope ID: FA379FE4-08A6-429F-B0E3-736223849C1F 4 of 11 California Avenue parking study area. • Consultant will conduct two (2) stakeholder and public outreach meetings. Deliverables: Summary of existing parking occupancy and parking habits based on data collected Gap analysis of current parking regulations and usage General themes and concerns garnered from the stakeholder and public engagement process Recommendation of paid parking strategy, including implementation, priority of recommendations if phased implementation is necessary, parking technology, pricing structures, and use of revenue. Figure 1 Proposed California Ave Study Area DocuSign Envelope ID: FA379FE4-08A6-429F-B0E3-736223849C1F 5 of 11 Revision July 20, 2016 EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number hours 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 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. Milestones Completion No. of Hours TASK 1. Four Finance Committee and/or Planning and TBD Transportation Committee meetings/work sessions and one additional City Council meeting between now and December 2017 AMENDMENT NO. 1 Task 1 306 Hrs. Data Collection Task 2 56 Hrs. Intercept Survey Task 3 54 Hrs. Gap Analysis Task 4 48 Hrs. Financial Strategies Task 5 38 Hrs. Stakeholder Meetings DocuSign Envelope ID: FA379FE4-08A6-429F-B0E3-736223849C1F 6 of 11 Revision July 20, 2016 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. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT Task 1 $ 23,510.00 (Various Meetings) AMENDMENT NO 1 Task 1 $33,990.00 (Data Collection) Task 2 $5,840.00 (Intercept Survey) Task 3 $6,630.00 (Gap Analysis) Task 4 $6,720.00 (Financial Strategies) Task 5 $5,710.00 (Stakeholder Meetings) Sub-total Basic Services $82,400.00 Reimbursable Expenses $18,362.00 Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $100,762.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: FA379FE4-08A6-429F-B0E3-736223849C1F 7 of 11 Revision July 20, 2016 Maximum Total Compensation $ 100,762.00 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: 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 $3,000.00 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 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: FA379FE4-08A6-429F-B0E3-736223849C1F 8 of 11 Revision July 20, 2016 EXHIBIT “C-1” SCHEDULE OF RATES Deliverables Associate Sr. Associate Principal To Total Hours NTE ExExceedCost Task 1: Additional Project Support Preparation of materials and meeting support for up to four (4) Finance Committee (FC) and/or Planning and Transportation Committee (PTC) meetings/work sessions PTC#1: General support hours and consultation including pre-meeting calls, presentation review, and QA/QC and presentation to PTC Committee 4 12 10 26 $4,090.00 PTC#2: General support hours and consultation including pre-meeting calls, presentation review, and QA/QC 4 10 10 24 $3,800.00 FC#1: Preparation of Financial Workbook cost revenue and expense scenarios; comparable cities permit review; cost inflation considerations; spare parts analysis 4 30 12 46 $7,070.00 FC#2: Preparation of Financial Workbook cost revenue and expense scenarios; comparable cities permit review; cost inflation considerations; spare parts analysis 4 12 12 28 $4,460.00 One (1) additional City Council meeting between now and December 2017. Preparation of presentation and recommendations; QA/QC; pre-meeting calls and support 4 12 10 26 $4,090.00 TOTAL $23,510.00 Additional Support Services Travel Item Cost/person Total Not To Exceed Cost Taxi $30.00 $60.00 Airfare $300.00 $600.00 Hotel (per night) $206.00 $412.00 Car $100.00 $100.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: FA379FE4-08A6-429F-B0E3-736223849C1F 9 of 11 Revision July 20, 2016 Gas $50.00 $50.00 Sub/trip $1,222.00 *GSA Per Diem (per person $64.00 $256.00 TOTAL $1,478.00 PTC#1 $1,478.00 PTC#2 $1,478.00 FC#1 $1,478.00 FC#2 $1,478.00 Council $1,478.00 TOTAL $7,390.00 Principal $195 Sr. Associate $145 Associate $125 Jr. Associate $ 85 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET (NTE) $30,900.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: FA379FE4-08A6-429F-B0E3-736223849C1F 10 of 11 Revision July 20, 2016 AMENDMENT NO. 1 Deliverables Proposed Hours and Budget Jr. Associate Associate Financial Analyst Sr. Associate Principal Total Hours Not To Exceed Cost California Ave Parking Management Study Completion of a California Ave Parking Management Study including all associated data collection and intercept surveys Data Collection Data Collection Visit Month 1: Thursday & Saturday vehicle occupancy counts within defined CA Ave study area 38 70 0 42 12 162 $ 17,930.00 Data Collection Visit Month 2: Thursday & Saturday vehicle occupancy counts within defined CA Ave study area 36 58 0 38 12 144 $ 16,060.00 Each data collection effort outlined above includes labor for preparation, data collection completion, and data cleaning and analysis. Intercept Survey Month 1: Friday intercept survey distribution & intercept survey analysis 12 8 0 6 2 28 $ 2,920.00 Month 2: Friday intercept survey distribution & intercept survey analysis 12 8 0 6 2 28 $ 2,920.00 Gap Analysis Gap analysis of current parking regulations and usage 15 15 0 12 12 54 $ 6,630.00 Financial Strategies Development of a pricing and management strategy to maximize the utility of existing parking, including specific recommendations on pricing and timeline for implementation 6 10 24 4 4 48 $ 6,720.00 Stakeholder Meetings Participate in two (2) key stakeholder meetings 0 8 0 18 12 38 $ 5,710.00 TOTAL $ 58,890.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: FA379FE4-08A6-429F-B0E3-736223849C1F 11 of 11 Revision July 20, 2016 CA AVE Parking Management Study Travel Item Cost/person Not to Exceed Cost Taxi $30.00 $90.00 Airfare $300.00 $900.00 Hotel (per night) $206.00 $2,472.00 Car $200.00 $200.00 Gas $125.00 $125.00 Sub/trip $3,787.00 *GSA Per Diem (per person) $ 64.00 $960.00 TOTAL $4,747.00 DATACOL1 $4,747.00 DATACOL2 $4,747.00 PRESENT1 $1,478.00 TOTAL $10,972.00 AMENDMENT NO. 1 Total Not To Exceed Cost $69,862.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: FA379FE4-08A6-429F-B0E3-736223849C1F Certificate Of Completion Envelope Id: FA379FE408A6429FB0E3736223849C1F Status: Sent Subject: Please DocuSign: S18169410 DIXON AMENDMENT NO 1.pdf Source Envelope: Document Pages: 11 Signatures: 0 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 9/5/2017 3:30:43 PM Holder: Christopher Anastole chris.anastole@cityofpaloalto.org Location: DocuSign Signer Events Signature Timestamp Julianne Dixon julie@dixonresourcesunlimited.com President Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 9/5/2017 3:36:38 PM Viewed: 9/5/2017 7:38:41 PM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign 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 Sherry Nikzat Sherry.Nikzat@CityofPaloAlto.org Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Elizabeth Egli elizabeth.egli@cityofpaloalto.org Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Yolanda Cervantes Yolanda.Cervantes@CityofPaloAlto.org Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Notary Events Signature Timestamp Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps Envelope Sent Hashed/Encrypted 9/5/2017 3:36:38 PM Payment Events Status Timestamps City of Palo Alto (ID # 8386) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 10/30/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of Amendments to the SEIU and UMPAPA Salary Schedules Title: Approval of Salary Schedule Amendments for Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 521 and the Utilities Management Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA) From: City Manager Lead Department: Human Resources Recommended Motion Staff recommends that the Council adopt the attached updates to the salary schedule for Service Employees International Union (“SEIU”) Local 521 and Utilities Management Professional Association of Palo Alto (“UMPAPA”). Recommendation Staff recommends that Council adopt the following motion: Adopt the attached updated salary schedule for the Service Employees International Union Local 521 (“SEIU”) and Utilities Management Professional Association of Palo Alto (“UMPAPA”) to reflect changes to the salaries for Assistant Gas Measurement and Control Technician, Gas Measurement and Control Technician, Senior Buyer Classifications, Utilities Locator, Electrical Equipment Technician and Engineering Manager, Water, Gas and Wastewater Discussion The City’s salaries are adopted and maintained in accordance with a number of laws, policies and regulations, including: City of Palo Alto Charter; City of Palo Alto Municipal Code; City of Palo Alto City of Palo Alto Merit Rules; Memoranda of Understanding as bargained between the City and unions/associations; and Management and Professional Compensation Plan The Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL) requires that the City adopt publicly available pay schedules that show “the pay rate for each identified position, which may be stated as a single City of Palo Alto Page 2 amount or as multiple amounts within a range.” The pay schedules are adopted and published with the fiscal year budget and/or when new Memoranda of Agreement are ratified. From time-to-time, the adopted pay schedules require updates to reflect settlements that arise from union grievances, from changes in minimum wage laws, internal or external alignment or for administrative reasons, such as correcting errors. The requested salary schedule adjustments are summarized in a chart below. The pre- arbitration grievance settlements are resolutions regarding dispute between the City and a bargaining unit due to change in work structure and business needs. The grievance resolution process under collective bargaining permits the parties to settle a dispute by entering into a pre-arbitration settlement. If the parties are unable to reach a mutual pre-arbitration agreement, the grievance escalates to an external arbitrator to settle the dispute in an arbitration hearing. The settlements below have reached a mutual pre-arbitration settlement including salary changes and an arbitration hearing will not be necessary. Adjustments for competitive market reasons are requested when the City is experiencing recruitment or retention issues for hard-to-fill positions. The salary adjustment is based on salary studies of similar positions in other agencies. The City has notified the Utilities Managers and Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA) regarding this request for the salary adjustment and will complete the meet and confer process, subject to Council approval and prior to posting proposed UMPAPA salary schedule. Salary Schedule Adjustments Unit Job Classification Reason Percent Change Current Hourly New Hourly Effective SEIU Assistant Gas Measurement & Control Technician Pre-Arbitration Grievance Settlement 4.5% $40.53 $42.36 07/08/2017 SEIU Gas Measurement & Control Technician Pre-Arbitration Grievance Settlement 4.5% $42.57 $44.49 07/08/2017 SEIU Senior Buyer Pre-Arbitration Grievance Settlement 3.9% $44.12 $45.84 10/7/2014 SEIU Utilities Locator Pre-Arbitration Grievance Settlement 5.0% $41.78 $43.87 05/15/2016 SEIU Electrical Equipment Technician Correction of Administrative Error 11.9% $40.28 $45.10 04/16/2016 City of Palo Alto Page 3 UMPAPA Engineering Manager, Water, Gas and Wastewater Competitive Market Adjustment 15.0% $75.59 (mid-pt) $86.93 (mid-pt) 11/11/2017 Resource Impact For the SEIU job classes, the recommended adjustments will result in additional salary costs of approximately $64,000, of which $30,000 is in the General Fund. Ongoing, these adjustments are anticipated to result in additional salary costs of $30,000 annually, of which approximately $7,000 is in the General Fund. For the UMPAPA position, the recommended adjustment will result in additional annual salary costs of approximately $23,600 at mid-point and on an ongoing basis. The costs for the UMPAPA position is the Enterprise Fund. It is anticipated that these increased cost and the related variable benefit costs such as pension contributions will be absorbed by the impacted departments in the current fiscal year and the revised salary schedules will be included in the development of the FY 2019 budget. Environmental Impact Adoption of the attached salary schedule is not project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and therefore no environmental review is required. Attachments: Attachment A - SEIU Salary Schedule Attachment B - UMPAPA Salary Schedule City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual 206 non‐exempt Account Assistant 1 $20.92 $21.56 $21.56 $22.21 2 $22.02 $22.69 $22.69 $23.38 3 $23.18 $23.88 $23.88 $24.61 4 $24.40 $25.14 $25.14 $25.90 5 $25.68 $4,451.20 $53,414.40 $26.46 $4,586.40 $55,036.80 $26.46 $4,586.40 $55,036.80$27.26 $4,725.07 $56,700.80 204 non‐exempt Acct Spec 1 $24.44 $25.18 $25.18 $25.94 2 $25.73 $26.51 $26.51 $27.31 3 $27.08 $27.90 $27.90 $28.75 4 $28.51 $29.37 $29.37 $30.26 5 $30.01 $5,201.73 $62,420.80 $30.92 $5,359.47 $64,313.60 $30.92 $5,359.47 $64,313.60$31.85 $5,520.67 $66,248.00 207 non‐exempt Acct Spec‐Lead 1 $26.15 $26.96 $26.96 $27.77 2 $27.53 $28.38 $28.38 $29.23 3 $28.98 $29.87 $29.87 $30.77 4 $30.51 $31.44 $31.44 $32.39 5 $32.12 $5,567.47 $66,809.60 $33.09 $5,735.60 $68,827.20 $33.09 $5,735.60 $68,827.20$34.09 $5,908.93 $70,907.20 294 non‐exempt Administrative Associate I1$24.05 $24.81 $24.84 $25.60 2 $25.32 $26.12 $26.15 $26.95 3 $26.65 $27.49 $27.53 $28.37 4 $28.05 $28.94 $28.98 $29.86 5 $29.53 $5,118.53 $61,422.40 $30.46 $5,279.73 $63,356.80 $30.51 $5,288.40 $63,460.80$31.43 $5,447.87 $65,374.40 295 non‐exempt Administrative Associate II 1 $26.14 $26.97 $27.00 $27.82 2 $27.52 $28.39 $28.42 $29.28 3 $28.97 $29.88 $29.92 $30.82 4 $30.49 $31.45 $31.49 $32.44 5 $32.09 $5,562.27 $66,747.20 $33.10 $5,737.33 $68,848.00 $33.15 $5,746.00 $68,952.00$34.15 $5,919.33 $71,032.00 296 non‐exempt Administrative Associate III 1 $28.03 $28.90 $28.94 $29.81 2 $29.50 $30.42 $30.46 $31.38 3 $31.05 $32.02 $32.06 $33.03 4 $32.68 $33.71 $33.75 $34.77 5 $34.40 $5,962.67 $71,552.00 $35.48 $6,149.87 $73,798.40 $35.53 $6,158.53 $73,902.40$36.60 $6,344.00 $76,128.00 277 non‐exempt Animal Attendant 1 $23.02 $23.78 $23.86 $24.58 2 $24.23 $25.03 $25.12 $25.87 3 $25.51 $26.35 $26.44 $27.23 4 $26.85 $27.74 $27.83 $28.66 5 $28.26 $4,898.40 $58,780.80 $29.20 $5,061.33 $60,736.00 $29.29 $5,076.93 $60,923.20$30.17 $5,229.47 $62,753.60 276 non‐exempt Animal Control Off 1 $24.66 $25.48 $25.56 $26.32 2 $25.96 $26.82 $26.90 $27.71 3 $27.33 $28.23 $28.32 $29.17 4 $28.77 $29.72 $29.81 $30.71 5 $30.28 $5,248.53 $62,982.40 $31.28 $5,421.87 $65,062.40 $31.38 $5,439.20 $65,270.40$32.33 $5,603.87 $67,246.40 312 non‐exempt Animal Control Off ‐ L1$26.39 $27.27 $27.35 $28.18 2 $27.78 $28.70 $28.79 $29.66 3 $29.24 $30.21 $30.31 $31.22 4 $30.78 $31.80 $31.90 $32.86 5 $32.40 $5,616.00 $67,392.00 $33.47 $5,801.47 $69,617.60 $33.58 $5,820.53 $69,846.40$34.59 $5,995.60 $71,947.20 263 non‐exempt Animal Services Spec 1 $24.32 $25.13 $25.20 $25.97 2 $25.60 $26.45 $26.53 $27.34 3 $26.95 $27.84 $27.93 $28.78 4 $28.37 $29.31 $29.40 $30.29 5 $29.86 $5,175.73 $62,108.80 $30.85 $5,347.33 $64,168.00 $30.95 $5,364.67 $64,376.00$31.88 $5,525.87 $66,310.40 275 non‐exempt Animal Services Spec II 1 $26.82 $27.71 $27.80 $28.63 2 $28.23 $29.17 $29.26 $30.14 3 $29.72 $30.70 $30.80 $31.73 4 $31.28 $32.32 $32.42 $33.40 5 $32.93 $5,707.87 $68,494.40 $34.02 $5,896.80 $70,761.60 $34.13 $5,915.87 $70,990.40$35.16 $6,094.40 $73,132.80 244 non‐exempt Assoc Buyer 1 $31.32 $32.28 $32.30 $33.27 2 $32.97 $33.98 $34.00 $35.02 3 $34.71 $35.77 $35.79 $36.86 4 $36.54 $37.65 $37.67 $38.80 5 $38.46 $6,666.40 $79,996.80 $39.63 $6,869.20 $82,430.40 $39.65 $6,872.67 $82,472.00$40.84 $7,078.93 $84,947.20 Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 1 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 333 non‐exempt Assoc Engineer 1 $38.75 $40.10 $40.29 $41.50 2 $40.79 $42.21 $42.41 $43.68 3 $42.94 $44.43 $44.64 $45.98 4 $45.20 $46.77 $46.99 $48.40 5 $47.58 $8,247.20 $98,966.40 $49.23 $8,533.20 $102,398.40 $49.46 $8,573.07 $102,876.80$50.95 $8,831.33 $105,976.00 353 non‐exempt Assoc Planner 1 $35.94 $37.28 $37.55 $38.68 2 $37.83 $39.24 $39.53 $40.72 3 $39.82 $41.31 $41.61 $42.86 4 $41.92 $43.48 $43.80 $45.12 5 $44.13 $7,649.20 $91,790.40 $45.77 $7,933.47 $95,201.60 $46.10 $7,990.67 $95,888.00$47.49 $8,231.60 $98,779.20 247 non‐exempt Assoc Power Engr 1 $41.25 $42.69 $42.89 $44.18 2 $43.42 $44.94 $45.15 $46.50 3 $45.71 $47.30 $47.53 $48.95 4 $48.12 $49.79 $50.03 $51.53 5 $50.65 $8,779.33 $105,352.00 $52.41 $9,084.40 $109,012.80 $52.66 $9,127.73 $109,532.80$54.24 $9,401.60 $112,819.20 269 non‐exempt Assoc Res Planner 1 $39.78 $40.97 $40.97 $42.20 2 $41.87 $43.13 $43.13 $44.42 3 $44.07 $45.40 $45.40 $46.76 4 $46.39 $47.79 $47.79 $49.22 5 $48.83 $8,463.87 $101,566.40 $50.30 $8,718.67 $104,624.00 $50.30 $8,718.67 $104,624.00$51.81 $8,980.40 $107,764.80 330 non‐exempt Asst Engineer 1 $35.10 $36.32 $36.49 $37.59 2 $36.95 $38.23 $38.41 $39.57 3 $38.89 $40.24 $40.43 $41.65 4 $40.94 $42.36 $42.56 $43.84 5 $43.09 $7,468.93 $89,627.20 $44.59 $7,728.93 $92,747.20 $44.80 $7,765.33 $93,184.00$46.15 $7,999.33 $95,992.00 256 non‐exempt Asst Power Engr 1 $37.25 $38.54 $38.72 $39.89 2 $39.21 $40.57 $40.76 $41.99 3 $41.27 $42.70 $42.91 $44.20 4 $43.44 $44.95 $45.17 $46.53 5 $45.73 $7,926.53 $95,118.40 $47.32 $8,202.13 $98,425.60 $47.55 $8,242.00 $98,904.00$48.98 $8,489.87 $101,878.40 268 non‐exempt Asst Res Planner 1 $35.91 $36.98 $36.98 $38.10 2 $37.80 $38.93 $38.93 $40.11 3 $39.79 $40.98 $40.98 $42.22 4 $41.88 $43.14 $43.14 $44.44 5 $44.08 $7,640.53 $91,686.40 $45.41 $7,871.07 $94,452.80 $45.41 $7,871.07 $94,452.80$46.78 $8,108.53 $97,302.40 299 non‐exempt Bldg Inspector 1 $35.69 $37.33 $37.91 $39.05 2 $37.57 $39.29 $39.91 $41.11 3 $39.55 $41.36 $42.01 $43.27 4 $41.63 $43.54 $44.22 $45.55 5 $43.82 $7,595.47 $91,145.60 $45.83 $7,943.87 $95,326.40 $46.55 $8,068.67 $96,824.00$47.95 $8,311.33 $99,736.00 300 non‐exempt Bldg Inspector Spec 1 $38.10 $39.84 $40.48 $41.70 2 $40.11 $41.94 $42.61 $43.89 3 $42.22 $44.15 $44.85 $46.20 4 $44.44 $46.47 $47.21 $48.63 5 $46.78 $8,108.53 $97,302.40 $48.92 $8,479.47 $101,753.60 $49.69 $8,612.93 $103,355.20$51.19 $8,872.93 $106,475.20 370 non‐exempt Bldg Serviceperson 1 $21.10 $21.98 $22.24 $22.90 2 $22.21 $23.14 $23.41 $24.10 3 $23.38 $24.36 $24.64 $25.37 4 $24.61 $25.64 $25.94 $26.71 5 $25.91 $4,491.07 $53,892.80 $26.99 $4,678.27 $56,139.20 $27.30 $4,732.00 $56,784.00$28.12 $4,874.13 $58,489.60 371 non‐exempt Bldg Serviceperson‐L1$22.59 $23.54 $23.80 $24.52 2 $23.78 $24.78 $25.05 $25.81 3 $25.03 $26.08 $26.37 $27.17 4 $26.35 $27.45 $27.76 $28.60 5 $27.74 $4,808.27 $57,699.20 $28.89 $5,007.60 $60,091.20 $29.22 $5,064.80 $60,777.60$30.10 $5,217.33 $62,608.00 355 non‐exempt Bldg/Plg Technician 1 $29.16 $30.24 $30.45 $31.37 2 $30.69 $31.83 $32.05 $33.02 3 $32.31 $33.51 $33.74 $34.76 4 $34.01 $35.27 $35.52 $36.59 5 $35.80 $6,205.33 $74,464.00 $37.13 $6,435.87 $77,230.40 $37.39 $6,480.93 $77,771.20$38.52 $6,676.80 $80,121.60 2 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 340 non‐exempt Business Analyst 1 $48.82 $51.62 $53.04 $54.63 2 $51.39 $54.34 $55.83 $57.51 3 $54.09 $57.20 $58.77 $60.54 4 $56.94 $60.21 $61.86 $63.73 5 $59.94 $10,389.60 $124,675.20 $63.38 $10,985.87 $131,830.40 $65.12 $11,287.47 $135,449.60$67.08 $11,627.20 $139,526.40 3400 non‐exempt Business Analyst ‐ S1$48.82 $51.62 $53.04 $54.63 2 $51.39 $54.34 $55.83 $57.51 3 $54.09 $57.20 $58.77 $60.54 4 $56.94 $60.21 $61.86 $63.73 5 $59.94 $10,389.60 $124,675.20 $63.38 $10,985.87 $131,830.40 $65.12 $11,287.47 $135,449.60$67.08 $11,627.20 $139,526.40 212 non‐exempt Buyer 1 $34.49 $35.54 $35.56 $36.61 2 $36.30 $37.41 $37.43 $38.54 3 $38.21 $39.38 $39.40 $40.57 4 $40.22 $41.45 $41.47 $42.71 5 $42.34 $7,338.93 $88,067.20 $43.63 $7,562.53 $90,750.40 $43.65 $7,566.00 $90,792.00$44.96 $7,793.07 $93,516.80 464 non‐exempt Cathodic Protection Tech Assistant 1 $33.56 $35.49 $36.47 $37.57 2 $35.33 $37.36 $38.39 $39.55 3 $37.19 $39.33 $40.41 $41.63 4 $39.15 $41.40 $42.54 $43.82 5 $41.21 $7,143.07 $85,716.80 $43.58 $7,553.87 $90,646.40 $44.78 $7,761.87 $93,142.40$46.13 $7,995.87 $95,950.40 536 non‐exempt Cathodic Tech 1 $41.21 $43.59 $44.77 $46.12 2 $43.38 $45.88 $47.13 $48.55 3 $45.66 $48.29 $49.61 $51.10 4 $48.06 $50.83 $52.22 $53.79 5 $50.59 $8,768.93 $105,227.20 $53.50 $9,273.33 $111,280.00 $54.97 $9,528.13 $114,337.60$56.62 $9,814.13 $117,769.60 208 non‐exempt CDBG Coordinator 1 $38.43 $39.85 $40.15 $41.34 2 $40.45 $41.95 $42.26 $43.52 3 $42.58 $44.16 $44.48 $45.81 4 $44.82 $46.48 $46.82 $48.22 5 $47.18 $8,177.87 $98,134.40 $48.93 $8,481.20 $101,774.40 $49.28 $8,541.87 $102,502.40$50.76 $8,798.40 $105,580.80 408 non‐exempt Cement Finisher 1 $30.11 $31.85 $32.75 $33.73 2 $31.69 $33.53 $34.47 $35.50 3 $33.36 $35.29 $36.28 $37.37 4 $35.12 $37.15 $38.19 $39.34 5 $36.97 $6,408.13 $76,897.60 $39.11 $6,779.07 $81,348.80 $40.20 $6,968.00 $83,616.00$41.41 $7,177.73 $86,132.80 409 non‐exempt Cement Finisher Lead 1 $32.21 $34.08 $35.03 $36.08 2 $33.91 $35.87 $36.87 $37.98 3 $35.69 $37.76 $38.81 $39.98 4 $37.57 $39.75 $40.85 $42.08 5 $39.55 $6,855.33 $82,264.00 $41.84 $7,252.27 $87,027.20 $43.00 $7,453.33 $89,440.00$44.29 $7,676.93 $92,123.20 502 non‐exempt Chemist 1 $35.11 $36.20 $36.21 $37.30 2 $36.96 $38.10 $38.12 $39.26 3 $38.90 $40.10 $40.13 $41.33 4 $40.95 $42.21 $42.24 $43.51 5 $43.10 $7,470.67 $89,648.00 $44.43 $7,701.20 $92,414.40 $44.46 $7,706.40 $92,476.80$45.80 $7,938.67 $95,264.00 239 non‐exempt Chf Inspec WGW 1 $38.18 $39.94 $40.56 $41.79 2 $40.19 $42.04 $42.69 $43.99 3 $42.31 $44.25 $44.94 $46.30 4 $44.54 $46.58 $47.31 $48.74 5 $46.88 $8,125.87 $97,510.40 $49.03 $8,498.53 $101,982.40 $49.80 $8,632.00 $103,584.00$51.30 $8,892.00 $106,704.00 301 non‐exempt Code Enforcement Off 1 $34.29 $35.85 $36.41 $37.52 2 $36.09 $37.74 $38.33 $39.49 3 $37.99 $39.73 $40.35 $41.57 4 $39.99 $41.82 $42.47 $43.76 5 $42.09 $7,295.60 $87,547.20 $44.02 $7,630.13 $91,561.60 $44.71 $7,749.73 $92,996.80$46.06 $7,983.73 $95,804.80 560 non‐exempt Code Enforcement Off ‐ L1$36.68 $38.36 $38.96 $40.14 2 $38.61 $40.38 $41.01 $42.25 3 $40.64 $42.50 $43.17 $44.47 4 $42.78 $44.74 $45.44 $46.81 5 $45.03 $7,805.20 $93,662.40 $47.09 $8,162.27 $97,947.20 $47.83 $8,290.53 $99,486.40$49.27 $8,540.13 $102,481.60 3 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 306 non‐exempt Comm Tech 1 $35.92 $36.99 $36.99 $38.11 2 $37.81 $38.94 $38.94 $40.12 3 $39.80 $40.99 $40.99 $42.23 4 $41.89 $43.15 $43.15 $44.45 5 $44.09 $7,642.27 $91,707.20 $45.42 $7,872.80 $94,473.60 $45.42 $7,872.80 $94,473.60$46.79 $8,110.27 $97,323.20 702 non‐exempt Community Serv Offcr 1 $26.09 $27.33 $27.82 $28.65 2 $27.46 $28.77 $29.28 $30.16 3 $28.90 $30.28 $30.82 $31.75 4 $30.42 $31.87 $32.44 $33.42 5 $32.02 $5,550.13 $66,601.60 $33.55 $5,815.33 $69,784.00 $34.15 $5,919.33 $71,032.00$35.18 $6,097.87 $73,174.40 320 non‐exempt Community Service Officer ‐ Lead 1 $27.89 $29.24 $29.75 $30.65 2 $29.36 $30.78 $31.32 $32.26 3 $30.91 $32.40 $32.97 $33.96 4 $32.54 $34.10 $34.70 $35.75 5 $34.25 $5,936.67 $71,240.00 $35.89 $6,220.93 $74,651.20 $36.53 $6,331.87 $75,982.40$37.63 $6,522.53 $78,270.40 341 non‐exempt Coor Trans Sys Mgmt 1 $36.60 $38.04 $38.38 $39.54 2 $38.53 $40.04 $40.40 $41.62 3 $40.56 $42.15 $42.53 $43.81 4 $42.69 $44.37 $44.77 $46.12 5 $44.94 $7,789.60 $93,475.20 $46.70 $8,094.67 $97,136.00 $47.13 $8,169.20 $98,030.40$48.55 $8,415.33 $100,984.00 3410 non‐exempt Coor Trans Sys Mgmt ‐ S 1 $36.60 $38.04 $38.38 $39.54 2 $38.53 $40.04 $40.40 $41.62 3 $40.56 $42.15 $42.53 $43.81 4 $42.69 $44.37 $44.77 $46.12 5 $44.94 $7,789.60 $93,475.20 $46.70 $8,094.67 $97,136.00 $47.13 $8,169.20 $98,030.40$48.55 $8,415.33 $100,984.00 255 non‐exempt Coord Library Prog 1 $33.24 $34.43 $34.62 $35.66 2 $34.99 $36.24 $36.44 $37.54 3 $36.83 $38.15 $38.36 $39.52 4 $38.77 $40.16 $40.38 $41.60 5 $40.81 $7,073.73 $84,884.80 $42.27 $7,326.80 $87,921.60 $42.51 $7,368.40 $88,420.80$43.79 $7,590.27 $91,083.20 342 non‐exempt Coord Pub Wks Proj 1 $34.78 $36.14 $36.46 $37.56 2 $36.61 $38.04 $38.38 $39.54 3 $38.54 $40.04 $40.40 $41.62 4 $40.57 $42.15 $42.53 $43.81 5 $42.70 $7,401.33 $88,816.00 $44.37 $7,690.80 $92,289.60 $44.77 $7,760.13 $93,121.60$46.12 $7,994.13 $95,929.60 317 non‐exempt Coord Rec Prog 1 $29.88 $31.04 $31.32 $32.27 2 $31.45 $32.67 $32.97 $33.97 3 $33.10 $34.39 $34.71 $35.76 4 $34.84 $36.20 $36.54 $37.64 5 $36.67 $6,356.13 $76,273.60 $38.11 $6,605.73 $79,268.80 $38.46 $6,666.40 $79,996.80$39.62 $6,867.47 $82,409.60 344 non‐exempt Coord Utility Proj 1 $37.55 $39.02 $39.38 $40.57 2 $39.53 $41.07 $41.45 $42.70 3 $41.61 $43.23 $43.63 $44.95 4 $43.80 $45.51 $45.93 $47.32 5 $46.11 $7,992.40 $95,908.80 $47.91 $8,304.40 $99,652.80 $48.35 $8,380.67 $100,568.00$49.81 $8,633.73 $103,604.80 3440 non‐exempt Coord Utility Proj ‐ S 1 $37.55 $39.02 $39.38 $40.57 2 $39.53 $41.07 $41.45 $42.70 3 $41.61 $43.23 $43.63 $44.95 4 $43.80 $45.51 $45.93 $47.32 5 $46.11 $7,992.40 $95,908.80 $47.91 $8,304.40 $99,652.80 $48.35 $8,380.67 $100,568.00$49.81 $8,633.73 $103,604.80 242 non‐exempt Coord Zero Waste 1 $33.39 $34.70 $35.02 $36.07 2 $35.15 $36.53 $36.86 $37.97 3 $37.00 $38.45 $38.80 $39.97 4 $38.95 $40.47 $40.84 $42.07 5 $41.00 $7,106.67 $85,280.00 $42.60 $7,384.00 $88,608.00 $42.99 $7,451.60 $89,419.20$44.28 $7,675.20 $92,102.40 205 non‐exempt Court Liaison Officer 1 $33.95 $35.58 $36.20 $37.30 2 $35.74 $37.45 $38.11 $39.26 3 $37.62 $39.42 $40.12 $41.33 4 $39.60 $41.49 $42.23 $43.50 5 $41.68 $7,224.53 $86,694.40 $43.67 $7,569.47 $90,833.60 $44.45 $7,704.67 $92,456.00$45.79 $7,936.93 $95,243.20 4 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 214 non‐exempt Crime Analyst 1 $33.95 $35.58 $36.20 $37.30 2 $35.74 $37.45 $38.11 $39.26 3 $37.62 $39.42 $40.12 $41.33 4 $39.60 $41.49 $42.23 $43.50 5 $41.68 $7,224.53 $86,694.40 $43.67 $7,569.47 $90,833.60 $44.45 $7,704.67 $92,456.00$45.79 $7,936.93 $95,243.20 415 non‐exempt Cust Srv Specialist‐L1$30.55 $31.47 $31.47 $32.40 2 $32.16 $33.13 $33.13 $34.11 3 $33.85 $34.87 $34.87 $35.91 4 $35.63 $36.70 $36.70 $37.80 5 $37.50 $6,500.00 $78,000.00 $38.63 $6,695.87 $80,350.40 $38.63 $6,695.87 $80,350.40$39.79 $6,896.93 $82,763.20 218 non‐exempt Cust Svc Represent 1 $25.98 $26.76 $26.76 $27.56 2 $27.35 $28.17 $28.17 $29.01 3 $28.79 $29.65 $29.65 $30.54 4 $30.30 $31.21 $31.21 $32.15 5 $31.89 $5,527.60 $66,331.20 $32.85 $5,694.00 $68,328.00 $32.85 $5,694.00 $68,328.00$33.84 $5,865.60 $70,387.20 217 non‐exempt Cust Svc Spec 1 $28.56 $29.41 $29.41 $30.31 2 $30.06 $30.96 $30.96 $31.90 3 $31.64 $32.59 $32.59 $33.58 4 $33.31 $34.31 $34.31 $35.35 5 $35.06 $6,077.07 $72,924.80 $36.12 $6,260.80 $75,129.60 $36.12 $6,260.80 $75,129.60$37.21 $6,449.73 $77,396.80 260 non‐exempt Desktop Technician 1 $31.13 $32.06 $32.06 $33.03 2 $32.77 $33.75 $33.75 $34.77 3 $34.49 $35.53 $35.53 $36.60 4 $36.31 $37.40 $37.40 $38.53 5 $38.22 $6,624.80 $79,497.60 $39.37 $6,824.13 $81,889.60 $39.37 $6,824.13 $81,889.60$40.56 $7,030.40 $84,364.80 514 non‐exempt Development Project Coordinator I1$27.42 $28.67 $29.13 $30.01 2 $28.86 $30.18 $30.66 $31.59 3 $30.38 $31.77 $32.27 $33.25 4 $31.98 $33.44 $33.97 $35.00 5 $33.66 $5,834.40 $70,012.80 $35.20 $6,101.33 $73,216.00 $35.76 $6,198.40 $74,380.80$36.84 $6,385.60 $76,627.20 515 non‐exempt Development Project Coordinator II 1 $31.15 $32.59 $33.10 $34.09 2 $32.79 $34.30 $34.84 $35.88 3 $34.52 $36.10 $36.67 $37.77 4 $36.34 $38.00 $38.60 $39.76 5 $38.25 $6,630.00 $79,560.00 $40.00 $6,933.33 $83,200.00 $40.63 $7,042.53 $84,510.40$41.85 $7,254.00 $87,048.00 516 non‐exempt Development Project Coordinator III 1 $34.36 $35.93 $36.50 $37.60 2 $36.17 $37.82 $38.42 $39.58 3 $38.07 $39.81 $40.44 $41.66 4 $40.07 $41.90 $42.57 $43.85 5 $42.18 $7,311.20 $87,734.40 $44.11 $7,645.73 $91,748.80 $44.81 $7,767.07 $93,204.80$46.16 $8,001.07 $96,012.80 533 non‐exempt Elec Asst I1$27.09 $28.22 $28.53 $29.39 2 $28.52 $29.70 $30.03 $30.94 3 $30.02 $31.26 $31.61 $32.57 4 $31.60 $32.90 $33.27 $34.28 5 $33.26 $5,765.07 $69,180.80 $34.63 $6,002.53 $72,030.40 $35.02 $6,070.13 $72,841.60$36.08 $6,253.87 $75,046.40 267 non‐exempt Elec Undgd Inspec 1 $33.84 $35.39 $35.94 $37.03 2 $35.62 $37.25 $37.83 $38.98 3 $37.49 $39.21 $39.82 $41.03 4 $39.46 $41.27 $41.92 $43.19 5 $41.54 $7,200.27 $86,403.20 $43.44 $7,529.60 $90,355.20 $44.13 $7,649.20 $91,790.40$45.46 $7,879.73 $94,556.80 345 non‐exempt Electric Project Engineer 1 $49.43 $51.15 $51.39 $52.93 2 $52.03 $53.84 $54.09 $55.72 3 $54.77 $56.67 $56.94 $58.65 4 $57.65 $59.65 $59.94 $61.74 5 $60.68 $10,517.87 $126,214.40 $62.79 $10,883.60 $130,603.20 $63.09 $10,935.60 $131,227.20$64.99 $11,264.93 $135,179.20 3450 non‐exempt Electric Project Engineer ‐ S 1 $49.43 $51.15 $51.39 $52.93 2 $52.03 $53.84 $54.09 $55.72 3 $54.77 $56.67 $56.94 $58.65 4 $57.65 $59.65 $59.94 $61.74 5 $60.68 $10,517.87 $126,214.40 $62.79 $10,883.60 $130,603.20 $63.09 $10,935.60 $131,227.20$64.99 $11,264.93 $135,179.20 5 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 292 non‐exempt Electric Underground Inspector ‐ Lead 1 $36.20 $37.84 $38.44 $39.60 2 $38.10 $39.83 $40.46 $41.68 3 $40.10 $41.93 $42.59 $43.87 4 $42.21 $44.14 $44.83 $46.18 5 $44.43 $7,701.20 $92,414.40 $46.46 $8,053.07 $96,636.80 $47.19 $8,179.60 $98,155.20$48.61 $8,425.73 $101,108.80 527 non‐exempt Electrical Equipment Tech 1 $34.61 $36.19 $36.74 $37.84 2 $36.43 $38.09 $38.67 $39.83 3 $38.35 $40.09 $40.71 $41.93 4 $40.37 $42.20 $42.85 $44.14 5 $42.49 $7,364.93 $88,379.20 $44.42 $7,699.47 $92,393.60 $45.10 $7,817.33 $93,808.00$46.46 $8,053.07 $96,636.80 530 non‐exempt Electrician 1 $36.23 $37.72 $38.14 $39.28 2 $38.14 $39.70 $40.15 $41.35 3 $40.15 $41.79 $42.26 $43.53 4 $42.26 $43.99 $44.48 $45.82 5 $44.48 $7,709.87 $92,518.40 $46.31 $8,027.07 $96,324.80 $46.82 $8,115.47 $97,385.60$48.23 $8,359.87 $100,318.40 529 non‐exempt Electrician‐Appren 1 $34.30 $35.70 $36.10 $37.18 2 $36.10 $37.58 $38.00 $39.14 3 $38.00 $39.56 $40.00 $41.20 4 $40.00 $41.64 $42.10 $43.37 5 $42.10 $7,297.33 $87,568.00 $43.83 $7,597.20 $91,166.40 $44.32 $7,682.13 $92,185.60$45.65 $7,912.67 $94,952.00 535 non‐exempt Electrician‐Lead 1 $38.79 $40.38 $40.83 $42.07 2 $40.83 $42.51 $42.98 $44.28 3 $42.98 $44.75 $45.24 $46.61 4 $45.24 $47.10 $47.62 $49.06 5 $47.62 $8,254.13 $99,049.60 $49.58 $8,593.87 $103,126.40 $50.13 $8,689.20 $104,270.40$51.64 $8,950.93 $107,411.20 399 non‐exempt Emergency Med Svs Data Specialist 1 $28.03 $28.90 $28.94 $29.81 2 $29.50 $30.42 $30.46 $31.38 3 $31.05 $32.02 $32.06 $33.03 4 $32.68 $33.71 $33.75 $34.77 5 $34.40 $5,962.67 $71,552.00 $35.48 $6,149.87 $73,798.40 $35.53 $6,158.53 $73,902.40$36.60 $6,344.00 $76,128.00 311 non‐exempt Eng Tech I1$26.50 $27.69 $28.09 $28.94 2 $27.89 $29.15 $29.57 $30.46 3 $29.36 $30.68 $31.13 $32.06 4 $30.90 $32.29 $32.77 $33.75 5 $32.53 $5,638.53 $67,662.40 $33.99 $5,891.60 $70,699.20 $34.49 $5,978.27 $71,739.20$35.53 $6,158.53 $73,902.40 332 non‐exempt Engineer 1 $43.64 $45.17 $45.37 $46.74 2 $45.94 $47.55 $47.76 $49.20 3 $48.36 $50.05 $50.27 $51.79 4 $50.91 $52.68 $52.92 $54.52 5 $53.59 $9,288.93 $111,467.20 $55.45 $9,611.33 $115,336.00 $55.71 $9,656.40 $115,876.80$57.39 $9,947.60 $119,371.20 323 non‐exempt Engr Tech II 1 $28.67 $29.95 $30.40 $31.31 2 $30.18 $31.53 $32.00 $32.96 3 $31.77 $33.19 $33.68 $34.69 4 $33.44 $34.94 $35.45 $36.52 5 $35.20 $6,101.33 $73,216.00 $36.78 $6,375.20 $76,502.40 $37.32 $6,468.80 $77,625.60$38.44 $6,662.93 $79,955.20 319 non‐exempt Engr Tech III 1 $32.02 $33.45 $33.94 $34.96 2 $33.70 $35.21 $35.73 $36.80 3 $35.47 $37.06 $37.61 $38.74 4 $37.34 $39.01 $39.59 $40.78 5 $39.30 $6,812.00 $81,744.00 $41.06 $7,117.07 $85,404.80 $41.67 $7,222.80 $86,673.60$42.93 $7,441.20 $89,294.40 257 non‐exempt Environmental Spec 1 $37.67 $39.35 $39.92 $41.13 2 $39.65 $41.42 $42.02 $43.29 3 $41.74 $43.60 $44.23 $45.57 4 $43.94 $45.89 $46.56 $47.97 5 $46.25 $8,016.67 $96,200.00 $48.31 $8,373.73 $100,484.80 $49.01 $8,495.07 $101,940.80$50.49 $8,751.60 $105,019.20 211 non‐exempt Equip Maint Serv Per 1 $22.62 $23.56 $23.83 $24.54 2 $23.81 $24.80 $25.08 $25.83 3 $25.06 $26.10 $26.40 $27.19 4 $26.38 $27.47 $27.79 $28.62 5 $27.77 $4,813.47 $57,761.60 $28.92 $5,012.80 $60,153.60 $29.25 $5,070.00 $60,840.00$30.13 $5,222.53 $62,670.40 6 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 396 non‐exempt Equip Operator 1 $27.81 $29.37 $30.13 $31.04 2 $29.27 $30.92 $31.72 $32.67 3 $30.81 $32.55 $33.39 $34.39 4 $32.43 $34.26 $35.15 $36.20 5 $34.14 $5,917.60 $71,011.20 $36.06 $6,250.40 $75,004.80 $37.00 $6,413.33 $76,960.00$38.11 $6,605.73 $79,268.80 397 non‐exempt Equip Operator ‐ Lead 1 $29.75 $31.43 $32.24 $33.21 2 $31.32 $33.08 $33.94 $34.96 3 $32.97 $34.82 $35.73 $36.80 4 $34.70 $36.65 $37.61 $38.74 5 $36.53 $6,331.87 $75,982.40 $38.58 $6,687.20 $80,246.40 $39.59 $6,862.27 $82,347.20$40.78 $7,068.53 $84,822.40 250 non‐exempt Equip Parts Tech 1 $24.31 $25.04 $25.04 $25.81 2 $25.59 $26.36 $26.36 $27.17 3 $26.94 $27.75 $27.75 $28.60 4 $28.36 $29.21 $29.21 $30.10 5 $29.85 $5,174.00 $62,088.00 $30.75 $5,330.00 $63,960.00 $30.75 $5,330.00 $63,960.00$31.68 $5,491.20 $65,894.40 203 non‐exempt Facilities Asst 1 $23.09 $24.44 $25.12 $25.87 2 $24.31 $25.73 $26.44 $27.23 3 $25.59 $27.08 $27.83 $28.66 4 $26.94 $28.50 $29.29 $30.17 5 $28.36 $4,915.73 $58,988.80 $30.00 $5,200.00 $62,400.00 $30.83 $5,343.87 $64,126.40$31.76 $5,505.07 $66,060.80 374 non‐exempt Facilities Carpenter 1 $30.11 $31.85 $32.75 $33.73 2 $31.69 $33.53 $34.47 $35.50 3 $33.36 $35.29 $36.28 $37.37 4 $35.12 $37.15 $38.19 $39.34 5 $36.97 $6,408.13 $76,897.60 $39.11 $6,779.07 $81,348.80 $40.20 $6,968.00 $83,616.00$41.41 $7,177.73 $86,132.80 375 non‐exempt Facilities Elect 1 $30.02 $31.26 $31.61 $32.56 2 $31.60 $32.90 $33.27 $34.27 3 $33.26 $34.63 $35.02 $36.07 4 $35.01 $36.45 $36.86 $37.97 5 $36.85 $6,387.33 $76,648.00 $38.37 $6,650.80 $79,809.60 $38.80 $6,725.33 $80,704.00$39.97 $6,928.13 $83,137.60 373 non‐exempt Facilities Maint‐L1$38.90 $41.15 $42.29 $43.58 2 $40.95 $43.32 $44.52 $45.87 3 $43.11 $45.60 $46.86 $48.28 4 $45.38 $48.00 $49.33 $50.82 5 $47.77 $8,280.13 $99,361.60 $50.53 $8,758.53 $105,102.40 $51.93 $9,001.20 $108,014.40$53.49 $9,271.60 $111,259.20 377 non‐exempt Facilities Painter 1 $30.11 $31.85 $32.75 $33.73 2 $31.69 $33.53 $34.47 $35.50 3 $33.36 $35.29 $36.28 $37.37 4 $35.12 $37.15 $38.19 $39.34 5 $36.97 $6,408.13 $76,897.60 $39.11 $6,779.07 $81,348.80 $40.20 $6,968.00 $83,616.00$41.41 $7,177.73 $86,132.80 376 non‐exempt Facilities Tech 1 $32.57 $33.79 $34.04 $35.07 2 $34.28 $35.57 $35.83 $36.92 3 $36.08 $37.44 $37.72 $38.86 4 $37.98 $39.41 $39.70 $40.90 5 $39.98 $6,929.87 $83,158.40 $41.48 $41.79 $43.05 462 non‐exempt Field Service Pers WGW 1 $27.89 $29.51 $30.31 $31.23 2 $29.36 $31.06 $31.91 $32.87 3 $30.91 $32.69 $33.59 $34.60 4 $32.54 $34.41 $35.36 $36.42 5 $34.25 $5,936.67 $71,240.00 $36.22 $6,278.13 $75,337.60 $37.22 $6,451.47 $77,417.60$38.34 $6,645.60 $79,747.20 383 non‐exempt Fleet Svcs Coord 1 $28.97 $29.84 $29.84 $30.73 2 $30.49 $31.41 $31.41 $32.35 3 $32.09 $33.06 $33.06 $34.05 4 $33.78 $34.80 $34.80 $35.84 5 $35.56 $6,163.73 $73,964.80 $36.63 $6,349.20 $76,190.40 $36.63 $6,349.20 $76,190.40$37.73 $6,539.87 $78,478.40 489 non‐exempt Gas System Tech 1 $30.39 $32.14 $33.01 $34.01 2 $31.99 $33.83 $34.75 $35.80 3 $33.67 $35.61 $36.58 $37.68 4 $35.44 $37.48 $38.50 $39.66 5 $37.31 $6,467.07 $77,604.80 $39.45 $6,838.00 $82,056.00 $40.53 $7,025.20 $84,302.40$41.75 $7,236.67 $86,840.00 7 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 419 non‐exempt Assistant Gas Measurement and Control Technician 1 $30.39 $32.14 $34.50 $35.55 2 $31.99 $33.83 $36.32 $37.42 3 $33.67 $35.61 $38.23 $39.39 4 $35.44 $37.48 $40.24 $41.46 5 $37.31 $6,467.07 $77,604.80 $39.45 $6,838.00 $82,056.00 $42.36 $7,146.53 $85,758.40$43.64 $7,564.27 $90,771.20 463 non‐exempt Gas System Tech II 1 $31.91 $33.74 $34.68 $35.72 2 $33.59 $35.52 $36.50 $37.60 3 $35.36 $37.39 $38.42 $39.58 4 $37.22 $39.36 $40.44 $41.66 5 $39.18 $6,791.20 $81,494.40 $41.43 $7,181.20 $86,174.40 $42.57 $7,378.80 $88,545.60$43.85 $7,600.67 $91,208.00 418 non‐exempt Gas Measurement and Control Technician 1 $31.91 $33.74 $36.24 $37.33 2 $33.59 $35.52 $38.15 $39.29 3 $35.36 $37.39 $40.16 $41.36 4 $37.22 $39.36 $42.27 $43.54 5 $39.18 $6,791.20 $81,494.40 $41.43 $7,181.20 $86,174.40 $44.49 $7,505.33 $90,064.00$45.83 $7,943.87 $95,326.40 417 non‐exempt Assistant Gas and Water Measurement and Control Technician 1 $31.91 $33.74 $36.24 $37.33 2 $33.59 $35.52 $38.15 $39.29 3 $35.36 $37.39 $40.16 $41.36 4 $37.22 $39.36 $42.27 $43.54 5 $39.18 $6,791.20 $81,494.40 $41.43 $7,181.20 $86,174.40 $44.49 $7,505.33 $90,064.00$45.83 $7,943.87 $95,326.40 416 non‐exempt Gas and Water Measurement and Control Technician 1 $35.36 $32.14 $38.05 $39.20 2 $37.22 $33.83 $40.05 $41.26 3 $39.18 $35.61 $42.16 $43.43 4 $41.25 $37.48 $44.38 $45.72 5 $43.42 $7,526.13 $90,313.60 $39.45 $6,838.00 $82,056.00 $46.72 $8,098.13 $97,177.60$48.13 $8,342.53 $100,110.40 420 non‐exempt Gas and Water Measurement and Control Technician Lead 1 $30.39 $32.14 $40.72 $41.94 2 $31.99 $33.83 $42.86 $44.15 3 $33.67 $35.61 $45.12 $46.47 4 $35.44 $37.48 $47.49 $48.92 5 $46.46 $8,053.07 $96,636.80 $42.22 $6,838.00 $82,056.00 $50.00 $8,666.67 $104,000.00$51.50 $8,926.67 $107,120.00 398 non‐exempt Geographic Inform Syst Specialist 1 $40.98 $43.34 $44.53 $45.88 2 $43.14 $45.62 $46.87 $48.29 3 $45.41 $48.02 $49.34 $50.83 4 $47.80 $50.55 $51.94 $53.50 5 $50.32 $8,722.13 $104,665.60 $53.21 $9,223.07 $110,676.80 $54.67 $9,476.13 $113,713.60$56.32 $9,762.13 $117,145.60 390 non‐exempt Heavy Equip Oper 1 $31.49 $33.26 $34.13 $35.15 2 $33.15 $35.01 $35.93 $37.00 3 $34.89 $36.85 $37.82 $38.95 4 $36.73 $38.79 $39.81 $41.00 5 $38.66 $6,701.07 $80,412.80 $40.83 $7,077.20 $84,926.40 $41.90 $7,262.67 $87,152.00$43.16 $7,481.07 $89,772.80 391 non‐exempt Heavy Equip Oper‐L1$33.68 $35.58 $36.50 $37.60 2 $35.45 $37.45 $38.42 $39.58 3 $37.32 $39.42 $40.44 $41.66 4 $39.28 $41.49 $42.57 $43.85 5 $41.35 $7,167.33 $86,008.00 $43.67 $7,569.47 $90,833.60 $44.81 $7,767.07 $93,204.80$46.16 $8,001.07 $96,012.80 389 non‐exempt HEO/Installer Repairer 1 $34.58 $36.58 $37.57 $38.70 2 $36.40 $38.50 $39.55 $40.74 3 $38.32 $40.53 $41.63 $42.88 4 $40.34 $42.66 $43.82 $45.14 5 $42.46 $7,359.73 $88,316.80 $44.90 $7,782.67 $93,392.00 $46.13 $7,995.87 $95,950.40$47.52 $8,236.80 $98,841.60 508 non‐exempt Ind Waste Inspec 1 $31.65 $33.06 $33.54 $34.56 2 $33.32 $34.80 $35.30 $36.38 3 $35.07 $36.63 $37.16 $38.29 4 $36.92 $38.56 $39.12 $40.30 5 $38.86 $6,735.73 $80,828.80 $40.59 $7,035.60 $84,427.20 $41.18 $7,137.87 $85,654.40$42.42 $7,352.80 $88,233.60 258 non‐exempt Ind Waste Invtgtr 1 $35.58 $37.15 $37.69 $38.83 2 $37.45 $39.10 $39.67 $40.87 3 $39.42 $41.16 $41.76 $43.02 4 $41.49 $43.33 $43.96 $45.28 5 $43.67 $7,569.47 $90,833.60 $45.61 $7,905.73 $94,868.80 $46.27 $8,020.13 $96,241.60$47.66 $8,261.07 $99,132.80 8 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 365 non‐exempt Industrial Waste Technician 1 $28.58 $29.85 $30.27 $31.19 2 $30.08 $31.42 $31.86 $32.83 3 $31.66 $33.07 $33.54 $34.56 4 $33.33 $34.81 $35.31 $36.38 5 $35.08 $6,080.53 $72,966.40 $36.64 $6,350.93 $76,211.20 $37.17 $6,442.80 $77,313.60$38.29 $6,636.93 $79,643.20 227 non‐exempt Inspector, Field Svc 1 $34.47 $36.05 $36.61 $37.72 2 $36.28 $37.95 $38.54 $39.70 3 $38.19 $39.95 $40.57 $41.79 4 $40.20 $42.05 $42.71 $43.99 5 $42.32 $7,335.47 $88,025.60 $44.26 $7,671.73 $92,060.80 $44.96 $7,793.07 $93,516.80$46.31 $8,027.07 $96,324.80 308 non‐exempt Instrum Elec 1 $34.16 $35.57 $35.96 $37.05 2 $35.96 $37.44 $37.85 $39.00 3 $37.85 $39.41 $39.84 $41.05 4 $39.84 $41.48 $41.94 $43.21 5 $41.94 $7,269.60 $87,235.20 $43.66 $7,567.73 $90,812.80 $44.15 $7,652.67 $91,832.00$45.48 $7,883.20 $94,598.40 293 non‐exempt Junior Museum & Zoo Educator 1 $26.71 $27.76 $28.02 $28.86 2 $28.12 $29.22 $29.49 $30.38 3 $29.60 $30.76 $31.04 $31.98 4 $31.16 $32.38 $32.67 $33.66 5 $32.80 $5,685.33 $68,224.00 $34.08 $5,907.20 $70,886.40 $34.39 $5,960.93 $71,531.20$35.43 $6,141.20 $73,694.40 503 non‐exempt Laboratory Tech Wqc 1 $31.40 $32.37 $32.40 $33.36 2 $33.05 $34.07 $34.10 $35.12 3 $34.79 $35.86 $35.89 $36.97 4 $36.62 $37.75 $37.78 $38.92 5 $38.55 $6,682.00 $80,184.00 $39.74 $6,888.27 $82,659.20 $39.77 $6,893.47 $82,721.60$40.97 $7,101.47 $85,217.60 413 non‐exempt Landfill Technician 1 $34.91 $36.47 $37.01 $38.13 2 $36.75 $38.39 $38.96 $40.14 3 $38.68 $40.41 $41.01 $42.25 4 $40.72 $42.54 $43.17 $44.47 5 $42.86 $7,429.07 $89,148.80 $44.78 $7,761.87 $93,142.40 $45.44 $7,876.27 $94,515.20$46.81 $8,113.73 $97,364.80 254 non‐exempt Librarian 1 $26.84 $27.80 $27.96 $28.79 2 $28.25 $29.26 $29.43 $30.31 3 $29.74 $30.80 $30.98 $31.91 4 $31.30 $32.42 $32.61 $33.59 5 $32.95 $5,711.33 $68,536.00 $34.13 $5,915.87 $70,990.40 $34.33 $5,950.53 $71,406.40$35.36 $6,129.07 $73,548.80 252 non‐exempt Library Associate 1 $24.52 $25.27 $25.27 $26.03 2 $25.81 $26.60 $26.60 $27.40 3 $27.17 $28.00 $28.00 $28.84 4 $28.60 $29.47 $29.47 $30.36 5 $30.11 $5,219.07 $62,628.80 $31.02 $5,376.80 $64,521.60 $31.02 $5,376.80 $64,521.60$31.96 $5,539.73 $66,476.80 253 non‐exempt Library Specialist 1 $23.20 $23.90 $23.90 $24.62 2 $24.42 $25.16 $25.16 $25.92 3 $25.71 $26.48 $26.48 $27.28 4 $27.06 $27.87 $27.87 $28.72 5 $28.48 $4,936.53 $59,238.40 $29.34 $5,085.60 $61,027.20 $29.34 $5,085.60 $61,027.20$30.23 $5,239.87 $62,878.40 541 non‐exempt Lineper/Cable Spl 1 $42.81 $44.75 $45.45 $46.83 2 $45.06 $47.11 $47.84 $49.29 3 $47.43 $49.59 $50.36 $51.88 4 $49.93 $52.20 $53.01 $54.61 5 $52.56 $9,110.40 $109,324.80 $54.95 $9,524.67 $114,296.00 $55.80 $9,672.00 $116,064.00$57.48 $9,963.20 $119,558.40 542 non‐exempt Lineper/Cable Spl‐L1$45.82 $47.90 $48.63 $50.09 2 $48.23 $50.42 $51.19 $52.73 3 $50.77 $53.07 $53.88 $55.51 4 $53.44 $55.86 $56.72 $58.43 5 $56.25 $9,750.00 $117,000.00 $58.80 $10,192.00 $122,304.00 $59.71 $10,349.73 $124,196.80$61.51 $10,661.73 $127,940.80 531 non‐exempt Lineperson/Cable Spl‐T1$40.78 $42.63 $43.29 $44.59 2 $42.93 $44.87 $45.57 $46.94 3 $45.19 $47.23 $47.97 $49.41 4 $47.57 $49.72 $50.49 $52.01 5 $50.07 $8,678.80 $104,145.60 $52.34 $9,072.27 $108,867.20 $53.15 $9,212.67 $110,552.00$54.75 $9,490.00 $113,880.00 9 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 532 non‐exempt Lineperson/Cable Spl‐TL 1 $43.61 $45.59 $46.30 $47.69 2 $45.91 $47.99 $48.74 $50.20 3 $48.33 $50.52 $51.30 $52.84 4 $50.87 $53.18 $54.00 $55.62 5 $53.55 $9,282.00 $111,384.00 $55.98 $9,703.20 $116,438.40 $56.84 $9,852.27 $118,227.20$58.55 $10,148.67 $121,784.00 528 non‐exempt Lnper/Cbl Spl‐Appren 1 $36.77 $38.45 $39.04 $40.21 2 $38.71 $40.47 $41.09 $42.33 3 $40.75 $42.60 $43.25 $44.56 4 $42.89 $44.84 $45.53 $46.90 5 $45.15 $7,826.00 $93,912.00 $47.20 $8,181.33 $98,176.00 $47.93 $8,307.87 $99,694.40$49.37 $8,557.47 $102,689.60 213 non‐exempt Mailing Svcs Spec 1 $20.48 $21.12 $21.16 $21.78 2 $21.56 $22.23 $22.27 $22.93 3 $22.69 $23.40 $23.44 $24.14 4 $23.88 $24.63 $24.67 $25.41 5 $25.14 $4,357.60 $52,291.20 $25.93 $4,494.53 $53,934.40 $25.97 $4,501.47 $54,017.60$26.75 $4,636.67 $55,640.00 291 non‐exempt Maintenance Mechanic‐Welding 1 $33.53 $35.46 $36.44 $37.54 2 $35.29 $37.33 $38.36 $39.52 3 $37.15 $39.29 $40.38 $41.60 4 $39.11 $41.36 $42.50 $43.79 5 $41.17 $7,136.13 $85,633.60 $43.54 $7,546.93 $90,563.20 $44.74 $7,754.93 $93,059.20$46.09 $7,988.93 $95,867.20 346 non‐exempt Management Assistant 1 $30.44 $31.40 $31.45 $32.40 2 $32.04 $33.05 $33.11 $34.10 3 $33.73 $34.79 $34.85 $35.89 4 $35.50 $36.62 $36.68 $37.78 5 $37.37 $6,477.47 $77,729.60 $38.55 $6,682.00 $80,184.00 $38.61 $6,692.40 $80,308.80$39.77 $6,893.47 $82,721.60 3460 non‐exempt Management Assistant ‐ S 1 $30.44 $31.40 $31.45 $32.40 2 $32.04 $33.05 $33.11 $34.10 3 $33.73 $34.79 $34.85 $35.89 4 $35.50 $36.62 $36.68 $37.78 5 $37.37 $6,477.47 $77,729.60 $38.55 $6,682.00 $80,184.00 $38.61 $6,692.40 $80,308.80$39.77 $6,893.47 $82,721.60 216 non‐exempt Marketing Eng 1 $43.64 $45.17 $45.37 $46.74 2 $45.94 $47.55 $47.76 $49.20 3 $48.36 $50.05 $50.27 $51.79 4 $50.91 $52.68 $52.92 $54.52 5 $53.59 $9,288.93 $111,467.20 $55.45 $9,611.33 $115,336.00 $55.71 $9,656.40 $115,876.80$57.39 $9,947.60 $119,371.20 241 non‐exempt Meter Reader 1 $24.31 $25.09 $25.14 $25.90 2 $25.59 $26.41 $26.46 $27.26 3 $26.94 $27.80 $27.85 $28.69 4 $28.36 $29.26 $29.32 $30.20 5 $29.85 $5,174.00 $62,088.00 $30.80 $5,338.67 $64,064.00 $30.86 $5,349.07 $64,188.80$31.79 $5,510.27 $66,123.20 240 non‐exempt Meter Reader‐Lead 1 $26.01 $26.84 $26.89 $27.71 2 $27.38 $28.25 $28.31 $29.17 3 $28.82 $29.74 $29.80 $30.70 4 $30.34 $31.31 $31.37 $32.32 5 $31.94 $5,536.27 $66,435.20 $32.96 $5,713.07 $68,556.80 $33.02 $5,723.47 $68,681.60$34.02 $5,896.80 $70,761.60 369 non‐exempt Meter Shop Lead 1 $29.29 $30.64 $31.14 $32.07 2 $30.83 $32.25 $32.78 $33.76 3 $32.45 $33.95 $34.50 $35.54 4 $34.16 $35.74 $36.32 $37.41 5 $35.96 $6,233.07 $74,796.80 $37.62 $6,520.80 $78,249.60 $38.23 $6,626.53 $79,518.40$39.38 $6,825.87 $81,910.40 552 non‐exempt Metering Technician 1 $40.36 $42.19 $42.85 $44.14 2 $42.48 $44.41 $45.10 $46.46 3 $44.72 $46.75 $47.47 $48.90 4 $47.07 $49.21 $49.97 $51.47 5 $49.55 $8,588.67 $103,064.00 $51.80 $8,978.67 $107,744.00 $52.60 $9,117.33 $109,408.00$54.18 $9,391.20 $112,694.40 553 non‐exempt Metering Technician – Lead 1 $43.20 $45.16 $45.87 $47.23 2 $45.47 $47.54 $48.28 $49.72 3 $47.86 $50.04 $50.82 $52.34 4 $50.38 $52.67 $53.49 $55.09 5 $53.03 $9,191.87 $110,302.40 $55.44 $9,609.60 $115,315.20 $56.30 $9,758.67 $117,104.00$57.99 $10,051.60 $120,619.20 10 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 384 non‐exempt Mobile Service Tech 1 $34.41 $35.44 $35.44 $36.52 2 $36.22 $37.31 $37.31 $38.44 3 $38.13 $39.27 $39.27 $40.46 4 $40.14 $41.34 $41.34 $42.59 5 $42.25 $7,323.33 $87,880.00 $43.52 $7,543.47 $90,521.60 $43.52 $7,543.47 $90,521.60$44.83 $7,770.53 $93,246.40 381 non‐exempt Motor Equip Mech‐L 1 $35.06 $36.11 $36.11 $37.21 2 $36.91 $38.01 $38.01 $39.17 3 $38.85 $40.01 $40.01 $41.23 4 $40.89 $42.12 $42.12 $43.40 5 $43.04 $7,460.27 $89,523.20 $44.34 $7,685.60 $92,227.20 $44.34 $7,685.60 $92,227.20$45.68 $7,917.87 $95,014.40 286 non‐exempt Motor Equipment Mechanic I1$30.36 $31.27 $31.27 $32.21 2 $31.96 $32.92 $32.92 $33.91 3 $33.64 $34.65 $34.65 $35.69 4 $35.41 $36.47 $36.47 $37.57 5 $37.27 $6,460.13 $77,521.60 $38.39 $6,654.27 $79,851.20 $38.39 $6,654.27 $79,851.20$39.55 $6,855.33 $82,264.00 287 non‐exempt Motor Equipment Mechanic II 1 $32.78 $33.76 $33.76 $34.78 2 $34.50 $35.54 $35.54 $36.61 3 $36.32 $37.41 $37.41 $38.54 4 $38.23 $39.38 $39.38 $40.57 5 $40.24 $6,974.93 $83,699.20 $41.45 $7,184.67 $86,216.00 $41.45 $7,184.67 $86,216.00$42.70 $7,401.33 $88,816.00 230 non‐exempt Offset Equip Op 1 $23.22 $23.94 $23.98 $24.70 2 $24.44 $25.20 $25.24 $26.00 3 $25.73 $26.53 $26.57 $27.37 4 $27.08 $27.93 $27.97 $28.81 5 $28.50 $4,940.00 $59,280.00 $29.40 $5,096.00 $61,152.00 $29.44 $5,102.93 $61,235.20$30.33 $5,257.20 $63,086.40 543 non‐exempt Overhead Underground Troubleman 1 $44.98 $47.03 $47.75 $49.18 2 $47.35 $49.50 $50.26 $51.77 3 $49.84 $52.10 $52.91 $54.49 4 $52.46 $54.84 $55.69 $57.36 5 $55.22 $9,571.47 $114,857.60 $57.73 $10,006.53 $120,078.40 $58.62 $10,160.80 $121,929.60$60.38 $10,465.87 $125,590.40 452 non‐exempt Park Maint ‐ Lead 1 $29.79 $30.78 $30.88 $31.82 2 $31.36 $32.40 $32.50 $33.49 3 $33.01 $34.11 $34.21 $35.25 4 $34.75 $35.90 $36.01 $37.10 5 $36.58 $6,340.53 $76,086.40 $37.79 $6,550.27 $78,603.20 $37.91 $6,571.07 $78,852.80$39.05 $6,768.67 $81,224.00 451 non‐exempt Park Maint Person 1 $25.70 $26.55 $26.64 $27.45 2 $27.05 $27.95 $28.04 $28.89 3 $28.47 $29.42 $29.52 $30.41 4 $29.97 $30.97 $31.07 $32.01 5 $31.55 $5,468.67 $65,624.00 $32.60 $5,650.67 $67,808.00 $32.70 $5,668.00 $68,016.00$33.69 $5,839.60 $70,075.20 281 non‐exempt Park Ranger 1 $28.79 $29.66 $29.66 $30.55 2 $30.30 $31.22 $31.22 $32.16 3 $31.89 $32.86 $32.86 $33.85 4 $33.57 $34.59 $34.59 $35.63 5 $35.34 $6,125.60 $73,507.20 $36.41 $6,311.07 $75,732.80 $36.41 $6,311.07 $75,732.80$37.51 $6,501.73 $78,020.80 570 non‐exempt Parking Operations Lead 1 $44.20 $46.31 $47.14 $48.55 2 $46.53 $48.75 $49.62 $51.11 3 $48.98 $51.32 $52.23 $53.80 4 $51.56 $54.02 $54.98 $56.63 5 $54.27 $9,406.80 $112,881.60 $56.86 $9,855.73 $118,268.80 $57.87 $10,030.80 $120,369.60$59.61 $10,332.40 $123,988.80 460 non‐exempt Parks/Golf Crew‐Lead 1 $27.96 $28.90 $28.98 $29.86 2 $29.43 $30.42 $30.50 $31.43 3 $30.98 $32.02 $32.11 $33.08 4 $32.61 $33.70 $33.80 $34.82 5 $34.33 $5,950.53 $71,406.40 $35.47 $6,148.13 $73,777.60 $35.58 $6,167.20 $74,006.40$36.65 $6,352.67 $76,232.00 348 non‐exempt Payroll Analyst 1 $29.15 $30.03 $30.03 $30.93 2 $30.68 $31.61 $31.61 $32.56 3 $32.29 $33.27 $33.27 $34.27 4 $33.99 $35.02 $35.02 $36.07 5 $35.78 $6,201.87 $74,422.40 $36.86 $6,389.07 $76,668.80 $36.86 $6,389.07 $76,668.80$37.97 $6,581.47 $78,977.60 11 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 3480 non‐exempt Payroll Analyst ‐ S 1 29.15 $30.03 $30.03 $30.93 2 30.68 $31.61 $31.61 $32.56 3 32.29 $33.27 $33.27 $34.27 4 33.99 $35.02 $35.02 $36.07 5 35.78 $6,201.87 $74,422.40 $36.86 $6,389.07 $76,668.80 $36.86 $6,389.07 $76,668.80$37.97 $6,581.47 $78,977.60 352 non‐exempt Planner 1 $38.43 $39.85 $40.15 $41.34 2 $40.45 $41.95 $42.26 $43.52 3 $42.58 $44.16 $44.48 $45.81 4 $44.82 $46.48 $46.82 $48.22 5 $47.18 $8,177.87 $98,134.40 $48.93 $8,481.20 $101,774.40 $49.28 $8,541.87 $102,502.40$50.76 $8,798.40 $105,580.80 347 non‐exempt Planning Arborist 1 $41.76 $43.66 $44.35 $45.70 2 $43.96 $45.96 $46.68 $48.10 3 $46.27 $48.38 $49.14 $50.63 4 $48.70 $50.93 $51.73 $53.29 5 $51.26 $8,885.07 $106,620.80 $53.61 $9,292.40 $111,508.80 $54.45 $9,438.00 $113,256.00$56.09 $9,722.27 $116,667.20 3470 non‐exempt Planning Arborist ‐ S 1 $41.76 $43.66 $44.35 $45.70 2 $43.96 $45.96 $46.68 $48.10 3 $46.27 $48.38 $49.14 $50.63 4 $48.70 $50.93 $51.73 $53.29 5 $51.26 $8,885.07 $106,620.80 $53.61 $9,292.40 $111,508.80 $54.45 $9,438.00 $113,256.00$56.09 $9,722.27 $116,667.20 304 non‐exempt Plans Check Engr 1 $42.38 $43.85 $44.07 $45.39 2 $44.61 $46.16 $46.39 $47.78 3 $46.96 $48.59 $48.83 $50.29 4 $49.43 $51.15 $51.40 $52.94 5 $52.03 $9,018.53 $108,222.40 $53.84 $9,332.27 $111,987.20 $54.10 $9,377.33 $112,528.00$55.73 $9,659.87 $115,918.40 513 non‐exempt Plans Examiner 1 $36.22 $37.88 $38.48 $39.63 2 $38.13 $39.87 $40.51 $41.72 3 $40.14 $41.97 $42.64 $43.92 4 $42.25 $44.18 $44.88 $46.23 5 $44.47 $7,708.13 $92,497.60 $46.51 $8,061.73 $96,740.80 $47.24 $8,188.27 $98,259.20$48.66 $8,434.40 $101,212.80 517 non‐exempt Plant Mechanic 1 $34.53 $35.58 $35.58 $36.64 2 $36.35 $37.45 $37.45 $38.57 3 $38.26 $39.42 $39.42 $40.60 4 $40.27 $41.49 $41.49 $42.74 5 $42.39 $7,347.60 $88,171.20 $43.67 $7,569.47 $90,833.60 $43.67 $7,569.47 $90,833.60$44.99 $7,798.27 $93,579.20 321 non‐exempt Police Records Specialist ‐ Lead 1 $27.00 $28.29 $28.79 $29.68 2 $28.42 $29.78 $30.31 $31.24 3 $29.92 $31.35 $31.91 $32.88 4 $31.49 $33.00 $33.59 $34.61 5 $33.15 $5,746.00 $68,952.00 $34.74 $6,021.60 $72,259.20 $35.36 $6,129.07 $73,548.80$36.43 $6,314.53 $75,774.40 313 non‐exempt Police Records Specialist I1$23.98 $25.13 $25.57 $26.34 2 $25.24 $26.45 $26.92 $27.73 3 $26.57 $27.84 $28.34 $29.19 4 $27.97 $29.31 $29.83 $30.73 5 $29.44 $5,102.93 $61,235.20 $30.85 $5,347.33 $64,168.00 $31.40 $5,442.67 $65,312.00$32.35 $5,607.33 $67,288.00 314 non‐exempt Police Records Specialist II 1 $25.23 $26.45 $26.91 $27.72 2 $26.56 $27.84 $28.33 $29.18 3 $27.96 $29.30 $29.82 $30.72 4 $29.43 $30.84 $31.39 $32.34 5 $30.98 $5,369.87 $64,438.40 $32.46 $5,626.40 $67,516.80 $33.04 $5,726.93 $68,723.20$34.04 $5,900.27 $70,803.20 246 non‐exempt Power Engr 1 $46.60 $48.22 $48.45 $49.91 2 $49.05 $50.76 $51.00 $52.54 3 $51.63 $53.43 $53.68 $55.30 4 $54.35 $56.24 $56.51 $58.21 5 $57.21 $9,916.40 $118,996.80 $59.20 $10,261.33 $123,136.00 $59.48 $10,309.87 $123,718.40$61.27 $10,620.13 $127,441.60 270 non‐exempt Prod Arts/Sci Prog 1 $32.39 $33.66 $33.97 $34.99 2 $34.09 $35.43 $35.76 $36.83 3 $35.88 $37.29 $37.64 $38.77 4 $37.77 $39.25 $39.62 $40.81 5 $39.76 $6,891.73 $82,700.80 $41.32 $7,162.13 $85,945.60 $41.70 $7,228.00 $86,736.00$42.96 $7,446.40 $89,356.80 12 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 232 non‐exempt Prog‐Analyst 1 $39.44 $41.71 $42.85 $44.14 2 $41.52 $43.91 $45.11 $46.46 3 $43.71 $46.22 $47.48 $48.91 4 $46.01 $48.65 $49.98 $51.48 5 $48.43 $8,394.53 $100,734.40 $51.21 $8,876.40 $106,516.80 $52.61 $9,119.07 $109,428.80$54.19 $9,392.93 $112,715.20 265 non‐exempt Program Assistant 1 $25.00 $25.79 $25.82 $26.62 2 $26.32 $27.15 $27.18 $28.02 3 $27.70 $28.58 $28.61 $29.49 4 $29.16 $30.08 $30.12 $31.04 5 $30.69 $5,319.60 $63,835.20 $31.66 $5,487.73 $65,852.80 $31.71 $5,496.40 $65,956.80$32.67 $5,662.80 $67,953.60 302 non‐exempt Program Assistant I1$26.51 $27.35 $27.40 $28.22 2 $27.91 $28.79 $28.84 $29.71 3 $29.38 $30.31 $30.36 $31.27 4 $30.93 $31.91 $31.96 $32.92 5 $32.56 $5,643.73 $67,724.80 $33.59 $5,822.27 $69,867.20 $33.64 $5,830.93 $69,971.20$34.65 $6,006.00 $72,072.00 303 non‐exempt Program Assistant II 1 $28.51 $29.41 $29.44 $30.33 2 $30.01 $30.96 $30.99 $31.93 3 $31.59 $32.59 $32.62 $33.61 4 $33.25 $34.30 $34.34 $35.38 5 $35.00 $6,066.67 $72,800.00 $36.10 $6,257.33 $75,088.00 $36.15 $6,266.00 $75,192.00$37.24 $6,454.93 $77,459.20 368 non‐exempt Program Coordinator 1 $27.96 $29.06 $29.33 $30.21 2 $29.43 $30.59 $30.87 $31.80 3 $30.98 $32.20 $32.49 $33.47 4 $32.61 $33.89 $34.20 $35.23 5 $34.33 $5,950.53 $71,406.40 $35.67 $6,182.80 $74,193.60 $36.00 $6,240.00 $74,880.00$37.08 $6,427.20 $77,126.40 349 non‐exempt Project Engineer 1 $46.99 $48.62 $48.83 $50.30 2 $49.46 $51.18 $51.40 $52.95 3 $52.06 $53.87 $54.11 $55.74 4 $54.80 $56.70 $56.96 $58.67 5 $57.68 $9,997.87 $119,974.40 $59.68 $10,344.53 $124,134.40 $59.96 $10,393.07 $124,716.80$61.76 $10,705.07 $128,460.80 3490 non‐exempt Project Engineer ‐ S 1 $46.99 $48.62 $48.83 $50.30 2 $49.46 $51.18 $51.40 $52.95 3 $52.06 $53.87 $54.11 $55.74 4 $54.80 $56.70 $56.96 $58.67 5 $57.68 $9,997.87 $119,974.40 $59.68 $10,344.53 $124,134.40 $59.96 $10,393.07 $124,716.80$61.76 $10,705.07 $128,460.80 209 non‐exempt Property Evid Tech 1 $26.11 $27.35 $27.84 $28.68 2 $27.48 $28.79 $29.31 $30.19 3 $28.93 $30.31 $30.85 $31.78 4 $30.45 $31.90 $32.47 $33.45 5 $32.05 $5,555.33 $66,664.00 $33.58 $5,820.53 $69,846.40 $34.18 $5,924.53 $71,094.40$35.21 $6,103.07 $73,236.80 315 non‐exempt Public Safety Dispatcher ‐ Lead 1 $40.54 $41.76 $41.76 $43.02 2 $42.67 $43.96 $43.96 $45.28 3 $44.92 $46.27 $46.27 $47.66 4 $47.28 $48.71 $48.71 $50.17 5 $49.77 $8,626.80 $103,521.60 $51.27 $8,886.80 $106,641.60 $51.27 $8,886.80 $106,641.60$52.81 $9,153.73 $109,844.80 6 $51.02 $52.56 $52.56 $54.14 7 $52.29 $53.86 $53.86 $55.48 298 non‐exempt Public Safety Dispatcher I1$34.30 $35.33 $35.33 $36.40 2 $36.10 $37.19 $37.19 $38.32 3 $38.00 $39.15 $39.15 $40.34 4 $40.00 $41.21 $41.21 $42.46 5 $42.11 $7,299.07 $87,588.80 $43.38 $7,519.20 $90,230.40 $43.38 $7,519.20 $90,230.40$44.69 $7,746.27 $92,955.20 6 $43.17 $44.47 $44.47 $45.81 7 $44.25 $45.58 $45.58 $46.95 316 non‐exempt Public Safety Dispatcher II 1 $36.11 $37.21 $37.21 $38.33 2 $38.01 $39.17 $39.17 $40.35 3 $40.01 $41.23 $41.23 $42.47 4 $42.12 $43.40 $43.40 $44.71 5 $44.34 $7,685.60 $92,227.20 $45.68 $7,917.87 $95,014.40 $45.68 $7,917.87 $95,014.40$47.06 $8,157.07 $97,884.80 6 $45.44 $46.81 $46.81 $48.22 7 $46.58 $47.98 $47.98 $49.42 13 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 262 non‐exempt Resource Planner 1 $47.19 $48.61 $48.61 $50.07 2 $49.67 $51.17 $51.17 $52.71 3 $52.28 $53.86 $53.86 $55.48 4 $55.03 $56.69 $56.69 $58.40 5 $57.93 $10,041.20 $120,494.40 $59.67 $10,342.80 $124,113.60 $59.67 $10,342.80 $124,113.60$61.47 $10,654.80 $127,857.60 366 non‐exempt Restoration Lead 1 $33.71 $35.60 $36.55 $37.64 2 $35.48 $37.47 $38.47 $39.62 3 $37.35 $39.44 $40.49 $41.71 4 $39.32 $41.52 $42.62 $43.90 5 $41.39 $7,174.27 $86,091.20 $43.71 $7,576.40 $90,916.80 $44.86 $7,775.73 $93,308.80$46.21 $8,009.73 $96,116.80 554 non‐exempt SCADA Technologist 1 $47.94 $50.69 $52.08 $53.66 2 $50.46 $53.36 $54.82 $56.48 3 $53.12 $56.17 $57.71 $59.45 4 $55.92 $59.13 $60.75 $62.58 5 $58.86 $10,202.40 $122,428.80 $62.24 $10,788.27 $129,459.20 $63.95 $11,084.67 $133,016.00$65.87 $11,417.47 $137,009.60 385 non‐exempt Senior Fleet Services Coordinator 1 $33.27 $34.27 $34.27 $35.29 2 $35.02 $36.07 $36.07 $37.15 3 $36.86 $37.97 $37.97 $39.11 4 $38.80 $39.97 $39.97 $41.17 5 $40.84 $7,078.93 $84,947.20 $42.07 $7,292.13 $87,505.60 $42.07 $7,292.13 $87,505.60$43.34 $7,512.27 $90,147.20 461 non‐exempt Sprinkler Sys Repr 1 $26.14 $27.00 $27.08 $27.89 2 $27.52 $28.42 $28.51 $29.36 3 $28.97 $29.92 $30.01 $30.91 4 $30.49 $31.49 $31.59 $32.54 5 $32.09 $5,562.27 $66,747.20 $33.15 $5,746.00 $68,952.00 $33.25 $5,763.33 $69,160.00$34.25 $5,936.67 $71,240.00 360 non‐exempt Sr Buyer 1 $34.87 $35.93 $35.93 $37.02 2 $36.70 $37.82 $37.82 $38.97 3 $38.63 $39.81 $39.81 $41.02 4 $40.66 $41.90 $41.91 $43.18 5 $42.80 $7,418.67 $89,024.00 $44.10 $7,644.00 $91,728.00 $44.12 $7,647.47 $91,769.60$45.45 $7,878.00 $94,536.00 360 non‐exempt Sr Buyer 1 $34.87 $37.32 $37.34 $38.46 2 $36.70 $39.28 $39.30 $40.48 3 $38.63 $41.35 $41.37 $42.61 4 $40.66 $43.53 $43.55 $44.85 5 $44.46 $7,706.40 $92,476.80 $45.82 $7,942.13 $95,305.60 $45.84 $7,947.33 $95,368.00$47.21 $8,188.27 $98,259.20 3600 non‐exempt Sr Buyer ‐ S 1 $34.87 $35.93 $35.93 $37.02 2 $36.70 $37.82 $37.82 $38.97 3 $38.63 $39.81 $39.81 $41.02 4 $40.66 $41.90 $41.91 $43.18 5 $42.80 $7,418.67 $89,024.00 $44.10 $7,644.00 $91,728.00 $44.12 $7,647.47 $91,769.60$45.45 $7,878.00 $94,536.00 3600 non‐exempt Sr Buyer ‐ S 1 $34.87 $37.32 $37.34 $38.46 2 $36.70 $39.28 $39.30 $40.48 3 $38.63 $41.35 $41.37 $42.61 4 $40.66 $43.53 $43.55 $44.85 5 $44.46 $7,706.40 $92,476.80 $45.82 $7,942.13 $95,305.60 $45.84 $7,947.33 $95,368.00$47.21 $8,188.27 $98,259.20 224 non‐exempt Sr Chemist 1 $39.02 $40.20 $40.23 $41.45 2 $41.07 $42.32 $42.35 $43.63 3 $43.23 $44.55 $44.58 $45.93 4 $45.50 $46.89 $46.93 $48.35 5 $47.89 $8,300.93 $99,611.20 $49.36 $8,555.73 $102,668.80 $49.40 $8,562.67 $102,752.00$50.89 $8,820.93 $105,851.20 544 non‐exempt Sr Industrial Waste Investigator 1 $38.05 $39.75 $43.11 $44.40 2 $40.05 $41.84 $45.38 $46.74 3 $42.16 $44.04 $47.77 $49.20 4 $44.38 $46.36 $50.28 $51.79 5 $46.72 $8,098.13 $97,177.60 $48.80 $8,458.67 $101,504.00 $52.93 $9,174.53 $110,094.40$54.52 $9,450.13 $113,401.60 512 non‐exempt Sr Instrum Elect 1 $37.31 $38.85 $39.27 $40.46 2 $39.27 $40.89 $41.34 $42.59 3 $41.34 $43.04 $43.52 $44.83 4 $43.52 $45.31 $45.81 $47.19 5 $45.81 $7,940.40 $95,284.80 $47.69 $8,266.27 $99,195.20 $48.22 $8,358.13 $100,297.60$49.67 $8,609.47 $103,313.60 14 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 251 non‐exempt Sr Librarian 1 $30.48 $31.57 $31.75 $32.70 2 $32.08 $33.23 $33.42 $34.42 3 $33.77 $34.98 $35.18 $36.23 4 $35.55 $36.82 $37.03 $38.14 5 $37.42 $6,486.13 $77,833.60 $38.76 $6,718.40 $80,620.80 $38.98 $6,756.53 $81,078.40$40.15 $6,959.33 $83,512.00 504 non‐exempt Sr. Mech 1 $37.13 $38.24 $39.03 $40.20 2 $39.08 $40.25 $41.08 $42.32 3 $41.14 $42.37 $43.24 $44.55 4 $43.30 $44.60 $45.52 $46.89 5 $45.58 $7,900.53 $94,806.40 $46.95 $8,138.00 $97,656.00 $47.92 $8,306.13 $99,673.60$49.36 $8,555.73 $102,668.80 361 non‐exempt Sr Mkt Analyst 1 $43.30 $44.60 $44.60 $45.94 2 $45.58 $46.95 $46.95 $48.36 3 $47.98 $49.42 $49.42 $50.91 4 $50.50 $52.02 $52.02 $53.59 5 $53.16 $9,214.40 $110,572.80 $54.76 $9,491.73 $113,900.80 $54.76 $9,491.73 $113,900.80$56.41 $9,777.73 $117,332.80 3610 non‐exempt Sr Mkt Analyst ‐ S 1 $43.30 $44.60 $44.60 $45.94 2 $45.58 $46.95 $46.95 $48.36 3 $47.98 $49.42 $49.42 $50.91 4 $50.50 $52.02 $52.02 $53.59 5 $53.16 $9,214.40 $110,572.80 $54.76 $9,491.73 $113,900.80 $54.76 $9,491.73 $113,900.80$56.41 $9,777.73 $117,332.80 506 non‐exempt Sr Operator Wqc 1 $39.40 $40.58 $40.58 $41.80 2 $41.47 $42.72 $42.72 $44.00 3 $43.65 $44.97 $44.97 $46.32 4 $45.95 $47.34 $47.34 $48.76 5 $48.37 $8,384.13 $100,609.60 $49.83 $8,637.20 $103,646.40 $49.83 $8,637.20 $103,646.40$51.33 $8,897.20 $106,766.40 318 non‐exempt Sr Planner 1 $44.39 $46.05 $46.37 $47.76 2 $46.73 $48.47 $48.81 $50.27 3 $49.19 $51.02 $51.38 $52.92 4 $51.78 $53.70 $54.08 $55.71 5 $54.51 $9,448.40 $113,380.80 $56.53 $9,798.53 $117,582.40 $56.93 $9,867.87 $118,414.40$58.64 $10,164.27 $121,971.20 280 non‐exempt Sr Ranger 1 $31.85 $32.81 $32.81 $33.80 2 $33.53 $34.54 $34.54 $35.58 3 $35.29 $36.36 $36.36 $37.45 4 $37.15 $38.27 $38.27 $39.42 5 $39.10 $6,777.33 $81,328.00 $40.28 $6,981.87 $83,782.40 $40.28 $6,981.87 $83,782.40$41.49 $7,191.60 $86,299.20 261 non‐exempt Sr Util Field Svc Rep 1 $36.49 $38.58 $39.64 $40.84 2 $38.41 $40.61 $41.73 $42.99 3 $40.43 $42.75 $43.93 $45.25 4 $42.56 $45.00 $46.24 $47.63 5 $44.80 $7,765.33 $93,184.00 $47.37 $8,210.80 $98,529.60 $48.67 $8,436.13 $101,233.60$50.14 $8,690.93 $104,291.20 501 non‐exempt Sr Water Sys Oper 1 $37.55 $38.68 $38.68 $39.84 2 $39.53 $40.72 $40.72 $41.94 3 $41.61 $42.86 $42.86 $44.15 4 $43.80 $45.12 $45.12 $46.47 5 $46.10 $7,990.67 $95,888.00 $47.49 $8,231.60 $98,779.20 $47.49 $8,231.60 $98,779.20$48.92 $8,479.47 $101,753.60 405 non‐exempt St Maint Asst 1 $23.72 $24.84 $25.28 $26.04 2 $24.97 $26.15 $26.61 $27.41 3 $26.28 $27.53 $28.01 $28.85 4 $27.66 $28.98 $29.48 $30.37 5 $29.12 $5,047.47 $60,569.60 $30.50 $5,286.67 $63,440.00 $31.03 $5,378.53 $64,542.40$31.97 $5,541.47 $66,497.60 392 non‐exempt St Sweeper Op 1 $27.76 $29.32 $30.08 $30.98 2 $29.22 $30.86 $31.66 $32.61 3 $30.76 $32.48 $33.33 $34.33 4 $32.38 $34.19 $35.08 $36.14 5 $34.08 $5,907.20 $70,886.40 $35.99 $6,238.27 $74,859.20 $36.93 $6,401.20 $76,814.40$38.04 $6,593.60 $79,123.20 248 non‐exempt Storekeeper 1 $25.45 $26.21 $26.21 $27.00 2 $26.79 $27.59 $27.59 $28.42 3 $28.20 $29.04 $29.04 $29.92 4 $29.68 $30.57 $30.57 $31.49 5 $31.24 $5,414.93 $64,979.20 $32.18 $5,577.87 $66,934.40 $32.18 $5,577.87 $66,934.40$33.15 $5,746.00 $68,952.00 15 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 288 non‐exempt Storekeeper‐L1$27.23 $28.05 $28.05 $28.90 2 $28.66 $29.53 $29.53 $30.42 3 $30.17 $31.08 $31.08 $32.02 4 $31.76 $32.72 $32.72 $33.71 5 $33.43 $5,794.53 $69,534.40 $34.44 $5,969.60 $71,635.20 $34.44 $5,969.60 $71,635.20$35.48 $6,149.87 $73,798.40 545 non‐exempt Street Light, Traffic Signal and Fiber – Apprentice 1 $36.54 $38.19 $38.78 $39.95 2 $38.46 $40.20 $40.82 $42.05 3 $40.48 $42.32 $42.97 $44.26 4 $42.61 $44.55 $45.23 $46.59 5 $44.85 $7,774.00 $93,288.00 $46.89 $8,127.60 $97,531.20 $47.61 $8,252.40 $99,028.80$49.04 $8,500.27 $102,003.20 547 non‐exempt Street Light, Traffic Signal and Fiber – Lead 1 $41.31 $43.19 $43.85 $45.18 2 $43.48 $45.46 $46.16 $47.56 3 $45.77 $47.85 $48.59 $50.06 4 $48.18 $50.37 $51.15 $52.69 5 $50.72 $8,791.47 $105,497.60 $53.02 $9,190.13 $110,281.60 $53.84 $9,332.27 $111,987.20$55.46 $9,613.07 $115,356.80 546 non‐exempt Street Light, Traffic Signal and Fiber Technician 1 $38.61 $40.36 $40.97 $42.21 2 $40.64 $42.48 $43.13 $44.43 3 $42.78 $44.72 $45.40 $46.77 4 $45.03 $47.07 $47.79 $49.23 5 $47.40 $8,216.00 $98,592.00 $49.55 $8,588.67 $103,064.00 $50.31 $8,720.40 $104,644.80$51.82 $8,982.13 $107,785.60 549 non‐exempt Substation Electrician 1 $42.11 $44.03 $44.71 $46.05 2 $44.33 $46.35 $47.06 $48.47 3 $46.66 $48.79 $49.54 $51.02 4 $49.12 $51.36 $52.15 $53.71 5 $51.71 $8,963.07 $107,556.80 $54.06 $9,370.40 $112,444.80 $54.89 $9,514.27 $114,171.20$56.54 $9,800.27 $117,603.20 548 non‐exempt Substation Electrician ‐ Apprentice 1 $39.87 $41.68 $42.32 $43.60 2 $41.97 $43.87 $44.55 $45.89 3 $44.18 $46.18 $46.89 $48.30 4 $46.50 $48.61 $49.36 $50.84 5 $48.95 $8,484.67 $101,816.00 $51.17 $8,869.47 $106,433.60 $51.96 $9,006.40 $108,076.80$53.52 $9,276.80 $111,321.60 550 non‐exempt Substation Electrician ‐ Lead 1 $45.06 $47.11 $47.83 $49.29 2 $47.43 $49.59 $50.35 $51.88 3 $49.93 $52.20 $53.00 $54.61 4 $52.56 $54.95 $55.79 $57.48 5 $55.33 $9,590.53 $115,086.40 $57.84 $10,025.60 $120,307.20 $58.73 $10,179.87 $122,158.40$60.50 $10,486.67 $125,840.00 326 non‐exempt Surveying Asst 1 $32.06 $33.53 $34.06 $35.09 2 $33.75 $35.29 $35.85 $36.94 3 $35.53 $37.15 $37.74 $38.88 4 $37.40 $39.11 $39.73 $40.93 5 $39.37 $6,824.13 $81,889.60 $41.17 $7,136.13 $85,633.60 $41.82 $7,248.80 $86,985.60$43.08 $7,467.20 $89,606.40 325 non‐exempt Surveyor, Public Wks 1 $34.89 $36.48 $37.07 $38.18 2 $36.73 $38.40 $39.02 $40.19 3 $38.66 $40.42 $41.07 $42.30 4 $40.69 $42.55 $43.23 $44.53 5 $42.83 $7,423.87 $89,086.40 $44.79 $7,763.60 $93,163.20 $45.50 $7,886.67 $94,640.00$46.87 $8,124.13 $97,489.60 362 non‐exempt Technologist 1 $48.82 $51.62 $53.04 $54.63 2 $51.39 $54.34 $55.83 $57.51 3 $54.09 $57.20 $58.77 $60.54 4 $56.94 $60.21 $61.86 $63.73 5 $59.94 $10,389.60 $124,675.20 $63.38 $10,985.87 $131,830.40 $65.12 $11,287.47 $135,449.60$67.08 $11,627.20 $139,526.40 3620 non‐exempt Technologist ‐ S 1 $48.82 $51.62 $53.04 $54.63 2 $51.39 $54.34 $55.83 $57.51 3 $54.09 $57.20 $58.77 $60.54 4 $56.94 $60.21 $61.86 $63.73 5 $59.94 $10,389.60 $124,675.20 $63.38 $10,985.87 $131,830.40 $65.12 $11,287.47 $135,449.60$67.08 $11,627.20 $139,526.40 229 non‐exempt Theater Specialist 1 $34.65 $36.01 $36.33 $37.42 2 $36.47 $37.90 $38.24 $39.39 3 $38.39 $39.89 $40.25 $41.46 4 $40.41 $41.99 $42.37 $43.64 5 $42.54 $7,373.60 $88,483.20 $44.20 $7,661.33 $91,936.00 $44.60 $7,730.67 $92,768.00$45.94 $7,962.93 $95,555.20 16 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 406 non‐exempt Traf Cont Maint I1$27.76 $29.08 $29.58 $30.47 2 $29.22 $30.61 $31.14 $32.07 3 $30.76 $32.22 $32.78 $33.76 4 $32.38 $33.92 $34.50 $35.54 5 $34.08 $5,907.20 $70,886.40 $35.70 $6,188.00 $74,256.00 $36.32 $6,295.47 $75,545.60$37.41 $6,484.40 $77,812.80 412 non‐exempt Traf Cont Maint Ii 1 $25.70 $26.92 $27.39 $28.22 2 $27.05 $28.34 $28.83 $29.70 3 $28.47 $29.83 $30.35 $31.26 4 $29.97 $31.40 $31.95 $32.91 5 $31.55 $5,468.67 $65,624.00 $33.05 $5,728.67 $68,744.00 $33.63 $5,829.20 $69,950.40$34.64 $6,004.27 $72,051.20 407 non‐exempt Traf Cont Maint‐L1$29.70 $31.11 $31.65 $32.60 2 $31.26 $32.75 $33.32 $34.32 3 $32.91 $34.47 $35.07 $36.13 4 $34.64 $36.28 $36.92 $38.03 5 $36.46 $6,319.73 $75,836.80 $38.19 $6,619.60 $79,435.20 $38.86 $6,735.73 $80,828.80$40.03 $6,938.53 $83,262.40 575 non‐exempt Traffic Engineering Lead 1 $49.43 $51.15 $51.39 $52.93 2 $52.03 $53.84 $54.09 $55.72 3 $54.77 $56.67 $56.94 $58.65 4 $57.65 $59.65 $59.94 $61.74 5 $60.68 $10,517.87 $126,214.40 $62.79 $10,883.60 $130,603.20 $63.09 $10,935.60 $131,227.20$64.99 $11,264.93 $135,179.20 435 non‐exempt Tree Maint Asst 1 $24.80 $25.77 $26.01 $26.81 2 $26.10 $27.13 $27.38 $28.22 3 $27.47 $28.56 $28.82 $29.70 4 $28.92 $30.06 $30.34 $31.26 5 $30.44 $5,276.27 $63,315.20 $31.64 $5,484.27 $65,811.20 $31.94 $5,536.27 $66,435.20$32.90 $5,702.67 $68,432.00 434 non‐exempt Tree Maintenance Specialist 1 $28.93 $30.07 $30.36 $31.27 2 $30.45 $31.65 $31.96 $32.92 3 $32.05 $33.32 $33.64 $34.65 4 $33.74 $35.07 $35.41 $36.47 5 $35.52 $6,156.80 $73,881.60 $36.92 $6,399.47 $76,793.60 $37.27 $6,460.13 $77,521.60$38.39 $6,654.27 $79,851.20 430 non‐exempt Tree Trim/Ln Clr 1 $28.48 $29.60 $29.89 $30.78 2 $29.98 $31.16 $31.46 $32.40 3 $31.56 $32.80 $33.12 $34.11 4 $33.22 $34.53 $34.86 $35.91 5 $34.97 $6,061.47 $72,737.60 $36.35 $6,300.67 $75,608.00 $36.69 $6,359.60 $76,315.20$37.80 $6,552.00 $78,624.00 431 non‐exempt Tree Trim/Ln Clr‐L1$30.46 $31.67 $31.98 $32.94 2 $32.06 $33.34 $33.66 $34.67 3 $33.75 $35.09 $35.43 $36.49 4 $35.53 $36.94 $37.29 $38.41 5 $37.40 $6,482.67 $77,792.00 $38.88 $6,739.20 $80,870.40 $39.25 $6,803.33 $81,640.00$40.43 $7,007.87 $84,094.40 432 non‐exempt Tree Trm/Ln Clr Asst 1 $26.84 $27.90 $28.17 $29.01 2 $28.25 $29.37 $29.65 $30.54 3 $29.74 $30.92 $31.21 $32.15 4 $31.31 $32.55 $32.85 $33.84 5 $32.96 $5,713.07 $68,556.80 $34.26 $5,938.40 $71,260.80 $34.58 $5,993.87 $71,926.40$35.62 $6,174.13 $74,089.60 223 non‐exempt Util Acctg Tech 1 $26.41 $27.20 $27.20 $28.03 2 $27.80 $28.63 $28.63 $29.51 3 $29.26 $30.14 $30.14 $31.06 4 $30.80 $31.73 $31.73 $32.69 5 $32.42 $5,619.47 $67,433.60 $33.40 $5,789.33 $69,472.00 $33.40 $5,789.33 $69,472.00$34.41 $5,964.40 $71,572.80 272 non‐exempt Util Comp Tech 1 $41.31 $43.19 $45.45 $46.83 2 $43.48 $45.46 $47.84 $49.29 3 $45.77 $47.85 $50.36 $51.88 4 $48.18 $50.37 $53.01 $54.61 5 $50.72 $8,791.47 $105,497.60 $53.02 $9,190.13 $110,281.60 $55.80 $9,672.00 $116,064.00$57.48 $9,963.20 $119,558.40 273 non‐exempt Util Comp Tech‐L 1 $44.19 $46.20 $48.63 $50.09 2 $46.52 $48.63 $51.19 $52.73 3 $48.97 $51.19 $53.88 $55.51 4 $51.55 $53.88 $56.72 $58.43 5 $54.26 $9,405.07 $112,860.80 $56.72 $9,831.47 $117,977.60 $59.71 $10,349.73 $124,196.80$61.51 $10,661.73 $127,940.80 17 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 219 non‐exempt Util Credit/Col Spec 1 $31.47 $32.40 $32.40 $33.38 2 $33.13 $34.11 $34.11 $35.14 3 $34.87 $35.91 $35.91 $36.99 4 $36.70 $37.80 $37.80 $38.94 5 $38.63 $6,695.87 $80,350.40 $39.79 $6,896.93 $82,763.20 $39.79 $6,896.93 $82,763.20$40.99 $7,104.93 $85,259.20 310 non‐exempt Util Engr Estimator 1 $41.03 $42.45 $42.66 $43.95 2 $43.19 $44.68 $44.90 $46.26 3 $45.46 $47.03 $47.26 $48.69 4 $47.85 $49.51 $49.75 $51.25 5 $50.37 $8,730.80 $104,769.60 $52.12 $9,034.13 $108,409.60 $52.37 $9,077.47 $108,929.60$53.95 $9,351.33 $112,216.00 486 non‐exempt Util Fld Svcs Rep 1 $34.12 $36.09 $37.08 $38.19 2 $35.92 $37.99 $39.03 $40.20 3 $37.81 $39.99 $41.08 $42.32 4 $39.80 $42.09 $43.24 $44.55 5 $41.89 $7,260.93 $87,131.20 $44.30 $7,678.67 $92,144.00 $45.52 $7,890.13 $94,681.60$46.89 $8,127.60 $97,531.20 480 non‐exempt Util Install/Rep 1 $33.27 $35.18 $36.15 $37.24 2 $35.02 $37.03 $38.05 $39.20 3 $36.86 $38.98 $40.05 $41.26 4 $38.80 $41.03 $42.16 $43.43 5 $40.84 $7,078.93 $84,947.20 $43.19 $7,486.27 $89,835.20 $44.38 $7,692.53 $92,310.40$45.72 $7,924.80 $95,097.60 481 non‐exempt Util Install/Rep Ast 1 $28.22 $29.84 $30.66 $31.58 2 $29.70 $31.41 $32.27 $33.24 3 $31.26 $33.06 $33.97 $34.99 4 $32.91 $34.80 $35.76 $36.83 5 $34.64 $6,004.27 $72,051.20 $36.63 $6,349.20 $76,190.40 $37.64 $6,524.27 $78,291.20$38.77 $6,720.13 $80,641.60 479 non‐exempt Util Install/Rep‐L1$36.31 $38.39 $39.44 $40.64 2 $38.22 $40.41 $41.52 $42.78 3 $40.23 $42.54 $43.71 $45.03 4 $42.35 $44.78 $46.01 $47.40 5 $44.58 $7,727.20 $92,726.40 $47.14 $8,170.93 $98,051.20 $48.43 $8,394.53 $100,734.40$49.89 $8,647.60 $103,771.20 363 non‐exempt Util Key Acct Rep 1 $40.16 $41.35 $41.35 $42.61 2 $42.27 $43.53 $43.53 $44.85 3 $44.49 $45.82 $45.82 $47.21 4 $46.83 $48.23 $48.23 $49.69 5 $49.29 $8,543.60 $102,523.20 $50.77 $8,800.13 $105,601.60 $50.77 $8,800.13 $105,601.60$52.30 $9,065.33 $108,784.00 3630 non‐exempt Util Key Acct Rep ‐S 1 $40.16 $41.35 $41.35 $42.61 2 $42.27 $43.53 $43.53 $44.85 3 $44.49 $45.82 $45.82 $47.21 4 $46.83 $48.23 $48.23 $49.69 5 $49.29 $8,543.60 $102,523.20 $50.77 $8,800.13 $105,601.60 $50.77 $8,800.13 $105,601.60$52.30 $9,065.33 $108,784.00 271 non‐exempt Util Locator 1 $31.32 $33.13 $34.03 $35.06 2 $32.97 $34.87 $35.82 $36.91 3 $34.70 $36.70 $37.71 $38.85 4 $36.53 $38.63 $39.69 $40.89 5 $38.45 $6,664.67 $79,976.00 $40.66 $7,047.73 $84,572.80 $41.78 $7,241.87 $86,902.40$43.04 $7,460.27 $89,523.20 271 non‐exempt Util Locator 1 $32.89 *** Effecitve 05/16/2016 $34.78 $35.74 $36.80 *** Effecitve 05/16/2016 2 $34.62 $36.61 $37.62 $38.74 3 $36.44 $38.54 $39.60 $40.78 4 $38.36 $40.57 $41.68 $42.93 5 $40.38 $6,999.20 $83,990.40 $42.70 $7,401.33 $88,816.00 $43.87 $7,604.13 $91,249.60$45.19 $7,832.93 $93,995.20 215 non‐exempt Util Marketing Program Admin 1 $38.15 $39.29 $39.29 $40.48 2 $40.16 $41.36 $41.36 $42.61 3 $42.27 $43.54 $43.54 $44.85 4 $44.49 $45.83 $45.83 $47.21 5 $46.83 $8,117.20 $97,406.40 $48.24 $8,361.60 $100,339.20 $48.24 $8,361.60 $100,339.20$49.69 $8,612.93 $103,355.20 233 non‐exempt Util Rate Analyst 1 $36.77 $37.88 $37.88 $39.02 2 $38.71 $39.87 $39.87 $41.07 3 $40.75 $41.97 $41.97 $43.23 4 $42.89 $44.18 $44.18 $45.51 5 $45.15 $7,826.00 $93,912.00 $46.51 $8,061.73 $96,740.80 $46.51 $8,061.73 $96,740.80$47.91 $8,304.40 $99,652.80 18 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 307 non‐exempt Util Syst Oper 1 $47.94 $50.11 $50.89 $52.42 2 $50.46 $52.75 $53.57 $55.18 3 $53.12 $55.53 $56.39 $58.08 4 $55.92 $58.45 $59.36 $61.14 5 $58.86 $10,202.40 $122,428.80 $61.53 $10,665.20 $127,982.40 $62.48 $10,829.87 $129,958.40$64.36 $11,155.73 $133,868.80 322 non‐exempt Util Syst Oper in Training 1 $45.54 $47.60 $48.35 $49.80 2 $47.94 $50.11 $50.89 $52.42 3 $50.46 $52.75 $53.57 $55.18 4 $53.12 $55.53 $56.39 $58.08 5 $55.92 $9,692.80 $116,313.60 $58.45 $10,131.33 $121,576.00 $59.36 $10,289.07 $123,468.80$61.14 $10,597.60 $127,171.20 284 non‐exempt Utilities Engineer Estimator Lead 1 $43.90 $45.41 $45.64 $47.02 2 $46.21 $47.80 $48.04 $49.49 3 $48.64 $50.32 $50.57 $52.09 4 $51.20 $52.97 $53.23 $54.83 5 $53.89 $9,340.93 $112,091.20 $55.76 $9,665.07 $115,980.80 $56.03 $9,711.87 $116,542.40$57.72 $10,004.80 $120,057.60 290 non‐exempt Utl Install Repair Lead‐Welding Cert 1 $37.15 $39.29 $40.37 $41.59 2 $39.11 $41.36 $42.49 $43.78 3 $41.17 $43.54 $44.73 $46.08 4 $43.34 $45.83 $47.08 $48.50 5 $45.62 $7,907.47 $94,889.60 $48.24 $8,361.60 $100,339.20 $49.56 $8,590.40 $103,084.80$51.05 $8,848.67 $106,184.00 289 non‐exempt Utl Install Repair‐Welding Cert 1 $34.58 $36.58 $37.57 $38.70 2 $36.40 $38.50 $39.55 $40.74 3 $38.32 $40.53 $41.63 $42.88 4 $40.34 $42.66 $43.82 $45.14 5 $42.46 $7,359.73 $88,316.80 $44.90 $7,782.67 $93,392.00 $46.13 $7,995.87 $95,950.40$47.52 $8,236.80 $98,841.60 278 non‐exempt Veterinarian Tech 1 $25.18 $26.03 $26.12 $26.90 2 $26.51 $27.40 $27.49 $28.32 3 $27.91 $28.84 $28.94 $29.81 4 $29.38 $30.36 $30.46 $31.38 5 $30.93 $5,361.20 $64,334.40 $31.96 $5,539.73 $66,476.80 $32.06 $5,557.07 $66,684.80$33.03 $5,725.20 $68,702.40 274 non‐exempt Volunteer Coord 1 $29.41 $30.55 $30.83 $31.76 2 $30.96 $32.16 $32.45 $33.43 3 $32.59 $33.85 $34.16 $35.19 4 $34.30 $35.63 $35.96 $37.04 5 $36.10 $6,257.33 $75,088.00 $37.51 $6,501.73 $78,020.80 $37.85 $6,560.67 $78,728.00$38.99 $6,758.27 $81,099.20 482 non‐exempt Water Meter Rep Asst 1 $24.06 $25.18 $25.57 $26.34 2 $25.33 $26.50 $26.92 $27.73 3 $26.66 $27.89 $28.34 $29.19 4 $28.06 $29.36 $29.83 $30.73 5 $29.54 $5,120.27 $61,443.20 $30.90 $5,356.00 $64,272.00 $31.40 $5,442.67 $65,312.00$32.35 $5,607.33 $67,288.00 484 non‐exempt Water Meter Repair 1 $26.65 $27.88 $28.33 $29.18 2 $28.05 $29.35 $29.82 $30.72 3 $29.53 $30.89 $31.39 $32.34 4 $31.08 $32.52 $33.04 $34.04 5 $32.72 $5,671.47 $68,057.60 $34.23 $5,933.20 $71,198.40 $34.78 $6,028.53 $72,342.40$35.83 $6,210.53 $74,526.40 499 non‐exempt Water Sys Oper I1$28.98 $29.86 $29.86 $30.75 2 $30.50 $31.43 $31.43 $32.37 3 $32.11 $33.08 $33.08 $34.07 4 $33.80 $34.82 $34.82 $35.86 5 $35.58 $6,167.20 $74,006.40 $36.65 $6,352.67 $76,232.00 $36.65 $6,352.67 $76,232.00$37.75 $6,543.33 $78,520.00 507 non‐exempt Water Sys Oper II 1 $33.12 $34.11 $34.11 $35.12 2 $34.86 $35.90 $35.90 $36.97 3 $36.69 $37.79 $37.79 $38.92 4 $38.62 $39.78 $39.78 $40.97 5 $40.65 $7,046.00 $84,552.00 $41.87 $7,257.47 $87,089.60 $41.87 $7,257.47 $87,089.60$43.13 $7,475.87 $89,710.40 500 non‐exempt WQC Plt Oper I1$30.41 $31.32 $31.32 $32.26 2 $32.01 $32.97 $32.97 $33.96 3 $33.69 $34.70 $34.70 $35.75 4 $35.46 $36.53 $36.53 $37.63 5 $37.33 $6,470.53 $77,646.40 $38.45 $6,664.67 $79,976.00 $38.45 $6,664.67 $79,976.00$39.61 $6,865.73 $82,388.80 19 City of Palo Alto SEIU Salary Schedule FY16/17/18 Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Rate Approx. Monthly Approx. Annual Salary Effective 12/9/2017 (PP26:2017)StepsJob TitleFLSAJob Code Salary Effective 4/16/2016 (PP09:2016) Salary Effective 12/10/2016 (PP26:2016)Salray Effective 7/08/2017 (PP15:2017) 509 non‐exempt WQC Plt Oper II 1 $34.74 $35.78 $35.78 $36.86 2 $36.57 $37.66 $37.66 $38.80 3 $38.49 $39.64 $39.64 $40.84 4 $40.52 $41.73 $41.73 $42.99 5 $42.65 $7,392.67 $88,712.00 $43.93 $7,614.53 $91,374.40 $43.93 $7,614.53 $91,374.40$45.25 $7,843.33 $94,120.00 510 non‐exempt WQC Plt Oper Trn 1 $26.77 $27.57 $27.57 $28.41 2 $28.18 $29.02 $29.02 $29.90 3 $29.66 $30.55 $30.55 $31.47 4 $31.22 $32.16 $32.16 $33.13 5 $32.86 $5,695.73 $68,348.80 $33.85 $5,867.33 $70,408.00 $33.85 $5,867.33 $70,408.00$34.87 $6,044.13 $72,529.60 226 non‐exempt Wtr Mtr Crs Cn Tec 1 $27.34 $28.60 $29.07 $29.93 2 $28.78 $30.10 $30.60 $31.51 3 $30.29 $31.68 $32.21 $33.17 4 $31.88 $33.35 $33.90 $34.92 5 $33.56 $5,817.07 $69,804.80 $35.11 $6,085.73 $73,028.80 $35.68 $6,184.53 $74,214.40$36.76 $6,371.73 $76,460.80 20 Updated 10/30/2017 Job Code Classifications Grade Codes Min Hourly Rate Mid Point Hourly Rate Max Hourly Rate Approx Mid-Point Monthly Salary Annual Salary 2076 Administrative Assistant - U 700 $30.08 $37.59 $45.11 $6,516 $78,187 1002 Assistant Director Utilities - Customer Support 230 $63.42 $79.27 $95.13 $13,740 $164,882 1003 Assistant Director Utilities - Engineering 190 $70.46 $88.07 $105.69 $15,265 $183,186 6 Assistant Director Utilities - Operations 210 $70.46 $88.07 $105.69 $15,265 $183,186 65 Assistant Director Utilities - Resource Management 190 $70.46 $88.07 $105.69 $15,265 $183,186 84 Division Manager/Manager of Communications 380 $45.72 $57.14 $68.57 $9,904 $118,851 129 Engineering Manager, Electric 231 $60.48 $75.59 $90.71 $13,102 $157,227 120 Engineering Manager, Water, Gas & Wastewater 231 $60.48 $75.59 $90.71 $13,102 $157,227 120 Engineering Manager, Water, Gas & Wastewater 231 $69.55 $86.93 $104.32 $15,068 $180,814 179 Manager, Customer Service and Meter Reading 300 $48.56 $60.70 $72.84 $10,521 $126,256 185 Manager, Electric Operations 270 $59.22 $74.02 $88.83 $12,830 $153,962 1114 Manager, Utilities Credit & Collection 300 $48.56 $60.70 $72.84 $10,521 $126,256 150 Manager, Utilities Program Services 300 $48.56 $60.70 $72.84 $10,521 $126,256 156 Manager, Utilities Operations WGW 290 $59.14 $73.92 $88.71 $12,813 $153,754 48 Manager, Utilities Telecommunications 250 $53.47 $66.83 $80.20 $11,584 $139,006 13 Senior Business Analyst 340 $43.86 $54.82 $65.79 $9,502 $114,026 188 Senior Electrical Engineer 291 $55.33 $69.16 $83.00 $11,988 $143,853 2187 Senior Engineer - U 710 $52.64 $65.79 $78.95 $11,404 $136,843 25 Sr. Resource Planner 271 $54.02 $67.52 $81.03 $11,703 $140,442 27 Supervising Electrical Project Engineer 341 $51.42 $64.27 $77.13 $11,140 $133,682 28 Supervising Project Engineer 360 $47.75 $59.68 $71.62 $10,345 $124,134 1115 Supervisor, Inspection Services 390 $36.72 $45.89 $55.07 $7,955 $95,465 1011 Utilities Compliance Manager 290 $59.14 $73.92 $88.71 $12,813 $153,754 114 Utilities Supervisor 680 $51.32 $64.14 $76.97 $11,118 $133,411 2020 Principal Business Analyst - U TBD $46.93 $58.66 $70.40 $10,168 $122,013 2017 Utility Safety Officer TBD $38.72 $48.40 $58.08 $8,389 $100,672 2025 Manager Utilities Strategic Business 231 $60.48 $75.59 $90.71 $13,102 $157,227 UMPAPA Salary Schedule City of Palo Alto (ID # 8290) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 10/30/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of a Contract with EnvisionWare, Inc., for Maintenance of Library Equipment for $448,634. Title: Approval of a 5-year Contract With EnvisionWare, Inc. for Maintenance of the Automated Materials Handling Systems (AMHS) at Rinconada and Mitchell Park Libraries for a Not-to-Exceed Total of $448,634 From: City Manager Lead Department: Library Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with EnvisionWare, Inc., in the amount of $373,861.29 for a 5-year renewal of maintenance and support for the Automated Material Handling Systems (AMHS) at the Rinconada and Mitchell Park Libraries; and 2. Approve a 20% contingency of $74,772 in addition to the contract amount. Executive Summary The Library has operated two installations of AMHS systems at Rinconada and Mitchell Park Libraries. Under Contract C12144307, the funds for the two installations were covered by Measure N as part of the new building project. After the first year of operation, the Library’s Operating Budget funded the yearly maintenance of the systems. A new contract, C18169539, (Attachment A) for a 5-year maintenance renewal at a cost of $373,861.29 will provide guaranteed ongoing operation of these systems. Ongoing maintenance and support costs are necessary to ensure continued efficient operation of the hardware and software of these systems. These systems have greatly assisted with workload, accuracy, and timeliness of check- in transactions and freed up staff for higher levels of customer service duties. Background A feasibility study and implementation plan for Radio Frequency Identification Systems (RFID) and an Automated Materials Handling System (AMHS) was completed in 2006. The implementation of the AMHS specifically responds to City Council direction to employ technology solutions in the Library, and the City Auditor’s recommendation in the July 2007 Audit of Library Operations, to expedite an RFID and AMHS implementation. The Palo Alto City City of Palo Alto Page 2 Library Technology Plan, 2009-2013, included a detailed analysis, evaluation, and recommendation for RFID and AMHS for the Palo Alto City Library. The AMH systems were implemented at the Mitchell Park Library in 2014 and at the Rinconada Library in 2015. The AMH systems in place are provided by EnvisionWare who are the sole-source vendor for providing maintenance and support. Yearly maintenance for the 2 systems will average $76,000 per year. This request for approval of a 5-year maintenance plan for these systems will allow the library to budget accordingly with a locked in maintenance cost each year. Discussion In the past three years, the Library’s AMHS have achieved these goals: Managing an increasing circulation workload without additional staffing; Achieving capacity for high levels of customer service; Freeing up staff from current repetitive and routine tasks; Reducing the risk of potential repetitive motion injuries; Reducing material losses; and Improving circulation efficiency and shelf accuracy. The AMHS in place in the new and renovated libraries allow for greater efficiency in managing material returns in a busy library system that sees annual circulation of approximately 1.5 million physical items. These systems also offer customers ease of use with 24-hour operation and immediate check-in of their returned material. These robust systems comprised of complex hardware and software require regular maintenance to continue the high performance users have come to expect. In approving an extended maintenance contract with EnvisionWare, this sole-source provider for AMHS maintenance and support will guarantee that the systems experience maximum uptime and benefit from any new releases and enhancements. Timeline, Resource Impact, Policy Implications, Environmental Review Funds for this 5-year contract covering the ongoing equipment and software maintenance costs are estimated at $76,000 per year for the 2 systems and are budgeted annually in the Library Operating Budget. Implementation of AMHS is not considered a project subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Environmental review for the Measure N bond projects was completed prior to the 2008 election. Attachments: Attachment A - C18165539 EnvisionWare GSA FINAL 10.10.17.docx Attachment B - Summary City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 1 Rev. February 8, 2017 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C18169539 GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into on the 17th day of July, 2017, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and ENVISIONWARE, a Georgia Corporation, located at 2855 Premiere Parkway, Suite A, Duluth, GA, 30097 Telephone Number: 800-216-8370 (“CONTRACTOR”). In consideration of their mutual covenants, the parties hereto agree as follows: Definitions “Customer Agreement” means the agreement in place between CITY and CONTRACTOR regarding the purchase of Software and/or Hardware (and possibly other services). “Customer Forum” means the CONTRACTOR’s open forum where the CONTRACTOR’s customers from around the world share ideas and concerns related to Computer and Financial Management, Self-Service Circulation, RFID, and Automated Materials Handling topics. The Customer Forum is not moderated by our support group. “EnvisionWare Customer Center” means CONTRACTOR’s online self-service portal into the CITY’s relationship with the CONTRACTOR where the CITY can open and manage support cases, view issues and submit and track enhancements, view the CITY’s maintenance status and annual billing information, see a history of items purchased and much more. “Hardware” means equipment (including, but not limited to, computers, displays, printers, readers, sorters, and the like) that CITY have purchased directly from CONTRACTOR or one of the CONTRACTOR’s authorized reseller partners. “Knowledge Base” means the repository of articles and FAQs accessible online at any time from CONTRACTOR’s Customer Center. Access is based upon the maintenance program level. “LiveChat” means CONTRACTOR’s online chat service that enables CITY to communicate with one of the CONTRACTOR’s support technicians. Access is based upon the maintenance program level. DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 2 Rev. February 8, 2017 “Preventative Maintenance” service (provided with Platinum and Platinum PLUS maintenance programs) means proactive replacement of parts, cleaning, system updates and performance testing and certification. “Software” means the object code versions of any software programs and any updates to the software programs that the CONTRACTOR may provide to CITY that CITY has purchased directly from CONTRACTOR or one of CONTRACTOR’s authorized reseller partners. “Standard Support Hours” means 8:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Eastern U.S. Time, Monday through Friday, excluding U.S. federal holidays. “Telephone Support” means support provided via the following telephone numbers: North America: 888-409-0888 or +1 678-382-6600. “Hardware Revisions” means a system update to improve the reliability, compatibility and/or performance of a complex system. Hardware Revisions may include new components and assemblies, parts replacements, onsite machining, onsite labor, software and firmware updates, documentation changes and related services, and testing. 1. SERVICES. CONTRACTOR shall provide or furnish the services (the “Services”) described in the Scope of Services, attached at Exhibit A. Optional On-Call Provision (This provision only applies if checked and only applies to on-call agreements.) Services will be authorized by CITY, as needed, with a Task Order assigned and approved by CITY’s Project Manager. Each Task Order shall be in substantially the same form as Exhibit A-1. Each Task Order shall designate a CITY Project Manager and shall contain a specific scope of work, a specific schedule of performance and a specific compensation amount. The total price of all Task Orders issued under this Agreement shall not exceed the amount of Compensation set forth in Section 5 of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall only be compensated for work performed under an authorized Task Order and CITY may elect, but is not required, to authorize work up to the maximum compensation amount set forth in Section 5. 2. EXHIBITS. The following exhibits are attached to and made a part of this Agreement: “A” - Scope of Services “B” - Schedule of Performance “C” – Schedule of Fees DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 3 Rev. February 8, 2017 “D” - Insurance Requirements “E” – End User License Agreement CONTRACT IS NOT COMPLETE UNLESS ALL INDICATED EXHIBITS ARE ATTACHED. 3. TERM. The term of this Agreement is from August 1, 2017 to July 31, 2022 inclusive, subject to the provisions of Sections Q and V of the General Terms and Conditions. 4. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. CONTRACTOR shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to CONTRACTOR, and if applicable, in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Schedule of Performance, attached at Exhibit B. Time is of the essence in this Agreement. 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: The total maximum lump sum compensation of dollars ($ ); OR The sum of dollars ($ ) per hour, not to exceed a total maximum compensation amount of dollars ($ ); OR A sum calculated in accordance with the fee schedule set forth at Exhibit C, not to exceed a total maximum annual compensation amount of Seventy-Six Thousand and Eight Hundred and Eighteen Dollars and Ninety-Two cents ($76,818.92) and not to exceed the total compensation of five years of Three Hundred and Seventy-Three Thousand and Eight Hundred and Sixty-One Dollars and Twenty-Nine cents (373,861.29) 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. CITY has set aside the sum of Zero dollars ($0.00) for Additional Services. CONTRACTOR shall provide Additional Services only by advanced, written authorization from the City Manager or designee. CONTRACTOR, at the DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 4 Rev. February 8, 2017 CITY’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONTRACTOR’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services. Compensation shall be based on the hourly rates set forth above or in Exhibit C (whichever is applicable), or if such rates are not applicable, a negotiated lump sum. CITY shall not authorize and CONTRACTOR shall not perform any Additional Services for which payment would exceed the amount set forth above for Additional Services. Payment for Additional Services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. 6. COMPENSATION DURING ADDITIONAL TERMS. CONTRACTOR’S compensation rates for each additional term shall be as specified in the quotations that are listed and included as part of Exhibit C; OR CONTRACTOR’s compensation rates shall be adjusted effective on the commencement of each Additional Term. The lump sum compensation amount, hourly rates, or fees, whichever is applicable as set forth in section 5 above, shall be adjusted by a percentage equal to the change in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers for the San Francisco-Oakland- San Jose area, published by the United States Department of Labor Statistics (CPI) which is published most immediately preceding the commencement of the applicable Additional Term, which shall be compared with the CPI published most immediately preceding the commencement date of the then expiring term. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no event shall CONTRACTOR’s compensation rates be increased by an amount exceeding five percent of the rates effective during the immediately preceding term. Any adjustment to CONTRACTOR’s compensation rates shall be reflected in a written amendment to this Agreement. 7. CLAIMS PROCEDURE FOR “9204 PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS”. For purposes of this Section 7, a “9204 Public Works Project” means the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any public structure, building, road, or other public improvement of any kind. Public Contract Code Section 9204 mandates certain claims procedures for Public Works Projects, which are set forth in “Appendix __ Claims for Public Contract Code Section 9204 Public Works Projects”. DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 5 Rev. February 8, 2017 This project is a 9204 Public Works Project and is required to comply with the claims procedures set forth in Appendix __, attached hereto and incorporated herein. OR This project is not a 9204 Public Works Project. 8. INVOICING. Send all invoices to CITY, Attention: Project Manager. The Project Manager is: Martha Walters, Dept.: Public Library, Telephone: 650-329-2308. Invoices shall be submitted annually for prepaid services. Invoices shall provide a detailed statement of Services to be performed during the invoice period and are subject to verification by CITY. CITY shall pay the undisputed amount of invoices within 30 days of receipt. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. ACCEPTANCE. CONTRACTOR accepts and agrees to all terms and conditions of this Agreement. This Agreement includes and is limited to the terms and conditions set forth in sections 1 through 7 above, these general terms and conditions and the attached exhibits. B. QUALIFICATIONS. CONTRACTOR represents and warrants that it has the expertise and qualifications to complete the services described in Section 1 of this Agreement, entitled “SERVICES,” and that every individual charged with the performance of the services under this Agreement has sufficient skill and experience and is duly licensed or certified, to the extent such licensing or certification is required by law, to perform the Services. CITY expressly relies on CONTRACTOR’s representations regarding its skills, knowledge, and certifications. CONTRACTOR shall perform all work in accordance with generally accepted business practices and performance standards of the industry, including all federal, state, and local operation and safety regulations. C. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in the performance of this Agreement, CONTRACTOR and any person employed by CONTRACTOR shall at all times be considered an independent CONTRACTOR and not an agent or employee of CITY. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to complete the work required under this Agreement. D. SUBCONTRACTORS. CONTRACTOR may use subcontractors to perform any Services under this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible for directing the work of approved subcontractors and for any compensation due to subcontractors. DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 6 Rev. February 8, 2017 E. TAXES AND CHARGES. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for payment of all taxes, fees, contributions or charges applicable to the conduct of CONTRACTOR’s business. F. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONTRACTOR shall in the performance of the Services comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders. G. 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. H. DAMAGE TO PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY. CONTRACTOR shall, at its sole expense, repair in kind, or as the City Manager or designee shall direct, any damage to public or private property that occurs in connection with CONTRACTOR’s performance of the Services. CITY may decline to approve and may withhold payment in whole or in part to such extent as may be necessary to protect CITY from loss because of defective work not remedied or other damage to the CITY occurring in connection with CONTRACTOR’s performance of the Services. CITY shall submit written documentation in support of such withholding upon CONTRACTOR’s request. When the grounds described above are removed, payment shall be made for amounts withheld because of them. DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 7 Rev. February 8, 2017 I. WARRANTIES. CONTRACTOR expressly warrants that all services provided under this Agreement shall be performed in a professional and workmanlike manner in accordance with generally accepted business practices and performance standards of the industry and the requirements of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR expressly warrants that all materials, goods and equipment provided by CONTRACTOR under this Agreement shall be fit for the particular purpose intended, shall be free from defects, and shall conform to the requirements of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR agrees to promptly replace or correct any material or service not in compliance with these warranties, including incomplete, inaccurate, or defective material or service, at no further cost to CITY. The warranties set forth in this section shall be in effect for a period of one year from completion of the Services and shall survive the completion of the Services or termination of this Agreement. J. MONITORING OF SERVICES. CITY may monitor the Services performed under this Agreement to determine whether CONTRACTOR’s work is completed in a satisfactory manner and complies with the provisions of this Agreement. K. CITY’S PROPERTY. Any reports, information, data or other material (including copyright interests) developed, collected, assembled, prepared, or caused to be prepared under this Agreement will become the property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use and will not be made available to any individual or organization by CONTRACTOR or its subcontractors, if any, without the prior written approval of the City Manager. This section K. does not purport to take copyright or ownership of CONTRACTOR’s intellectual property rights in its software, product manuals, and configuration guides. L. AUDITS. CONTRACTOR agrees to permit CITY and its authorized representatives to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years from the date of final payment, CONTRACTOR’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONTRACTOR agrees to maintain accurate books and records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for at least three (3) following the terms of this Agreement. M. NO IMPLIED WAIVER. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY shall operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. N. INSURANCE. CONTRACTOR, at its sole cost, shall purchase and maintain in full force during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described at Exhibit D. Insurance must be provided by companies with a Best’s Key Rating of A-:VII or higher and which are otherwise acceptable to CITY’s Risk Manager. The Risk Manager must approve deductibles and self-insured retentions. In addition, DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 8 Rev. February 8, 2017 all policies, endorsements, certificates and/or binders are subject to approval by the Risk Manager as to form and content. CONTRACTOR shall obtain a policy endorsement naming the City of Palo Alto as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy. CONTRACTOR shall obtain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled or materially reduced in coverage or limits until after providing 30 days prior written notice of the cancellation or modification to the Risk Manager. CONTRACTOR shall provide certificates of such policies or other evidence of coverage satisfactory to the Risk Manager, together with the required endorsements and evidence of payment of premiums, to CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement and shall throughout the term of this Agreement provide current certificates evidencing the required insurance coverages and endorsements to the Risk Manager. CONTRACTOR shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall obtain and provide to CITY separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor that meet all the requirements of this section. The procuring of such required policies of insurance shall not operate to limit CONTRACTOR’s liability or obligation to indemnify CITY under this Agreement. O. HOLD HARMLESS. To the fullest extent permitted by law and without limitation by the provisions of section N relating to insurance, CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents from and against any and all demands, claims, injuries, losses, or liabilities of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss and including without limitation all damages, penalties, fines and judgments, associated investigation and administrative expenses and defense costs, including, but not limited to reasonable attorney’s fees, courts costs and costs of alternative dispute resolution), arising out of, or resulting in any way from or in connection with the performance of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR’s obligations under this Section apply regardless of whether or not a liability is caused or contributed to by any negligent (passive or active) act or omission of CITY, except that CONTRACTOR shall not be obligated to indemnify for liability arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of CITY. The acceptance of the Services by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section survive the completion of the Services or termination of this Agreement. P. NON-DISCRIMINATION. 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 DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 9 Rev. February 8, 2017 Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. Q. WORKERS' COMPENSATION. CONTRACTOR, by executing this Agreement, certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California 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 certifies that it will comply with such provisions, as applicable, before commencing and during the performance of the Services. R. TERMINATION. The City Manager may terminate this Agreement without cause by giving ten (10) days’ prior written notice thereof to CONTRACTOR. If CONTRACTOR fails to perform any of its material obligations under this Agreement, in addition to all other remedies provided by law, the City Manager may terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice of termination. Upon receipt of such notice of termination, CONTRACTOR shall immediately discontinue performance. CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR for services satisfactorily performed up to the effective date of termination. If the termination is for cause, CITY may deduct from such payment the amount of actual damage, if any, sustained by CITY due to CONTRACTOR’s failure to perform its material obligations under this Agreement. Upon termination, CONTRACTOR shall immediately deliver to the City Manager any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other material or products, whether or not completed, prepared by CONTRACTOR or given to CONTRACTOR, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials shall become the property of CITY. S. ASSIGNMENTS/CHANGES. This Agreement binds the parties and their successors and assigns to all covenants of this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be assigned or transferred without the prior written consent of CITY. No amendments, changes or variations of any kind are authorized without the written consent of CITY. T. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. In accepting this Agreement, CONTRACTOR 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 this Contract. CONTRACTOR further covenants that, in the performance of this Contract, it will not employ any person having such an interest. CONTRACTOR certifies that no CITY Officer, employee, or authorized representative has any financial interest in the business of CONTRACTOR and that no person associated with CONTRACTOR has any interest, direct or indirect, which could conflict with the faithful performance of this Contract. CONTRACTOR agrees to advise CITY if any conflict arises. DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 10 Rev. February 8, 2017 U. GOVERNING LAW. This contract shall be governed and interpreted by the laws of the State of California. V. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement, including all exhibits, represents the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the services that may be the subject of this Agreement. Any variance in the exhibits does not affect the validity of the Agreement and the Agreement itself controls over any conflicting provisions in the exhibits. This Agreement supersedes all prior agreements, representations, statements, negotiations and undertakings whether oral or written. W. NON-APPROPRIATION. 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 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 Contract. X. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONTRACTOR shall comply with CITY’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at CITY’s Purchasing Division, which are incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONTRACTOR 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, CONTRACTOR shall comply with the following zero waste requirements: All printed materials provided by CONTRACTOR 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. Goods purchased by Contractor 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. Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by CONTRCATOR, at no additional cost to CITY, for reuse or recycling. CONTRACTOR shall provide DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 11 Rev. February 8, 2017 documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. Y. AUTHORITY. The individual(s) executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. Z. 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 contract is not a public works contract, if 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. 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 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. AA. DIR REGISTRATION. In regard to any public work construction, alteration, demolition, repair or maintenance work, CITY will not accept a bid proposal from or enter into this Agreement 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. City requires CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of SB 854. CITY provides notice to CONTRACTOR of the requirements of California Labor Code section 1771.1(a), which reads: DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 12 Rev. February 8, 2017 “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 contractor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 at the time the contract is awarded.” 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. CITY requires CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of Labor Code section 1776, including: 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. 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. 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. [For state- and federally-funded projects] 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. 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. DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 13 Rev. February 8, 2017 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. BB. CONTRACT TERMS. All unchecked boxes do not apply to this Agreement. In the case of any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the exhibits hereto or CONTRACTOR’s proposal (if any), the Agreement shall control. In the case of any conflict between the exhibits hereto and CONTRACTOR’s proposal, the exhibits shall control. 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 ENVISIONWARE, INC. ______________________________ By________________________________________ City Manager Name Michael J. Monk Title CEO Telephone: 1-678-382-6590 Approved as to form: ___________________________ City Attorney or Designee DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 14 Rev. February 8, 2017 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES Maintenance Programs. CONTRACTOR will provide maintenance services as follows: Platinum Level: Services available via the CONTRACTOR Customer Center portal and via toll-free telephone in North America 24x7 365 days per year. These services include the Knowledge Base, Customer Forum access, Support Case management, Enhancement and Defect tracking, software downloads, and documentation. LiveChat is available via the Customer Center during Standard Support Hours. Requests for service after Standard Support Hours must be made via the toll- free telephone number using your Platinum support access PIN. EnvisionWare is to have calls answered within 2 hours during all times and onsite response dispatched within 4 hours of determining that a site visit is required. The maximum interval for onsite arrival is 24 hours after determination that a site visit is required. When a sorter (AMH) or a 24-Hour Library™ unit is purchased, a Preventative Maintenance site visit is performed within 60 days of each annual renewal. The lifetime coverage limit is specified on a per-item basis and in no case exceeds a guaranteed lifetime of ten (10) years. Sorters (AMH) and 24-Hour Libraries are guaranteed for a lifetime of ten (10) years provided there is continued Platinum maintenance coverage from the Effective date. Any lapse in coverage for a period of more than 30 days will void the ten (10) year guarantee. Software patches and new versions of licensed Software as well as Hardware Revisions are available without added charge. Platinum Level Service requires continued coverage of all items purchased from CONTRACTOR that remain in use by CITY except for consumables. Service Level Objectives CONTRACTOR goal is to answer 90% of all incoming support calls with a live technician. Support Response i) Platinum Support CONTRACTOR goal is to answer all of the CITY’s inquiries within 2 hours, and to attempt to remedy any major outage within 48 hours. DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 15 Rev. February 8, 2017 Should CONTRACTOR fail to achieve the applicable performance objective for Platinum Level Maintenance measured as an average of all failures over a calendar quarter not meeting the applicable objective of all incidents and if CITY has notified CONTRACTOR Support or our Director of Support via email (with appropriate details of the case number and the failure) no later than thirty (30) calendar days from the end of the calendar quarter in which failure occurred, CONTRACTOR will credit the next invoice to the CITY in the amount of one month of maintenance as prorated for that item being serviced. The measurements will reset each calendar quarter A failure to achieve a service objective shall not be a breach of this Agreement or give rise to a credit if and to the extent that failure to achieve a service objective was primarily caused by any one or more of the following: i) Prioritization of tasks or reduction of resources requested by the CITY in writing with the written understanding by the parties that we will be excused by any resulting service level impact; ii) Occurrence of a Force Majeure event (as defined herein); iii) Any breach, failure to perform an agreed-upon responsibility, user error or other act or omission of CITY or CITY’s customers, third party contractors or agents that materially prevents CONTRACTOR from achieving the applicable service level; or, iv) Problems originating from CITY’s facility, network, hardware, software, hosting or storage provider, server or other provider, that are outside the scope of our Services. Remote Access. CITY agrees to provide CONTRACTOR with remote access via the Central Management system the CONTRACTOR installs part of CITY’s products. If the CITY does not agree, CONTRACTOR will increase CITY’s annual maintenance cost by 10%. Limitations to the Services. i) We provide Services only for Hardware and Software as defined herein. ii) We support only the then-current release of the given Software and the most recent previous release. Notice of available Software updates is available by subscribing to Twitter (@EnvisionWare), by visiting the User Forum (subscribe via the Customer Center) or by viewing the Release Notes in the Customer Center. The CITY may download at CITY’s convenience and install on CITY’s systems according to CITY timetable for as long as CITY is covered under the applicable product warranty or Maintenance Program. DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 16 Rev. February 8, 2017 iii) Unless otherwise agreed to between CITY and CONTRACTOR, CONTRACTOR shall have no obligation to provide Services with respect to any issue resulting from (i) use of the Software or Hardware other than according to the terms of this Agreement; (ii) modification of the Software or Hardware by CITY or any third party, except as CONTRACTOR expressly permits in writing; or (iii) any combination or integration of the Software or Hardware with hardware, software and/or technology not provided by CONTRACTOR. iv) Except for payment obligations by the CITY, neither party shall be held responsible for any delay or failure in performance of any obligation under this Agreement to the extent that delay or failure is caused by fire, flood, explosion, war, act of terrorism, strike, embargo, government requirement, civil or military authority, act of God, act or omission of carriers or other similar causes beyond its control (each, a “Force Majeure” event). If any Force Majeure event occurs, the party delayed or unable to perform (“Delayed Party”) shall give immediate notice to the other party (“Affected Party”), and the Delayed Party, upon giving prompt notice to the Affected Party, shall be excused from performance under this Agreement for the duration of the Force Majeure event, provided, however, that the Delayed Party shall take all reasonable steps and cooperate with the Affected Party to avoid or remove the cause of non-performance and shall resume performance hereunder with dispatch when the cause is removed; and provided further that if the Delayed Party cannot within sixty (60) days remove the cause of non-performance, the Affected Party may terminate this Agreement. Re-establishing Maintenance After a Lapse v) If CITY budget or other reason prevents CITY from acquiring maintenance or local ordinance prevents an annual agreement in advance of a fiscal period, the CITY system will not be disabled by expiration of the maintenance agreement, but, as of the date of expiration, CITY will not have further access to updates or upgrades. vi) If CITY later choose to resume maintenance, CITY will be charged as follows: (1) The full amount of the next twelve (12) months of maintenance; and, (2) Any time and costs for updating Hardware or Software or for on-site visits; and, (3) A catch-up fee as follows: DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 17 Rev. February 8, 2017 (a) for Software maintenance: 50% of the amount of maintenance that would have been paid if maintenance had been maintained (calculated on an annual basis) and/or (b) for Hardware maintenance: 100% of the amount of maintenance that would have been paid if maintenance had been maintained (calculated on an annual basis), subject to the availability of support for the Hardware CITY have at the time of re-establishing maintenance. vii) The amounts above cover our continuing development and evolution of our software, hardware, systems and support during CITY’s lapsed period. The fact that CITY did not avail yourself of telephone or other support Services during the period the product was covered by maintenance is no cause for adjustment. If CITY have replaced Hardware that is no longer supported by CONTRACTOR, in order to be eligible for re-establishment of maintenance on the Hardware, the CITY will need to purchase new Hardware from CONTRACTOR. As part of re-establishing maintenance CONTRACTOR will provide CITY with the updates to the Software. viii) Re-establishment of maintenance is permitted only once. Payment Terms. We will invoice CITY for the Services. Payment terms are set forth in the applicable Quotation. The CITY agrees to pay CONTRACTOR according to the payment terms in the Quotation. Full payment prior to expiration of CITY’s first year warranty or prior to the expiration of the current maintenance period. If CITY does not provide timely payment, we will discontinue providing our Services. In the event that CITY is ever dissatisfied, CONTRACTOR asks that the CITY contact CONTRACTOR and provide an opportunity to remedy any problems. CITY may escalate CITY’s service request at any time by sending an email to customersatisfaction@envisionware.com. If CITY does not pay in advance for maintenance, near the end of the warranty period or each successive maintenance renewal period, CITY will receive an invoice for the annual maintenance agreement. If CITY fails to pay CITY’s maintenance Services invoice on time, CITY will receive a 30-day grace period after which CITY’s extended support Services and access to downloads will be suspended until payment is received. DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 18 Rev. February 8, 2017 EXHIBIT B SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONTRACTOR shall perform the Services for the following period of time: 08/01/2017 thru 07/31/2022. DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 19 Rev. February 8, 2017 EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF FEES All Payments are based upon CITY’s acceptance of CONTRACTOR’s performance of the phase as evidenced by successful completion of the Deliverable for that Phase. CITY shall have no obligation to pay unless CONTRACTOR has successfully completed and CITY has approved the Project Phase for which payment is due. The maximum amount of compensation to be paid to CONTRACTOR, including both payment for services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed the amounts stated in Sections 5 and 6 of the Agreement. Any 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. Each of the services below for maintenance are for “Platinum Level” service as described in Exhibit A and Quotations are attached herein as part of Exhibit C EnvisionWare Annual System Maintenance – Year 1 Quotation US-41517 $76,585.61 EnvisionWare Annual System Maintenance – Year 2 Quotation US-41522 $66,818.92 EnvisionWare Annual System Maintenance – Year 3 Quotation US-41523 $76,818.92 EnvisionWare Annual System Maintenance – Year 4 Quotation US-41524 $76,818.92 EnvisionWare Annual System Maintenance – Year 5 Quotation US-41525 $76,818.92 Total $373,861.29 DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 20 Rev. February 8, 2017 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 BCONTRACTORINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: REQUIRED 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 NO 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 MCONTRACTORT INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY 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 MCONTRACTORT SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 21 Rev. February 8, 2017 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. 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 ISSUING COMPANY 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 ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303 DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 2 2 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 22 Rev. February 8, 2017 EXHIBIT E End User License Agreement The following End User License Agreement shall supersede all other End User License Agreements for all software, hardware, and services provided by CONTRACTOR to CITY. End User License Agreements embedded in, or that are part of, software, hardware, and/or services do not apply. If CITY’s users if CONTRACTOR’s software, hardware, or services are required to agree to End User License Agreements different than the one below, only the version below will apply. Should any provision in this Exhibit E conflict with the Agreement or other Exhibits, the following order or precedence shall apply: (1) Agreement; (2) Exhibits B, C, and D; (3) this Exhibit E. ENVISIONWARE, INC. END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT AND LIMITED WARRANTY (“EULA”) IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS EULA CAREFULLY BEFORE USING THE SOFTWARE. ENVISIONWARE, INC. (“ENVISIONWARE”) IS WILLING TO LICENSE THE SOFTWARE TO YOU AS THE INDIVIDUAL, THE ORGANIZATION, OR THE LEGAL ENTITY THAT WILL BE UTILIZING THE SOFTWARE (REFERRED TO AS “YOU” OR “YOUR”) ONLY ON THE CONDITION THAT YOU ACCEPT ALL OF THE TERMS OF THIS EULA. UPON AND AS OF THE DATE ENVISIONWARE SENDS AN EMAIL TO YOU (THE “EFFECTIVE DATE”) ISSUING CREDENTIALS TO LOG INTO ENVISIONWARE’S WEBSITE FROM WHERE THE SOFTWARE MAY BE DOWNLOADED, YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS EULA. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS EULA, DO NOT ATTEMPT TO DOWNLOAD OR INSTALL THE SOFTWARE, OR, IF INSTALLED, MAKE NO FURTHER USE OF THE SOFTWARE, AND NOTIFY IN WRITING ENVISIONWARE OR THE RESELLER FROM WHOM IT WAS ACQUIRED WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS OF PURCHASE, AND THE PURCHASE PRICE WILL BE REFUNDED. 1. License: The software and documentation (collectively the “Software”) are owned by and are the property of EnvisionWare or its licensors and are protected by copyright and other intellectual property laws. Some licensors may be express or intended beneficiaries of this EULA. Subject to all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, EnvisionWare grants you a limited, non-exclusive, worldwide, non-transferable, non-sublicensable license to use the Software for which you have been issued a Product Key by EnvisionWare or an authorized distributor or reseller, but only in accordance with (i) the documentation, (ii) the restrictions contained herein and any restrictions on the applicable invoice, and (iii) the number of authorized users. Portions of some Software modules are licensed from Artifex Software, Inc. Portions of some modules may contain MySQL connector (pursuant to the GNU GPL v2 license at http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html). Portions of some modules may contain the MS access driver, licensed from Microsoft Corporation. Portions of some modules may be licensed under the Microsoft Reciprocal License (MS-RL) http://opensource.org/licenses/ms-rl. Portions of some Software modules are licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0; you may not use these files except in compliance with the Apache License. You may obtain a copy of the Apache License at http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0. Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the Apache License is distributed on an “AS IS” BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the Apache License for the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the Apache License. Portions of some Software modules are licensed under the MIT Expat License. This EULA DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 2 3 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 23 Rev. February 8, 2017 also incorporates the terms of the Verifone Pass Through Terms of Use attached hereto. This EULA governs any releases, revisions, or enhancements to the Software that EnvisionWare may furnish to you. Your rights and obligations with respect to the use of this Software are as follows: A. You may: i. use the Software on the quantity and type of computers indicated on EnvisionWare invoice. You may make that number of copies of the Software licensed to you by EnvisionWare. ii. make one copy of the Software for archival purposes, or copy the Software onto the hard disk of your computer and retain the original for archival purposes; iii. use the Software on a network, provided that you have a licensed copy of the Software for each computer that can access the Software over that network; and, iv. make printed copies of electronic documentation for your internal use. B. You may not: i. transfer, assign, convey, sublicense, rent or lease the Software (or any portion thereof) to another person or entity or unlicensed division, subsidiary, or affiliate (or to anyone other than the entity named as licensee as appearing on the software splash screen), and any transfer in violation hereof shall be of no power or effect; ii. distribute, sell, sublicense, rent, lease or use the Software (or any portion thereof) for time sharing, hosting, service provider or like purposes, except as expressly permitted under this Agreement; iii. reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble, modify, translate, make any attempt to discover, modify or use the source code, underlying ideas, algorithms, file formats or programming interfaces of the Software by any means whatsoever (except and only to the extent that applicable law prohibits or restricts reverse engineering restrictions), or create derivative works from the Software (any such modifications shall automatically be owned by EnvisionWare upon creation); iv. utilize any equipment, device, software, or other means designed to circumvent or remove any form of product key or copy protection used by EnvisionWare in connection with the Software, or use the Software together with any authorization code, product key, serial number, or other copy protection device not supplied by EnvisionWare or through an authorized distributor or reseller; v. use the Software to develop or facilitate development of a product which is competitive with any EnvisionWare product offerings; vi. post or otherwise publish electronic documentation of the Software for access outside the licensed organization; vii. use a previous version or copy of the Software after you have installed a replacement set or an upgraded version and, upon upgrading the Software, all copies of the prior version must be uninstalled or rendered unusable; viii. use a later version of the Software than is provided in the email with the login credentials except as provided under the Software Product Warranty, unless you have purchased maintenance and update service or have otherwise separately acquired the right to use such later version; ix. remove any product identification, proprietary, copyright or other notices contained in the Software; x. provide any product key or login information to a third party; or xi. use the Software or product keys in any manner not expressly authorized by this EULA. 2. Thirty Day Money Back Guarantee: If you are the original licensee of the Software and are dissatisfied with it for any reason, and if at any time during the thirty (30) day period following the Effective Date you email EnvisionWare confirming your complete removal and deletion of the DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 2 4 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 24 Rev. February 8, 2017 complete product and provide a signed statement to EnvisionWare attesting to removal of all software components, then EnvisionWare will provide a full refund, subject to the provisions of the Hardware Return Policy below. 3. Hardware Return Policy: Custom printed RFID tags, manufactured, built-to-order or custom- configured Hardware as designated on a Quotation, such as but not limited to, kiosks or sorters, may not be returned or canceled for any reason. Custom items include any item listed in an EnvisionWare quotation, product description or order form as being a custom item, or any item which is modified by EnvisionWare after installation. Standard Hardware products may be accepted for return within ninety (90) days of the date of invoice subject to advance, written approval expressed in the form of an EnvisionWare Return Merchandise Authorization (“RMA”). EnvisionWare, at its sole discretion, may grant the right to return standard Hardware products during this return period. Any such returns are subject to a 20% restocking fee unless EnvisionWare determines that the cause of the return is a result of an error on the part of EnvisionWare, in which case EnvisionWare may waive all or part of the restocking fee. No Hardware product will be accepted for return for ANY reason without a Return Merchandise Authorization issued by EnvisionWare. The RMA number must be clearly displayed on any packaging shipped to EnvisionWare. Products returned without an RMA number on the package will be refused. Any return for any reason, whether for an authorized RMA or for warranty support must be shipped to EnvisionWare freight prepaid. Equipment serviced under warranty will be returned freight prepaid. 4. Limited Warranty: A. Software Product Warranty: EnvisionWare warrants that the Software as distributed operate in substantial conformity with the documentation (the “Software Product Warranty”) for a period of one (1) year from the delivery of the Software to you (the “Software Warranty Period”). This is the sole warranty EnvisionWare provides for all Software supplied by EnvisionWare, unless specifically stated otherwise in EnvisionWare’s quotation. EnvisionWare does not warrant that your use of the Software will be uninterrupted or error-free. EnvisionWare’s sole liability (and your sole remedy) in the event of a breach of this Product Warranty will be that EnvisionWare will, in EnvisionWare’s sole discretion, (A) use commercially reasonable efforts to provide you with an error correction or a work- around which corrects the reported non-conformity or (B) if EnvisionWare determines such remedies to be impracticable within a reasonable period of time, refund the money you paid for the Software being returned. EnvisionWare does not warrant that the Software will meet your requirements or that operation of the Software will be uninterrupted or that the Software will be error-free. EnvisionWare provides Software product support through the reseller from whom you purchased the Software or directly from EnvisionWare for a period of twelve (12) months from date of delivery of the Software. Hardware Product Warranty: EnvisionWare warrants that EnvisionWare-branded hardware as distributed will be free from material defects (the “Hardware Product Warranty”) for a period of one (1) year from the date of delivery of the EnvisionWare-brand hardware to you (the “Hardware Warranty Period”). Other Hardware components supplied to you by EnvisionWare that are not manufactured or branded by EnvisionWare are covered by the warranties provided by the product manufacturer. EnvisionWare shall have no obligation with respect to a warranty claim unless notified of such claim within the applicable Software or Hardware Warranty Period. The term “delivery” in this Section 4 means, with respect to Software, the date of invoice, and, with respect to Hardware, “delivery” means the date that the Har dware is delivered to your facility. B. Exclusions: The above warranties shall not apply: (i) if the Software or Hard ware is used with hardware or software not specified in the documentation; (ii) if any modifications are made to the Software or Hardware by you or any third party; (iii) to defects in the Software or Hardware that are due to accident, abuse or improper use by you or your contractors; or (iv) to any evaluation version or other Software or Hardware provided on a no-charge or evaluation basis. Any replacement Software or Hardware will be warranted for the remainder of the original applicable Software Warranty Period or Hardware Warranty Period. C. THE ABOVE SOFTWARE PRODUCT WARRANTY AND HARDWARE PRODUCT WARRANTY ARE EXCLUSIVE AND IN LIEU OF ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, WHETHER DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 2 5 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 25 Rev. February 8, 2017 EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NONINFRINGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS, ALL OF WHICH ARE SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMED. THE SOFTWARE PRODUCT WARRANTY AND THE HARDWARE PRODUCT WARRANTY GIVE YOU SPECIFIC LEGAL RIGHTS. YOU MAY HAVE OTHER RIGHTS, WHICH VARY FROM STATE TO STATE AND COUNTRY TO COUNTRY. D. EnvisionWare uses virus protection scanning software to scan the Software prior to installation and to the best of EnvisionWare’s knowledge as of the installation date, the Software, when installed, does not contain or otherwise introduce any computer virus or any harmful or destructive code which could damage or harm your computers; however, EnvisionWare cannot guarantee that benign or harmful viruses or other malware will not enter your computers or systems. 5. Personal Information: A. In the event that your (or your users’) use of the Software currently or in the future involves the transmitting, uploading, downloading, storage, management, manipulation or other use of personal information (as defined by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, Payment Card Industry Security Standards Council or other applicable standards or rules relating to electronic transaction processing and personal information, such information referred to herein as “Personal Information”), you agree to the following provisions: i. You shall maintain as confidential any Personal Information. ii. You covenant that you have, as of the Installation Date become and currently are PCI and HIPAA (as applicable) compliant and shall maintain compliance and/or certification under the PCI (Payment Card Industry), PCI-DSS, HIPAA and other relevant and applicable standards relating to electronic transaction processing and personal healthcare information existing as of the Effective Date and as promulgated thereafter. iii. If you are de-certified, have your compliance proof expire or are threatened with de- certification, you shall notify EnvisionWare in writing within ten (10) days of such de- certification or threat thereof. B. EnvisionWare shall use commercially reasonable efforts to maintain all of your Personal Information confidential, but EnvisionWare is not liable for the confidentiality of any Personal Information in the event of unauthorized access, theft or use of such Personal Information, either by you, your users, or third parties. C. The obligations of the parties under this Section 5 shall survive any expiration or termination of this EULA. 6. Data: A. CUSTOMER DATA. In connection with the Software and any related hardware or services provided by EnvisionWare, EnvisionWare may collect and maintain data and information provided by you, your patrons and users (collectively, “Customer Data”). As between EnvisionWare and you, all Customer Data shall be and remain owned by you and be your property. EnvisionWare shall maintain the aspects of all Customer Data identify an individual as confidential. All third parties authorized by EnvisionWare which may have access to the Customer Data shall be under obligations of confidentiality to maintain the Customer Data as confidential. B. USE OF CUSTOMER DATA. EnvisionWare shall have the right to use Customer Data in connection with EnvisionWare’s business, provided that such data shall be anonymized or aggregated such that Personal Information has been de-identified so that one could not link anonymized information back to a specific individual (“Anonymized Data”). All such Anonymized Data shall be the sole property of EnvisionWare. EnvisionWare may use, disseminate, share, or DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 2 6 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 26 Rev. February 8, 2017 transfer the Anonymized Data or any portion thereof in any way EnvisionWare chooses. C. ENVISIONWARE DATA. EnvisionWare may also collect data and information in connection with the service that EnvisionWare provides generally (but not including Customer Data) through its services (“EnvisionWare Data”). You acknowledge and consent that the Software may communicate (e.g., via an outbound or inbound call using SSL) with EnvisionWare’s servers (which may be hosted by a third-party service provider) and support personnel, or vice versa, to communicate diagnostic, event logs, support, licensing, compliance, and other information (which is included in the definition of EnvisionWare Data). Some communication may be done automatically by the Software without your needing to be involved, other communication may be at your initiation (e.g., uploading logs) or initiated by EnvisionWare. All such EnvisionWare Data shall be the sole property of EnvisionWare. 7. Confidential Information: Each party agrees that all code, inventions, know-how, business, technical and financial information it obtains (“Receiving Party”) from the disclosing party (“Disclosing Party”) constitute the confidential property of the Disclosing Party (“Confidential Information”), provided that it is identified as confidential at the time of disclosure or should be reasonably known by the Receiving Party to be Confidential Information due to the nature of the information disclosed and the circumstances surrounding the disclosure. Any software, documentation or technical information provided by EnvisionWare (or its agents), performance information relating to the Software, and the terms of this Agreement shall be deemed Confidential Information of EnvisionWare without any marking or further designation except as such disclosure is required by FOIA requirements. Except as expressly authorized herein, the Receiving Party will hold in confidence and not use or disclose any Confidential Information. The Receiving Party’s nondisclosure obligation shall not apply to information which the Receiving Party can document: (a) was rightfully in its possession or known to it prior to receipt of the Confidential Information; (b) is or has become public knowledge through no fault of the Receiving Party; (c) is rightfully obtained by the Receiving Party from a third party without breach of any confidentiality obligation; (d) is independently developed by employees of the Receiving Party who had no access to such information; or (e) is required to be disclosed pursuant to a regulation, law or court order (but only to the minimum extent required to comply with such regulation or order and with advance notice to the Disclosing Party). The Receiving Party acknowledges that disclosure of Confidential Information would cause substantial harm for which damages alone would not be a sufficient remedy, and therefore that upon any such disclosure by the Receiving Party the Disclosing Party shall be entitled to appropriate equitable relief in addition to whatever other remedies it might have at law. In order for any information to be considered Confidential Information under this EULA, the Disclosing Party must label such information in writing as “Confidential” prior to or contemporaneous with disclosure to the Receiving Party. The obligations under this Section 7 shall, with respect to Confidential Information, continue for a period of two (2) years after disclosure and, with respect to any information considered by and treated as a trade secret by the Disclosing Party, continue until the trade secret status has been lost. 8. Indemnification: A. Infringement. Subject to your compliance with the terms of this EULA, EnvisionWare shall indemnify and hold harmless you and your officers, directors, employees and agents from and against all third party claims, to the extent such claim alleges that the Software (in each case as provided by EnvisionWare) infringes any copyright, U.S. patent right, trade secret right, or other intellectual property right provided, however, that you must comply with the following terms: EnvisionWare must have received from you: (i) prompt written notice of such claim (but in any event notice in sufficient time for EnvisionWare to respond without prejudice); (ii) the exclusive right to control and direct the investigation, defense, and settlement (if applicable) of such claim; and (iii) all reasonable necessary cooperation by you. In the event that the Software is, or in EnvisionWare’s sole opinion is likely to be, enjoined or subject to a claim due to the type of infringement described in this Section 8, EnvisionWare, at its option and expense, may (a) replace the Software with functionally equivalent non-infringing Software or (b) obtain a license for your continued use of the Software, or, if the foregoing alternatives are not reasonably available to EnvisionWare (c) terminate this Agreement and refund a pro rata amount, as determined by EnvisionWare, of the purchase price of the Software and DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 2 7 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 27 Rev. February 8, 2017 Hardware. Notwithstanding the above, EnvisionWare shall have no liability for any infringement claim which: (i) pertains to any Software that has been altered or modified without EnvisionWare’s prior written approval; (ii) is based on use of the Software in conjunction with any item not provided by EnvisionWare, unless such use is shown to constitute the infringement when not used in conjunction with the item not provided by EnvisionWare; (iii) pertains to any unauthorized use of the Software; (iv) pertains to an unsupported release of the Software; or, (v) pertains to any Open Source Software or other third party code provided with the Software. THIS SECTION 8 SETS FORTH ENVISIONWARE’S SOLE LIABILITY AND YOUR SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY WITH RESPECT TO ANY CLAIM OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INFRINGEMENT. B. EnvisionWare shall indemnify, defend and hold you harmless from any losses (including, but not limited to, damage awards, reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, cost of notification, remediation, and penalties) you incur due to any third party claim or action directly resulting from any Data Breach of your (or your patrons’) Personal Information to the extent that such losses are due to the direct act or omission of EnvisionWare or its representatives, agents or contractors. C. This Section 8 shall survive any expiration or termination of this EULA. 9. Disclaimer of and Limitations on Damages: SOME STATES AND COUNTRIES, INCLUDING MEMBER COUNTRIES OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA, DO NOT ALLOW THE LIMITATION OR EXCLUSION OF LIABILITY FOR INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES SO THE LIMITATION OR EXCLUSION BELOW MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW AND REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ANY REMEDY SET FORTH HEREIN FAILS OF ITS ESSENTIAL PURPOSE, IN NO EVENT WILL ENVISIONWARE OR ITS LICENSORS BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY LOSS OF USE, LOST DATA, FAILURE OF SECURITY MECHANISMS, INTERRUPTION OF BUSINESS OR ANY SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE, EXEMPLARY OR SIMILAR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY LOST PROFITS ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE, EVEN IF ENVISIONWARE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. IN NO CASE SHALL ENVISIONWARE’S OR ITS LICENSORS’ TOTAL LIABILITY (A) FOR ANY PRODUCTS COVERED UNDER THIS EULA, EXCEED THE PURCHASE PRICE FOR THE SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE OR (B) FOR ANY SERVICES, EXCEED THE FEES PAID BY YOU FOR THE SERVICES (EXCLUDING MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES) WHICH DIRECTLY CAUSED THE DAMAGES ALLEGED. The disclaimers and limitations set forth above in this Section 9 will apply regardless of whether or not you accept the Software or Hardware. The parties agree that the limitations specified in this Section 9 will survive any expiration or termination of this EULA and apply even if any limited remedy specified in this EULA is found to have failed of its essential purpose. 10. U.S. Government Restricted Rights: RESTRICTED RIGHTS LEGEND. All EnvisionWare products and documentation are commercial in nature. The Software and software documentation are “Commercial Items”, as that term is defined in 48 C.F.R. section 2.101, consisting of “Commercial Computer Software” and “Commercial Computer Software Documentation”, as such terms are defined in 48 C.F.R. section 252.227-7014(a)(5) and 48 C.F.R. section 252.227-7014(a)(1), and used in 48 C.F.R. section 12.212 and 48 C.F.R. section 227.7202, as applicable. Consistent with 48 C.F.R. section 12.212, 48 C.F.R. section 252.227-7015, 48 C.F.R. section 27.7202 through 227.7202-4, 48 C.F.R. section 52.227-14, and other relevant sections of the Code of Federal Regulations, as applicable. EnvisionWare’s computer Software and software documentation are licensed to United States Government end users with only those rights as granted to all other end users, according to the terms and conditions contained in this EULA. The manufacturer is EnvisionWare, Inc., 2855 Premiere Parkway, Suite A, Duluth, GA 30097-5201. 11. Export Compliance: You acknowledge that the Software is subject to export restrictions by the United States government and import restrictions by certain foreign governments. You shall not, and shall not allow any third-party hired or under contract by you, to, remove or export from the United States or allow the export or re-export of any part of the Software or any direct product thereof: (i) DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 2 8 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 28 Rev. February 8, 2017 into (or to a national or resident of) any embargoed or terrorist-supporting country; (ii) to anyone on the U.S. Commerce Department’s Table of Denial Orders or U.S. Treasury Department’s list of Specially Designated Nationals; (iii) to any country to which such export or re-export is restricted or prohibited, or as to which the United States government or any agency thereof requires an export license or other governmental approval at the time of export or re-export without first obtaining such license or approval; or (iv) otherwise in violation of any export or import restrictions, laws or regulations of any United States or foreign agency or authority. 12. Third-Party Code: The Software may contain or be provided with components subject to the terms and conditions of "open source" or freeware software licenses ("Open Source Software"). Licenses for open source are identified in Section 1. To the extent required by the license that accompanies the Open Source Software, the terms of such license will apply in lieu of the terms of this EULA with respect to such Open Source Software, including, without limitation, any provisions governing access to source code, modification or reverse engineering. 13. Professional Services: Upon request and agreement between the parties, EnvisionWare may provide consulting, training, installation, development, customization, report creation or other services (“Professional Services”). You may order Professional Services under a Statement of Work (“SOW”) describing the work to be performed, fees and any applicable milestones, dependencies and other technical specifications or related information. Each SOW must be signed by both parties before EnvisionWare shall commence work under such SOW. If the parties do not execute a separate SOW, the Services shall be provided as stated on the invoice. You will reimburse EnvisionWare for reasonable travel and lodging expenses as incurred. EnvisionWare shall be deemed the sole owner of any work product created pursuant to the Professional Services, whether created solely by EnvisionWare or jointly with you or your contractors. Subject to your full payment of any and all fees pursuant to the applicable SOW, EnvisionWare grants to you the limited, nontransferable right to use any deliverables (including any documentation, code, Software, training materials or other work product) (collectively referred to as the “Deliverables”) delivered as part of the Professional Services solely in connection with your permitted use of the Software, subject to all the same terms and conditions as apply to your Software license (including the restrictions set forth in Section 1B), and subject to any additional terms and conditions provided with the Deliverables. 14. General: EnvisionWare may terminate this EULA upon your breach of any term contained herein. Upon termination, you shall cease use of, uninstall or render inoperable, and delete destroy all copies of the Software. The disclaimers of warranties and damages and limitations on liability shall survive termination. The parties to this EULA are independent contractors with respect to one another. There is no relationship of partnership, joint venture, employment, franchise or agency created hereby between the parties. Neither party will have the power to bind the other or incur obligations on the other party’s behalf without the other party’s prior written consent. 15. Software Escrow: At your request, EnvisionWare is willing to set up and maintain the Software with EnvisionWare’s independent U.S. escrow agent and make ongoing escrow deposits for significant updates. You would be responsible for additional fees for this service. Please contact EnvisionWare to for more information and pricing. 16. Purchase in Australia: If you purchase Software, Hardware or services from EnvisionWare Pty Ltd or its partners, the laws of South Australia, Australia govern all warranty and service claims. EnvisionWare Pty Ltd is authorized to convey and effect all of the rights expressed in this EULA for its direct and indirect customers. 17. Contact Us: Should you have any questions concerning this EULA, or if you desire to contact EnvisionWare for any reason, please email info@envisionware.com or write to: EnvisionWare, Inc., 2855 Premiere Parkway, Suite A, Duluth, GA 30097-5201 USA, unless you purchase from an Asia Pacific country in which case, please write EnvisionWare Pty Ltd, 10 George Street, Stepney, SA DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 2 9 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 29 Rev. February 8, 2017 5069 Australia. Revised Mar 2017 © 2002-2017 EnvisionWare, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Solely for the purposes of the following Verifone Terms of Use, the following terms shall have their associated meanings. “Agreement” means the Verifone Terms of Use. “BPP” means Verifone’s Buyer Protection Program. “Covered Territory” means your location(s). “Customer Agreement” means the EULA. “Payment Gateway” means Verifone’s transaction gateway portal which provides transaction routing, online reporting and other tools made available by the portal. “Point Solution” and “Rental Devices” mean the Point Solution hardware and Software manufactured or provided by Verifone and offered by EnvisionWare under the EULA. “Reseller” means EnvisionWare. “Software” means the software accompanying the Point Solutions Rental Devices. “Verifone” means VeriFone, Inc. VERIFONE PASS THROUGH TERMS OF USE 1. The following are Verifone’s Pass Through Terms of Use for its Point Solution Rental Device hardware and Software. 2. Each Verifone payment device used with the Point Solution is subject to an initial service term of 36 months (the “Initial Service Term”). Subject to the terms of the Customer Agreement, with respect to a particular Verifone payment device, Verifone shall provide the Point Solution to customer for a service term commencing (A) for Rental Devices (or any other payment devices shipped directly by Verifone), on the date such devices are shipped by Verifone, or (B) for any other payment devices, on the date on which such device is activated on the Payment Gateway, and in any case ending on the earliest of (1) the date on which Reseller removes such device from the Payment Gateway, (2) upon Verifone’s ceasing to provide the Point Solution for a payment device, which Verifone shall have the right to do on thirty days’ notice to customer following the Initial Service Term for such device, and (3) termination of customer’s right to use the Point Solution by Reseller due to breach by customer of the Customer Agreement (the “Service Term”). In addition, in the event Verifone’s separate agreement with Reseller terminates or Verifone ceases to offer the Point Solution to its customers generally, Verifone reserves the right to terminate the Service Terms for any or all Verifone payment devices. Upon the termination of the Service Term for a particular Verifone payment device, customer shall cease using the Point Solution for such payment device. In the event that a customer desires to end the Service Term for a payment device, the customer must request that Reseller remove the applicable device from the Payment Gateway on its behalf; Verifone will not be responsible for removing a payment device from the Payment Gateway provided that, notwithstanding customer’s earlier request, the Service Term will end on the day Reseller actually removes the device from the Payment Gateway. 3. Subject to the terms of this Agreement and customer’s payment of the applicable fees, Verifone hereby grants to customer a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sub-licensable right and license, in the Covered Territory during the Service Term for each payment device, to access and use the Point Solution subscribed to hereunder solely for customer’s internal business purposes. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Reseller will be responsible for managing and monitoring customer’s payment devices on customer’s behalf, including with respect to the installation of payment applications and key loading, and customer will not be able to directly manage or monitor its payment devices via the Payment Gateway portal. Verifone may modify the Point Solution from time to time in its reasonable discretion, provided that such modifications shall not materially diminish the functionality thereof. If Reseller fails to pay Verifone for services rendered in accordance with its agreement with Verifone, Verifone reserves the right to withhold customer’s access to the Point Solution until such fees are paid in full, and Verifone shall not have any liability to customer for any amounts paid to Reseller and not received by Verifone for such services. 4. Customer shall have no right to market, distribute, sell, assign, pledge, sublicense, lease, deliver DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 3 0 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 30 Rev. February 8, 2017 or otherwise transfer the Point Solution, or any component thereof, including without limitation the Software, to any third party. Customer shall not reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble, translate, modify, alter or create any derivative works based upon the Software, or determine or attempt to determine any source code, algorithms, methods or techniques embodied in the Software, without the prior express written consent of Verifone. Customer shall not remove from the Rental Devices or the Software, or alter, any of trademarks, trade names, logos, patent or copyright notices, or other notices or markings, or add any other notices or markings to the Rental Devices or the Software, without the prior express written consent of Verifone. 5. Customer acknowledges that the Point Solution (including any related documentation) and any intellectual property rights relating to or residing therein (including any patents, copyrights, trade secrets, trademarks, trade names or mask work rights), including the proprietary electronics, software and technical information of Verifone therein, are proprietary products of Verifone and that ownership of such shall remain with and inure to Verifone. Except for the license rights set forth in this clause 5, customer shall have no right, title or interest therein. 6. Customer grants VeriFone a limited, non-exclusive and irrevocable license during and after the term of this Agreement to follow customer’s activity inside of the Point Solution components and to use, share, and disseminate data from customer’s activity (including its transactions) on an aggregate and anonymous basis only (such data, “Derived Data”), including for purposes of data analytics and optimizing or otherwise enhancing its products and services. VeriFone will comply with all applicable laws with respect to any use, sharing and dissemination of Derived Data. This clause 6 shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement. 7. VERIFONE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, WITH RESPECT TO THE POINT SOLUTION, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT OF THIRD PARTY RIGHTS. VERIFONE DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE POINT SOLUTION, OR ANY COMPONENT THEREOF, WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF CUSTOMER OR THAT THE OPERATION OF THE POINT SOLUTION, OR ANY COMPONENT THEREOF, WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ENTIRELY ERROR FREE. CUSTOMER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES DOES VERIFONE REPRESENT OR WARRANT THAT ALL ERRORS IN ANY SOFTWARE CAN BE REMEDIED. NO ADVICE OR INFORMATION OBTAINED BY CUSTOMER FROM VERIFONE OR FROM ANY OTHER THIRD PARTY ABOUT THE POINT SOLUTION SHALL CREATE ANY WARRANTY. 8. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY CONTAINED IN THE CUSTOMER AGREEMENT: EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT PROHIBITED BY LAW: (A) VERIFONE SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY TO CUSTOMER OR ANY THIRD PARTY FOR SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOSS OF USE, LOSS OF BUSINESS, LOSS OF PROFITS OR REVENUE, GOODWILL OR SAVINGS, DOWNTIME, OR DAMAGE TO, LOSS OF OR REPLACEMENT OF DATA OR TRANSACTIONS, COST OF PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE SERVICES) RELATING IN ANY MANNER TO THE POINT SOLUTION (WHETHER ARISING FROM CLAIMS BASED IN WARRANTY, CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE), EVEN IF VERIFONE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH CLAIM OR DAMAGE; (B) IN ANY CASE, VERIFONE’S ENTIRE LIABILITY RELATING IN ANY MANNER TO THIS AGREEMENT OR THE POINT SOLUTION, REGARDLESS OF THE FORM OR NATURE OF THE CLAIM, SHALL BE LIMITED IN THE AGGREGATE TO THE FEES ACTUALLY RECEIVED BY VERIFONE FROM RESELLER FOR CUSTOMER FOR THE POINT SOLUTION UNDER THE CUSTOMER AGREEMENT DURING THE SIX (6) MONTHS PRIOR TO THE CLAIM ARISING; AND (C) VERIFONE SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIMS OF THIRD PARTIES RELATING TO THE POINT SOLUTION. THE LIMITATIONS ON VERIFONE’S LIABILITY SET FORTH IN CLAUSES “(B)” AND “(C)” OF DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 3 1 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 31 Rev. February 8, 2017 THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY TO LIABILITY FOR DEATH, PERSONAL INJURY OF A PHYSICAL NATURE OR DAMAGE TO TANGIBLE PROPERTY CAUSED BY VERIFONE’S NEGLIGENCE OR INTENTIONAL MISCONDUCT. THE LIMITATIONS CONTAINED IN CLAUSE 7 ABOVE AND THIS CLAUSE 8 ARE A FUNDAMENTAL PART OF THE BASIS OF VERIFONE’S BARGAIN HEREUNDER, AND VERIFONE WOULD NOT PROVIDE THE POINT SOLUTION TO CUSTOMER ABSENT SUCH LIMITATIONS 9. Customer shall comply with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations in connection with this Agreement, including, but not limited to, export control laws and anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws, rules, and regulations. Customer agrees that if Verifone reasonably believes that customer is in breach of this clause 9, that alone shall be sufficient grounds for further action by Verifone, including, without limitation, cancellation of any orders or denial of future business, without any liability or obligation to customer. In addition, customer hereby indemnifies Verifone and its affiliates, directors, officers and employees for all costs, expenses, damages, claims, charges, penalties, fines and other losses that arise in connection with any breach by customer or customer subsidiaries, owners, officers, directors, employees, partners, subcontractors, agents and representatives of the terms and conditions contained in this clause 9. 10. VERIFONE SHALL BE A THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARY OF THIS AGREEMENT, WITH THE RIGHT TO ENFORCE THE TERMS HEREOF AGAINST CUSTOMER WITH RESPECT TO THE POINT SOLUTION. 11. In the case of any customer agreements that include Rental Devices: A. Verifone Property. The Rental Devices shall remain the property of Verifone. Customer shall have no right, title or interest therein except as a lessee under this Agreement. Customer shall keep all Rental Devices free and clear from all liens, including any direct or indirect charge, encumbrance, lien, security interest, legal process or claim against the Rental Devices. Customer may not assign, hypothecate, sublet, sell, transfer, permit the sale of or part with possession of all or any of the Rental Devices or interest in the Customer Agreement, without Verifone’s prior written consent. If customer fails to pay any undisputed fees when due, and fails to cure such failure within ten (10) business days of written notice thereof, Verifone may, at any time thereafter enter, with or without legal process, any premises where any Rental Device may be, and repossess and remove such Rental Device. Customer hereby waives any claim of trespass or right of action for damages by reason of such entry and repossession. In addition, customer shall pay to Verifone any actual additional expenses incurred by Verifone in collection efforts. B. Upgrades. Customer may, commencing on the one year anniversary of the start of the Service Term for a Rental Device, upgrade to a different Rental Device (in which event customer may be subject to an increase in fees based on the new Rental Device subscription fee). For such upgrades, customer shall be required to commit to a new Initial Service Term for such Rental Device and shall be required to return the old Rental Device in accordance with clause (d) below. C. Loss and Damage. Subject to Verifone’s obligation to provide the Services, customer assumes and shall bear the entire risk of loss or damage to the Rental Devices from any use whatsoever from the date of delivery of the Rental Devices to the customer site, until such Rental Devices are returned to Verifone. No loss or damage shall relieve customer from the obligation to make payments hereunder or to comply with any other obligation under the Customer Agreement. In the event of a loss of a Rental Device (but not damage), customer shall immediately notify Reseller thereof. With respect to any lost Rental Device, customer shall be obligated to pay Reseller the Non- Return Fee applicable to such Rental Device. Subject to Verifone’s receipt of such Non-Return Fee from Reseller, Verifone shall ship customer a new or refurbished replacement Rental Device. At all times payments for the Point Solution for such Rental Device shall continue in effect. D. Return at End of Service Term. At the end of the Service Term for a Rental Device, customer shall return such Rental Device to Reseller or Verifone, as directed by Reseller. When returning a Rental Device to Verifone a Material Return Authorization number is required. If a Rental Device DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 3 2 City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement 32 Rev. February 8, 2017 is not returned to Verifone within thirty (30) days of the end of its Service Term, customer shall be obligated to pay Reseller the Non-Return Fee for such Rental Device. If, upon return of the Rental Device, Verifone determines that the Rental Device requires repair that is not covered by the BPP or Repair Services (e.g., “Out of Scope” or “Limitations”), customer shall be required to pay Reseller for such services at Verifone’s standard fees. DocuSign Envelope ID: 746C7913-81B8-467D-A7E2-32045DC70826 Certificate Of Completion Envelope Id: 746C791381B8467DA7E232045DC70826 Status: Completed Subject: Please DocuSign: C18165539 EnvisionWARE GSA FINAL 10.10.17.docx Source Envelope: Document Pages: 32 Signatures: 3 Envelope Originator: Certificate Pages: 5 Initials: 0 Kenneth Mullen AutoNav: Enabled EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled Time Zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto , CA 94301 Kenneth.Mullen@CityofPaloAlto.org IP Address: 12.220.157.20 Record Tracking Status: Original 10/10/2017 4:09:30 PM Holder: Kenneth Mullen Kenneth.Mullen@CityofPaloAlto.org Location: DocuSign Signer Events Signature Timestamp Michael J. Monk mmonk@envisionware.com Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Using IP Address: 71.68.35.116 Sent: 10/10/2017 4:13:25 PM Viewed: 10/11/2017 8:56:17 AM Signed: 10/12/2017 10:18:36 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Tim Shimizu Tim.Shimizu@CityofPaloAlto.org Deputy City Attorney Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None)Using IP Address: 12.220.157.20 Sent: 10/12/2017 10:18:37 AM Viewed: 10/12/2017 10:23:50 AM Signed: 10/12/2017 10:33:32 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign James Keene james.keene@cityofpaloalto.org City Manager City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Using IP Address: 50.206.118.3 Signed using mobile Sent: 10/12/2017 10:33:33 AM Viewed: 10/12/2017 10:40:00 AM Signed: 10/12/2017 10:40:44 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Accepted: 4/14/2015 5:40:07 PM ID: 44fe333a-6a81-4cb7-b7d4-925473ac82e3 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 Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp Laura Weaver lweaver@envisionware.com Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 10/12/2017 10:40:44 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Martha Waters martha.waters@cityofpaloalto.org Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 10/12/2017 10:40:45 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Chris Anastole chris.anastole@cityofpaloalto.org Contract Administrator City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 10/12/2017 10:40:46 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Kenneth Mullen kenneth.mullen@cityofpaloalto.org Contracts Administrator City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 10/12/2017 10:40:47 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Notary Events Signature Timestamp Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps Envelope Sent Hashed/Encrypted 10/12/2017 10:40:47 AM Certified Delivered Security Checked 10/12/2017 10:40:47 AM Signing Complete Security Checked 10/12/2017 10:40:47 AM Completed Security Checked 10/12/2017 10:40:47 AM Payment Events Status Timestamps Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure CONSUMER DISCLOSURE From time to time, City of Palo Alto (we, us or Company) may be required by law to provide to you certain written notices or disclosures. Described below are the terms and conditions for providing to you such notices and disclosures electronically through your DocuSign, Inc. (DocuSign) Express user account. Please read the information below carefully and thoroughly, and if you can access this information electronically to your satisfaction and agree to these terms and conditions, please confirm your agreement by clicking the 'I agree' button at the bottom of this document. Getting paper copies At any time, you may request from us a paper copy of any record provided or made available electronically to you by us. For such copies, as long as you are an authorized user of the DocuSign system you will have the ability to download and print any documents we send to you through your DocuSign user account for a limited period of time (usually 30 days) after such documents are first sent to you. After such time, if you wish for us to send you paper copies of any such documents from our office to you, you will be charged a $0.00 per-page fee. You may request delivery of such paper copies from us by following the procedure described below. Withdrawing your consent If you decide to receive notices and disclosures from us electronically, you may at any time change your mind and tell us that thereafter you want to receive required notices and disclosures only in paper format. How you must inform us of your decision to receive future notices and disclosure in paper format and withdraw your consent to receive notices and disclosures electronically is described below. Consequences of changing your mind If you elect to receive required notices and disclosures only in paper format, it will slow the speed at which we can complete certain steps in transactions with you and delivering services to you because we will need first to send the required notices or disclosures to you in paper format, and then wait until we receive back from you your acknowledgment of your receipt of such paper notices or disclosures. To indicate to us that you are changing your mind, you must withdraw your consent using the DocuSign 'Withdraw Consent' form on the signing page of your DocuSign account. This will indicate to us that you have withdrawn your consent to receive required notices and disclosures electronically from us and you will no longer be able to use your DocuSign Express user account to receive required notices and consents electronically from us or to sign electronically documents from us. All notices and disclosures will be sent to you electronically Unless you tell us otherwise in accordance with the procedures described herein, we will provide electronically to you through your DocuSign user account all required notices, disclosures, authorizations, acknowledgements, and other documents that are required to be provided or made available to you during the course of our relationship with you. To reduce the chance of you inadvertently not receiving any notice or disclosure, we prefer to provide all of the required notices and disclosures to you by the same method and to the same address that you have given us. Thus, you can receive all the disclosures and notices electronically or in paper format through the paper mail delivery system. If you do not agree with this process, please let us know as described below. Please also see the paragraph immediately above that describes the consequences of your electing not to receive delivery of the notices and disclosures electronically from us. Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure created on: 10/1/2013 8:33:53 AM Parties agreed to: James Keene How to contact City of Palo Alto: You may contact us to let us know of your changes as to how we may contact you electronically, to request paper copies of certain information from us, and to withdraw your prior consent to receive notices and disclosures electronically as follows: To contact us by email send messages to: david.ramberg@cityofpaloalto.org To advise City of Palo Alto of your new e-mail address To let us know of a change in your e-mail address where we should send notices and disclosures electronically to you, you must send an email message to us at david.ramberg@cityofpaloalto.org and in the body of such request you must state: your previous e-mail address, your new e-mail address. We do not require any other information from you to change your email address.. In addition, you must notify DocuSign, Inc to arrange for your new email address to be reflected in your DocuSign account by following the process for changing e-mail in DocuSign. To request paper copies from City of Palo Alto To request delivery from us of paper copies of the notices and disclosures previously provided by us to you electronically, you must send us an e-mail to david.ramberg@cityofpaloalto.org and in the body of such request you must state your e-mail address, full name, US Postal address, and telephone number. We will bill you for any fees at that time, if any. To withdraw your consent with City of Palo Alto To inform us that you no longer want to receive future notices and disclosures in electronic format you may: i. decline to sign a document from within your DocuSign account, and on the subsequent page, select the check-box indicating you wish to withdraw your consent, or you may; ii. send us an e-mail to david.ramberg@cityofpaloalto.org and in the body of such request you must state your e-mail, full name, IS Postal Address, telephone number, and account number. We do not need any other information from you to withdraw consent.. The consequences of your withdrawing consent for online documents will be that transactions may take a longer time to process.. Required hardware and software Operating Systems: Windows2000? or WindowsXP? Browsers (for SENDERS): Internet Explorer 6.0? or above Browsers (for SIGNERS): Internet Explorer 6.0?, Mozilla FireFox 1.0, NetScape 7.2 (or above) Email: Access to a valid email account Screen Resolution: 800 x 600 minimum Enabled Security Settings: •Allow per session cookies •Users accessing the internet behind a Proxy Server must enable HTTP 1.1 settings via proxy connection ** These minimum requirements are subject to change. If these requirements change, we will provide you with an email message at the email address we have on file for you at that time providing you with the revised hardware and software requirements, at which time you will have the right to withdraw your consent. Acknowledging your access and consent to receive materials electronically To confirm to us that you can access this information electronically, which will be similar to other electronic notices and disclosures that we will provide to you, please verify that you were able to read this electronic disclosure and that you also were able to print on paper or electronically save this page for your future reference and access or that you were able to e-mail this disclosure and consent to an address where you will be able to print on paper or save it for your future reference and access. Further, if you consent to receiving notices and disclosures exclusively in electronic format on the terms and conditions described above, please let us know by clicking the 'I agree' button below. By checking the 'I Agree' box, I confirm that: • I can access and read this Electronic CONSENT TO ELECTRONIC RECEIPT OF ELECTRONIC CONSUMER DISCLOSURES document; and • I can print on paper the disclosure or save or send the disclosure to a place where I can print it, for future reference and access; and • Until or unless I notify City of Palo Alto as described above, I consent to receive from exclusively through electronic means all notices, disclosures, authorizations, acknowledgements, and other documents that are required to be provided or made available to me by City of Palo Alto during the course of my relationship with you. City of Palo Alto (ID # 8516) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 10/30/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: On-Call Surveying Consultant Contract Title: Approval of a Professional Services Agreement With BKF Engineers for the Amount of $450,000 Over a 3-year Term for On-Call Surveying and Design Support Services From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Contract No. C18169791 with BKF Engineers (Attachment A) in the amount of $150,000 per year for three years for a total amount not to exceed $450,000, for on-call surveying and design support services. Background/Discussion The City currently has one land surveyor on-staff who primarily handles grade checking for Public Works Capital Improvement Program (CIP) construction projects and administrative documents and does not have the time or capability to perform large roadway surveys. The proposed on-call contract for surveying will augment the staff surveyor to meet this need. The proposed contract would replace a previous on-call surveying contract which has expired. On August 22, 2017, the City released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for On-Call Surveying Services. Three proposals were received in response to the RFP. Public Works Engineering Services staff carefully reviewed each firm's qualifications and submittal in response to the criteria identified in the RFP. BKF Engineers was selected as the top ranked proposer based principally on its in-house ability to perform surveying, studies and design as well as its familiarity with City projects and standards. City of Palo Alto Page 2 The scope of services of the proposed contract includes providing on-call support services to help advance street resurfacing projects, including the survey and drainage design for various City streets in the Barron Park neighborhood. Additionally, these professional services may be utilized for other CIP projects requiring surveying. Work will be assigned to the consultant on a task order basis. Summary of Solicitation Process Proposed Length of Project 36 months Number of Notices sent to Vendors via City’s eProcurement System (PlanetBids) 401 Number of Notices sent to Builder’s Exchanges 3 Number of RFP Packages Downloaded by Builder’s Exchanges 2 Number of RFP Packages downloaded by Consultants 18 Number of days to respond 21 days Number of Proposals received 3 Company Name Address BKF Engineers San Jose, CA Electrical Consultants, Inc. Woods Cross, UT Siegfried Engineering, Inc. San Jose, CA Proposed Fee Range N/A Resource Impact Funding for on-call project work will be encumbered as survey and design task orders, assigned to specific CIP projects, and funded within the existing CIP projects’ budgets as approved by the City Council as part of the annual budget process. Policy Implications This contract in is conformance with City of Palo Alto’s Comprehensive Plan and does not represent any change to existing City policies. Environmental Review City of Palo Alto Page 3 Surveying and design work does not constitute a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Typical street roadway projects that are supported by surveying are considered minor alterations and repairs to existing facilities and are categorically exempt from CEQA under Section 15301(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. Environmental review required for projects other than roadway work would be completed during the design process. Attachments: Attachment A: C18169791 - BKF On-Call Surveying CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C18169791 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND BKF ENGINEERS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this 23rd day of October, 2017, (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and BKF ENGINEERS, a California Corporation, located at 1730 N. First Street, Suite 600, San Jose, CA 95112 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to have Professional Engineering and Surveying Services performed for various projects (“Project”) and desires to engage a consultant to provide surveying, engineering and design 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. Optional On-Call Provision (This provision only applies if checked and only applies to on-call agreements.) Services will be authorized by CITY, as needed, with a Task Order assigned and approved by CITY’s Project Manager. Each Task Order shall be in substantially the same form as Exhibit A- 1. Each Task Order shall designate a CITY Project Manager and shall contain a specific scope of work, a specific schedule of performance and a specific compensation amount. The total price of all Task Orders issued under this Agreement shall not exceed the amount of Compensation set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall only be compensated for work performed under an authorized Task Order and CITY may elect, but is not required, to authorize work up to the maximum compensation amount set forth in Section 4. DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 2 SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through October 22, 2020 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 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 One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000) per contract year, for a total not-to-exceed amount over the three-year term of Four Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($450,000). CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out at Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “SCHEDULE OF RATES,” 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. 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 email all invoices to the City’s project manager at pweinvoices@cityofpaloalto.org . 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 DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 3 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 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. Option A: No Subcontractor: CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the work to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the city manager or designee. Option B: Subcontracts Authorized: 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: To be determined by CONSULTANT and approved by the City’s project manager. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 4 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 CITY’s City Manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign David Thresh as the Principal In Charge to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and Ben Santos as the Project Manager 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 Holly Boyd, Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301, Telephone:650.329.2612. 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. [Option A applies to the following design professionals pursuant to Civil Code Section 2782.8: architects; landscape architects; registered professional engineers and licensed professional land surveyors.] 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 DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 5 other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including reasonable 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. [Option B applies to any consultant who does not qualify as a design professional as defined in Civil Code Section 2782.8.] 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”) resulting from, arising out of or in any manner related to performance or nonperformance by 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. 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 DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 6 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. 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 DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 7 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 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, DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 8 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 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 This Project is not subject to prevailing wages. CONSULTANT is not required to pay prevailing wages in the 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 DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 9 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. OR 26.1 CONSULTANT 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 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. CONSULTANT 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. CONSULTANT 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. 26.2 CONSULTANT shall comply with the requirements of Exhibit “E” for any contract for public works construction, alteration, demolition, repair or maintenance. 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 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 DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 10 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: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 11 CONTRACT No. C18169791 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 (Contract over $85k) APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney or designee (Contract over $25k) BKF ENGINEERS Officer 1 By: Name: Title: Officer 2 (Required for Corp. or LLC) By: Name: Title: Attachments: EXHIBIT “A”: SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT “A-1” PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER EXHIBIT “C”: COMPENSATION EXHIBIT “C-1”: SCHEDULE OF RATES EXHIBIT “D”: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Davish Thresh Vice President Principal / Vice President Todd Adair Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 12 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES Consultant shall provide as-needed, on-call surveying services for various City projects. The contract will be administered by the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, but the services may be requested by and for other divisions of the Public Works Department and other City departments SPECIFIC QUALIFICATIONS The Consultant must be able to provide the following services in-house (not through use of a subconsultant): Surveying Technical review of survey and land use/development related documents Perform functions of City Surveyor Civil Engineering The Consultant must be able to subcontract for the following related services, including but not necessarily limited to: Construction Management Architecture (minor) TASK ORDERS Consultant shall perform topographic surveying, engineering or design services on a task order basis. Task orders not to exceed $150,000 will be developed for specific projects by the City department requesting the work and the not-to- exceed fee negotiated with the Consultant. Issuance of any or a certain number of task orders under this Agreement is not guaranteed and is at the sole discretion of City. SCOPE OF SERVICES: CONSULTANT will be working with various work groups within the Public Works Engineering Services Division including Private Development, Streets and Sidewalks and Storm Drain. Therefore the Consultant may be asked to work on more than one project at a time. All services to be performed by the Consultant shall be documented in a task order to be executed by the Consultant and City in the form of Exhibit “A-1” attached hereto. The specified work required for these projects will be determined as the projects are developed including a detailed scope, schedule and budget, and will be set forth in the task order. Below are descriptions of required tasks for each work group. Private Development – Technical review of maps, easements, and legal documents will be used to determine accuracy and completeness of various land development applications and entitlements. CONSULTANT shall provide the following services: DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 13 Technical review of tentative maps, preliminary parcel maps, final (tract) maps, parcel maps and all associated documents, including but not limited to closure calculations, title reports, ordinances, etc.. Review of deeds, title reports, chains of title, and associated documents. Technical review of Certificates of Compliance for Lot Line Adjustments, Lot Line Removals/Lot Mergers, and Compliance. Technical review of legal descriptions, plat maps, record of surveys, and easements of all types. Perform historical and/or forensic analysis of discrepancies, errors, or inconsistencies in plats, legal descriptions, surveys, record of surveys, and other documents as needed. Perform tasks required as City Surveyor such as but not limited to signing and stamping final (tract) maps, parcel maps, and certificates of compliance. Attend meetings; provide professional opinion/s as needed. Streets, Sidewalks and Storm Drain – Topographic survey services will be used to provide base maps for preparation of plans for proposed street and storm drain improvement projects. CONSULTANT shall provide the following topographic survey services: Establish survey control line extending beyond the limits of work Locate, identify, and tie-out City of Palo Alto survey markers found within the project area Perform topographic survey of existing features, which includes but is not limited to the following: o Street features – curb and gutter, sidewalk, driveways, ramps, edge of pavement, centerline, street cross-sections, catch-basins, manholes and valves in roadway o Trees, utility boxes and walkways in park strips or driveway areas o Speed humps, traffic striping, signs, and other pertinent roadway features Additional features required for Storm Drain projects include the following: Storm drain infrastructure (pipelines, manholes, and catch basins) including invert elevations, pipe sizes, material type, and rim elevations Other existing underground utilities (i.e. sewer, water, gas, electric, fiber optics, telecommunications, and cable television utilities) including invert elevations, pipe sizes, material type, top/bottom, pipe elevations, rim elevations, and duct/encasement bottom elevations. Deliverables – prepare and submit the following: Surveys must use NAVD88 2010 Civil 3D Auto-CAD files for the survey work done Electronic files (csv format) of all survey data points Key descriptions as feature identifier for each surveyed infrastructure DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 14 Separate layers for different topographic features Provide line work, profile, and cross-sections utilizing 2010 Auto-CAD Civil 3D The City will provide existing infrastructure and right-of way information from City of Palo Alto Geographic Information System (GIS) Streets may include busy arterials such as Middlefield and Alma Street. Work on arterial and collector streets (including Alma, Middlefield, and Embarcadero will not be permitted between the hours of 7 and 9 a.m. and 4 and 6 p.m. to avoid traffic congestion to the public. Consultant shall be responsible for all traffic control for survey crews. The Consultant shall comply will the MUTCD Rolling/mobile traffic control for short term work. Any work that is longer than 15 minutes at one particular spot shall require a more specific traffic control plan to be submitted for the City’s Transportation Division’s review and approval. Consultant shall be responsible for all traffic control for survey crews. DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 15 EXHIBIT “A-1” PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER Consultant hereby agrees to perform the work detailed below in accordance with all the terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced in Item 1A below. All exhibits referenced in Item 8 are incorporated into the Agreement by this reference. The Consultant shall furnish the necessary facilities, professional, technical and supporting personnel required by this Task Order as described below. CONTRACT NO. ISSUE DATE Purchase Requisition No. 1A. MASTER AGREEMENT NUMBER 1B. TASK ORDER NO. 2. CONSULTANT 3. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: START: COMPLETION: 4 TOTAL TASK ORDER PRICE: $__________________ BALANCE REMAINING IN MASTER AGREEMENT $__________________________________ 5. BUDGET CODE: _____ COST CENTER_______________COST ELEMENT____________WBS/CIP___ _______PHASE______ 6. CITY PROJECT MANAGER’S NAME/DEPARTMENT_____________________________ 7. DESCRIPTION OF SCOPE OF SERVICES MUST INCLUDE: WORK TO BE PERFORMED SCHEDULE OF WORK BASIS FOR PAYMENT & FEE SCHEDULE DELIVERABLES REIMBURSABLES (with “not to exceed” cost) 8. ATTACHMENTS: A: Scope of Services B: ____________________ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I hereby authorize the performance of I hereby acknowledge receipt and acceptance the work described above in this Task Order. of this Task Order and warrant that I have authority to sign on behalf of Consultant. APPROVED: APPROVED: CITY OF PALO ALTO BKF ENGINEERING BY:__________________________________ BY:____________________________________ Name ________________________________ Name __________________________________ Title_________________________________ Title___________________________________ Date _________________________________ Date ___________________________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 16 EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services according to the schedule set forth in each task order. DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 17 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement based on the hourly rate schedule attached as Exhibit C-1. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services, additional services, and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed the amount(s) stated in Section 4 of this Agreement. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Services and Additional Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this/these amount(s). Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth in this Agreement shall be at no cost to the CITY. 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. DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 18 EXHIBIT “C-1” SCHEDULE OF RATES PERSONNEL HOURLY RATES ENGINEERING Senior Associate $206.00 Associate $200.00 Project Manager $190.00 - $196.00 Engineer IV $176.00 Engineer I, II, III $124.00 - $142.00 - $162.00 Engineering Assistant $77.00 Junior Engineer $65.00 PLANNING Planner I, II, III, IV $124.00 - $142.00 - $162.00 - $176.00 SURVEYING Senior Associate $206.00 Associate $200.00 Project Manager $190.00 - $196.00 Surveyor I, II, III, IV $124.00 - $142.00 - $162.00 - $176.00 Survey Party Chief $164.00 Survey Chainman $106.00 Apprentice I, II, III, IV $65.00 - $87.00 - $96.00 - $102.00 Instrumentman $141.00 Surveying Assistant $77.00 Junior Surveyor $65.00 Utility Locator I, II, III $85.00 - $120.00 - $145.00 BIM Specialist I, II, III $124.00 - $142.00 - $162.00 DESIGN AND DRAFTING Technician I, II, III, IV $119.00 - $127.00 - $139.00 - $150.00 Drafter I, II, III, IV $93.00 - $103.00 - $111.00 - $123.00 CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION Senior Construction Administrator $185.00 Resident Engineer $137.00 Field Engineer I, II, III $124.00 - $142.00 - $162.00 Senior Consultant $215.00 SERVICES AND EXPENSES Project Assistant $77.00 Clerical/Administrative Assistant $65.00 Delivery Services $35.00 Principals’ time on projects is chargeable at $230.00- $252.00 per hour. DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 19 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: REQUIRED 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 YES 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 DocuSign Envelope ID: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 Professional Services Rev. April 27, 2016 20 INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. 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: D7D14A45-2BC4-46FF-95E4-65F661DF7CD7 CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY October 30, 2017 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Adoption of an Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Repealing Chapter 9.17 (Personal Cultivation of Marijuana) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code; Repealing Ordinance No. 4422; and Amending Chapters 18.04 (Definitions) and 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses) of Title 18 (Zoning) to Prohibit Medical Cannabis Dispensaries and Prohibit Commercial Cannabis Activities, Except for Deliveries. Environmental Assessment: The Ordinance is Exempt in Accordance With Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions: 1. Find the proposed ordinance exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). 2. Adopt the proposed ordinance (Attachment A) prohibiting medical cannabis dispensaries and prohibiting commercial cannabis activities in the City of Palo Alto except for deliveries. The ordinance would also repeal the temporary ban on outdoor cultivation due to new State law that regulates outdoor cultivation for personal use. Executive Summary Commercial cannabis activities, including commercial cultivation and retailing, will be permitted in California under the Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) starting January 1, 2018. Municipalities have the option to allow or prohibit some or all of such activities, including: commercial cultivation, retail sales, delivery services, distribution, manufacturing of cannabis-containing products, and testing businesses.1 If the City Council wishes to prohibit some or all commercial cannabis activities in the City of Palo Alto, it must enact an ordinance that is effective before January 1, 2018. On that date, the state is required to begin issuing licenses for commercial cannabis activities under the MAUCRSA, but the State will not issue a license if such commercial activity is banned by the City. 1 The MAUCRSA also permits personal use activities, including smoking of cannabis by adults 21 years or older and growing of up to six cannabis plants for personal use. Page 2 Presently, the City has two ordinances that regulate cannabis. The first bans medical cannabis dispensaries and was enacted in 1997 in response to the voter-approved legalization of medical cannabis. The second bans the outdoor cultivation of cannabis and was enacted in 2016 in anticipation of the passage of Proposition 64. The City’s ban on outdoor cultivation will sunset in November 2017. The proposed ordinance (Attachment A) will prohibit most commercial cannabis activities allowed under the MAUCRSA, which will preserve the City’s right to regulate commercial cannabis activities permitted under the MAUCRSA, including commercial cultivation (indoors and outdoors), manufacturing facilities, retailers, and warehouses. The only permitted commercial activity under this ordinance is the delivery of cannabis from licensed retailers located outside of the City. The proposed ordinance will also codify the existing prohibition of medical cannabis dispensaries. These measures will give the City more time to consider which, if any, commercial activities should be permitted in the City, and to adopt relevant regulations. The proposed ordinance will also repeal the City’s outdoor cultivation ban to defer to state law standards for personal cultivation, which requires personal cultivation to occur within a private residence or within locked space not visible from a public space. Background of State and Local Cannabis Laws Cannabis has been decriminalized in phases in California.2 Medical cannabis was first legalized by the voters in 1996 upon the passage of Proposition 215. In response, the City passed an ordinance in 1997 prohibiting medical cannabis dispensaries. While dispensaries were not allowed under the City’s zoning code under the principles of permissive zoning provisions, the City passed the ordinance to make the prohibition clear.3 In 2015, the Governor approved AB 266, known as the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MCRSA). The Act created a new licensing system for medical cannabis-related businesses and imposed regulations on medical cannabis. In November 2016, California voters passed Proposition 64, also known as the Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA), which legalized cannabis under state law for recreational (non-medical) and commercial uses. In June 2017, the state legislature passed SB 94, known as the Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA), which consolidated the MCRSA and the AUMA, largely by eliminating the MCRSA and expanding the scope of the AUMA to include medicinal cannabis. The following is a summary of some of the major provisions of the MAUCRSA: Recreational Possession, Use, and Personal Growing Permitted, Subject To Local Regulations 2 Cf. cannabis remains a Schedule I drug under the federal Controlled Substances Act. 3 See Ordinance 5399, Section 1 for more analysis of the zoning issues and presumptions regarding cannabis. Page 3 The MAUCRSA allows adult (21 years or older) smoking and consumption of cannabis.4 Adults are allowed to grow up to six plants per residence and possess 28.5 grams of cannabis in public.5 Outdoor cultivation for personal use must occur in a locked space and out of sight from public spaces.6 Cannabis grown at home cannot be sold, but can be gifted.7 Smoking is not allowed in any place where tobacco smoking is already banned or near schools, and driving while smoking cannabis is also illegal.8 The City can enact reasonable regulations that govern personal cultivation that do not conflict with state law.9 Personal use regulations can be addressed by the Council in the future. Staff recommends discussing commercial activities first, as any local ordinance prohibiting commercial activities should be in place before the issuance of state licenses, which is expected to start on January 1, 2018. Commercial Activities Permitted, Subject to Local Prohibitions The MAUCRSA allows for several types of commercial cannabis activities, but all require a state- issued license. The MAUCRSA envisions at least three types of state-issued licenses: a license to cultivate commercially, a license to retail or distribute (which also allows delivery), and a license to test or manufacture. Cities have the option to prohibit one or more types of these state-licensed commercial activities.10 The City Council may adopt an ordinance that identifies which activities are prohibited within the City. If the City prohibits any commercial cannabis activity, the state shall not grant a license for such activity within the City.11 Conversely, cities that wish to allow all state-licensed commercial activity do not have to pass an ordinance affirming their intent; it is already state law. For commercial activities that are allowed, cities can create their own regulations, such as business license requirements and zoning and land use requirements, among others.12 Should the City be interested in allowing commercial activities, it can look to neighboring cities for examples of regulations. San Jose has already developed regulations as to medical cannabis which would likely be extended to all commercial cannabis activities. These regulations are largely time, place, and manner regulations that set minimum standards for safety and security, as well as create a permit system for delivery vehicles and drivers. The San Jose City Council has delegated regulatory authority to its City Manager. The City should also be cognizant of the 4 H&S §11362.1. 5 H&S §11362.2 6 Id. 7 H&S §11362.1(a)(2). 8 H&S §11362.3. 9 H&S §11362.2(b). 10 Business and Professions Code (BPC) §26200. 11 BPC §26055(d). 12 BPC §26200. Page 4 state’s regulations for commercial, medicinal, and adult-use cannabis that may preempt the need for the City to develop its own regulations. The State’s proposed regulations are due to be released in Fall 2017. Taxes on Cannabis Sales Taxation of cannabis depends on whether it is for recreational or medicinal use. Recreational cannabis is subject to traditional state and local sales taxes, but medicinal cannabis is exempt.13 Both recreational and medicinal cannabis are subject to a new state Cannabis Excise Tax, which is 15%.14 There is also a new state Cultivation Tax, which is imposed on flowers at the rate of $9.25 per ounce and on leaves at $2.75 per ounce.15 Cannabis cultivated for personal use is exempt from the state Cultivation Tax.16 Recommended City Actions under the Proposed Ordinance Prohibit Commercial Cannabis Activities Except for Deliveries Under principles of permissive zoning, commercial cannabis activities for both medical and recreational use are presumptively prohibited in Palo Alto because they are not listed as permitted activities in the City’s zoning code. But the MAUCRSA seems to anticipate that cities will adopt ordinances prohibiting the activities they wish to keep out. To avoid confusion and preserve local control, staff recommends adding an express prohibition of all commercial cannabis activities except for deliveries. Codify the Existing Prohibition on Medical Cannabis Dispensaries The City Council passed an uncodified urgency ordinance in 1997 to prohibit medical cannabis dispensaries. To avoid confusion and to ensure that no state licenses for medical cannabis dispensaries are issued, staff recommends adopting and codifying a prohibition on medical cannabis dispensaries. Repeal the Outdoor Cultivation Prohibition and Defer to State Law’s Personal Cultivation Standards The City currently has a temporary ban on outdoor cannabis cultivation that will sunset in November 2017. That ban has become outdated, as state law now allows outdoor cultivation for personal use only if it is within a locked space and not visible by normal unaided vision from a public place.17 The attached ordinance would repeal the existing outdoor cultivation for personal use prohibition to defer to state law standards for personal cultivation. The City has the option to require that outdoor personal cultivation occur within an accessory structure to a private residence, located upon the grounds of a private residence that is fully enclosed and secure.18 The Planning and Transportation Commission discussed this option on 13 Rev. & Tax. §34011(c) and (f). 14 Rev. & Tax. §34011(a). 15 Rev. & Tax. §34012(a). 16 Rev. & Tax. §34012(j). 17 H&S §11362.2. 18 Id. Page 5 August 30, 2017 and voted against requiring an accessory structure. The Policy and Services Committee had earlier reviewed the issue on June 13, 2017. At that time, Policy and Services had some reservations about requiring accessory structures (as was proposed in an earlier draft of the ordinance) and desired a sunset clause on the accessory structure requirement. Outdoor cultivation for commercial purposes would continue to be prohibited, however, under the ordinance’s provision prohibiting commercial activities. (See above). Questions from Policy and Services Committee An earlier version of this ordinance was reviewed by the Policy and Services Committee on June 13, 2017. The Committee voted to advance the ordinance to the Planning and Transportation Commission, but asked for answers on the following: Research on delivery regulations, including maximum delivery size and vehicle safety. The State of California is scheduled to release its proposed regulations for commercial cannabis businesses in November, 2017, so there are no concrete regulations in place yet regarding deliveries or any other provision of the MAUCRSA. But the state did preview its proposed regulations regarding deliveries in a now-withdrawn set of proposed regulations for medicinal cannabis. Some of these proposed regulations include: Deliveries must be by an employee of a licensed dispensary, and not by an independent contractor, courier, or unmanned vehicle.19 Cannabis cannot be visible to the public while it is being transported.20 Vehicles used for delivery of cannabis must be outfitted with a GPS device.21 Deliveries can only occur between 6 a.m. and 9 p.m.22 A delivery employee cannot carry in excess of $3,000 of cannabis goods, based on the retail price.23 The delivery route is limited to the delivery addresses, the licensed dispensary, and necessary rest, fuel, or vehicle repair stops.24 These regulations are not in effect, and could differ in the proposed regulations to be released in November 2017. Application of sales and excise taxes to deliveries. The City is waiting for guidance from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration as to the City’s ability to collect sales tax on deliveries made to addresses within the City. Timeline 19 California Bureau of Marijuana Control, “Proposed Text of Regulations” for Title 16, Division 42 (withdrawn) at § 5187. Available at http://bcc.ca.gov/law_regs/mcrsa_ptor.pdf. 20 Id. at § 5193. 21 Id. 22 Id. at § 5196. 23 Id. at § 5199. 24 Id. at § 5208. Page 6 The City Council must pass an ordinance with an effective date no later than January 1, 2018 if it wishes to prohibit some or all commercial cannabis activities. Otherwise, the state can issue licenses for commercial cannabis activities to occur within the City. Resource Impact Staff does not anticipate a resource impact associated with this proposed ordinance. Any future efforts to develop additional regulations for commercial cannabis businesses or personal cultivation would require staff time and could result in zoning or licensing provisions requiring additional staff resources. Future regulations may require additional law enforcement or code enforcement resources. Environmental Review This proposed ordinance has been evaluated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and determined to be exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty to have no possibility of a significant effect on the environment. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Ordinance Amending Title 18 (Zoning) to Prohibit Medicinal Cannabis Dispensaries and Prohibit Commercial Cannabis Activities, Except for Deliveries. (DOCX) Attachment B - CalCannabis FAQ (PDF) Department Head: Molly Stump, City Attorney Page 7 NOT YET APPROVED 170503 th TS/ORD Amending 9.17 Ordinance No. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Repealing Chapter 9.17 (Personal Cultivation of Marijuana) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code; Repealing Ordinance No. 4422; and Amending Chapters 18.04 (Definitions) and 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses) of Title 18 (Zoning) to Prohibit Medical Cannabis Dispensaries and Prohibit Commercial Cannabis Activities, Except for Deliveries. The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1: The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and declares as follows: A. On June 9, 1997, the Palo Alto City Council adopted uncodified urgency Ordinance No. 4422 declaring the establishment and operation of medical cannabis dispensaries to be a prohibited use under the City’s zoning ordinance. B. On October 24, 2016, the Palo Alto City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5399, prohibiting the outdoor cultivation of cannabis. That ordinance had a sunset date of one year from the date the ordinance took effect. C. On November 8, 2016, California voters passed Proposition 64, known as the Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA), which legalized the use, sale, and consumption of recreational cannabis by persons 21 years of age and older. D. In June 2017, the California Legislature passed SB 94, which consolidated the state regulation of medical and recreational cannabis into the Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA), taking the place of the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act and the AUMA. E. The MAUCRSA provides base standards for personal cultivation of cannabis and allows local jurisdictions to legislate additional standards. (See Health and Safety Code section 11362.2). F. The MAUCRSA permits commercial cannabis activities subject to state licensure, but preserves local governments’ authority to regulate or ban commercial cannabis activities. (See, e.g., Business and Professions Code section 26200). G. Medical cannabis dispensaries and commercial cannabis activities are not listed in the City’s zoning code as permitted or conditionally-permitted land uses, making them prohibited under the principles of permissive zoning provisions. (See, e.g., City of Corona v. Naulls (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 418). Nevertheless, the state may not necessarily recognize the application of permissive zoning principles as to cannabis-related uses. H. In order to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, the Palo Alto City Council desires to replace the existing uncodified prohibition of medical cannabis dispensaries NOT YET APPROVED 170503 th TS/ORD Amending 9.17 in Ordinance No. 4422 with new Code section 18.42.150 to prohibit medical cannabis dispensaries and prohibit commercial cannabis activities, with the exception of deliveries. The Palo Alto City Council also desires to repeal Ordinance No. 5399, codified at Chapter 9.17 of Title 9 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, in recognition of new state law regulating cultivation for personal use. SECTION 2. Chapter 9.17 of Title 9 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby repealed. SECTION 3. Ordinance No. 4422 of the City of Palo Alto is hereby repealed. SECTION 4. Chapter 18.04 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended to add new subsection 18.04.030(a)(94.5) to read as follows: (94.5) “Cannabis” means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa Linnaeus, Cannabis indica, or Cannabis ruderalis, whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin, whether crude or purified, extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds, or resin. “Cannabis” also means the separated resin, whether crude or purified, obtained from cannabis. “Cannabis” does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination. For the purpose of this Title, “cannabis” does not mean “industrial hemp” as defined by Section 11018.5 of the Health and Safety Code. (A) “Commercial cannabis activity” includes the cultivation, possession, manufacture, distribution, processing, storing, laboratory testing, packaging, labeling, transportation, delivery or sale of cannabis and cannabis products as provided for in Division 10 of the California Business and Professions Code. “Commercial cannabis activity” does not include personal uses allowed by Health and Safety Code sections 11362.1 and 11362.2 or personal medicinal uses allowed by sections 11362.765 and 11362.77, as amended from time to time. (B) “Cultivation” means any activity involving the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, curing, grading, or trimming of cannabis. (C) “Medical cannabis dispensary” is a facility where cannabis is made available for medicinal purposes in accordance with any provision of state law that authorizes the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes. SECTION 5. Chapter 18.42 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended to add new section 18.42.150 to read as follows: 18.42.150 Cannabis Cultivation and Commercial Activities (a) Prohibition of commercial activities. Commercial cannabis activity is not permitted. NOT YET APPROVED 170503 th TS/ORD Amending 9.17 (b) Exception for qualified delivery services. Notwithstanding the prohibition in section 18.42.150(a), delivery of cannabis is permitted only from a licensed retailer, microbusiness, or nonprofit located outside the City of Palo Alto and is subject to California Business and Professions Code section 26090 as amended from time to time. This section shall not be interpreted to permit any temporary, persistent, or fixed physical presence used for commercial cannabis activities besides delivery vehicles in the active state of making a delivery to a specific person and location. (d) Prohibition of medical cannabis dispensaries. Medical cannabis dispensaries are not permitted. (e) Regulations. The City Manager is authorized to approve and enforce regulations consistent with this section. (f) Enforcement. The City may enforce this section and its regulations in any manner permitted by law and is entitled to recover all costs, including attorneys fees, related to enforcement. The violation of this section is hereby declared to be a public nuisance and shall, at the discretion of the city, create a cause of action for injunctive relief. SECTION 6. 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 7. CEQA. The City Council finds and determines that this Ordinance is not a “project” within the meaning of section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines because it has no potential for resulting in physical change in the environment, either directly or ultimately. In the event that this Ordinance is found to be a project under CEQA, it is subject to the CEQA exemption contained in CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty to have no possibility of a significant effect on the environment. / / / / / / / / / / / / NOT YET APPROVED 170503 th TS/ORD Amending 9.17 SECTION 8. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: ______________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ City Manager ______________________________ Deputy City Attorney Q. A. Q. A. When can I apply for a state cannabis cultivation license? Applications will be available for all California state cannabis cultivation licenses—both medicinal and adult-use (recreational)—on January 1, 2018. How are you developing the cannabis cultivation licensing regulations? The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) is required to follow the statutory requirements found in the California Administrative Procedure Act. CDFA works with stakeholders, the public, and licensing authorities to develop the standards and regulations necessary to successfully implement a statewide cannabis cultivation regulatory structure in California. CDFA intends to use the emergency rulemaking process in 2017 for developing the state’s combined medicinal and adult-use cannabis cultivation licensing regulations. For a detailed description of this process, visit the California Office of Administrative Law (OAL) at oal.ca.gov; click on the “Rulemaking Process” link. How do I apply for a cannabis cultivation license? The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) is not issuing any cultivation licenses until January 1, 2018. However, in preparation for state licensure, CDFA recommends staying up to date on city and/or county government requirements for local cannabis cultivation licenses and permits. How can I receive updates on the status of California’s cultivation licensing regulations? The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) regularly posts information on its CalCannabis Cultivation Licensing website and via these three social media channels: Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. Email alerts are another way to get information. For links to these resources, please go to: calcannabis.cdfa.ca.gov Q. A. Q. A. Medicinal and Adult-Use (Recreational)Cannabis Cultivation Licensing Frequently Asked Questions What types of cannabis cultivation licenses will be offered in California? The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) will issue 17 types of cannabis cultivation licenses: Q. A. Specialty Cottage Outdoor An outdoor cultivation site with up to 25 mature plants Specialty Cottage Indoor An indoor cultivation site with up to 500 square feet or less of total canopy Specialty Cottage Mixed-Light A mixed-light cultivation site with 2,500 square feet or less of total canopy Specialty Outdoor An outdoor cultivation site with 5,000 square feet or less of total canopy—or up to 50 mature plants on noncontiguous plots Specialty Indoor An indoor cultivation site of between 501 and 5,000 square feet of total canopy Specialty Mixed-Light A mixed-light cultivation site of between 2,501 and 5,000 square feet of total canopy Small Outdoor An outdoor cultivation site of between 5,001 and 10,000 square feet of total canopy Small Indoor An indoor cultivation site of between 5,001 and 10,000 square feet of total canopy Small Mixed-Light A mixed-light cultivation site of between 5,001 and 10,000 square feet of total canopy Medium Outdoor An outdoor cultivation site of between 10,001 square feet and 1 acre of total canopy Medium Indoor An indoor cultivation site of between 10,001 and 22,000 square feet of total canopy Medium Mixed-Light A mixed-light cultivation site of between 10,001 and 22,000 square feet of total canopy Nursery Cultivation of cannabis solely as a nursery (examples of typical nursery activities include cloning and seed propagation) Processor A cultivation site that conducts only trimming, drying, curing, grading, or packaging of cannabis and nonmanufactured cannabis products Large Outdoor Note: CDFA will not issue any Large Outdoor licenses prior to January 1, 2023 For outdoor cultivation that uses no artificial lighting for more than 1 acre of total canopy size on one premises Large Indoor Note: CDFA will not issue any Large Indoor licenses prior to January 1, 2023 For indoor cultivation that exclusively uses artificial lighting for more than 22,000 square feet of total canopy size on one premises Large Mixed-Light Note: CDFA will not issue any Large Mixed-Light licenses prior to January 1, 2023 For cultivation using a combination of natural and supplemental artificial lighting at a maximum threshold (which will be determined by the licensing authority) for more than 22,000 square feet of total canopy size on one premises Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. What is the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA)? On June 27, 2017, California Governor Jerry Brown signed the cannabis trailer bill (also known as California Senate Bill 94), which effectively merged two existing bills—the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MCRSA) and the Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA)—into one streamlined bill: the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA). Having one comprehensive state law will provide for a more unified regulatory process governing both medicinal and adult-use cannabis. You can read the full text of MAUCRSA on the CalCannabis Cultivation Licensing website at: calcannabis.cdfa.ca.gov How long will a license last before it must be renewed? All commercial cannabis cultivation licenses will be valid for one year; a license must be renewed to continue commercial cannabis cultivation. What is the cannabis track-and-trace system? How will it work? The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) is developing a track- and-trace system for both medicinal and adult-use (recreational) cannabis that all commercial cannabis licensees in California will be required to use. This system will record the movement of cannabis and cannabis products through the supply chain—from cultivation to sale—which will help ensure that if a public safety concern arises, the source will be identifiable. The track-and-trace system also will help prevent black-market cannabis products from entering the regulated market, and likewise help prevent regulated cannabis products from being diverted into the black market. In June 2017, CDFA selected Franwell Inc. as the state’s cannabis track-and-trace vendor. Will there be different rules for how medicinal and adult-use (recreational) cannabis may be grown in California? The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) is still developing regulations, but the cultivation requirements are expected to be the same for growing medicinal and adult-use cannabis. However, cannabis products sold to the public must be clearly differentiated as either medicinal or adult-use (recreational) products. Is cannabis considered an agricultural crop in California? California defines medicinal and adult-use (recreational) cannabis as an agricultural product. However, this identification as an agricultural product is limited to the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA). Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. How can I contact CalCannabis Cultivation Licensing? Visit the CalCannabis website at calcannabis.cdfa.ca.gov; call (916) 263-0801, Monday through Friday, 8am to 5pm; or send an email to calcannabis@cdfa.ca.gov. Which department should I contact to learn about other— noncultivation—types of state cannabis licenses? The Bureau of Cannabis Control (also known as the bureau) is within the California Department of Consumer Affairs and will issue licenses for distribution, dispensaries, microbusinesses, and testing laboratories. Visit the bureau’s website at bcc.ca.gov or call (800) 952-5210, Monday through Friday, 8am to 5pm. The Manufactured Cannabis Safety Branch (MCSB) is within the California Department of Public Health and will issue licenses for manufacturing (such as edibles and topical products). Visit the MCSB website at cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CEH/DFDCS/Pages/MCSB.aspx or call (916) 440-7861, Monday through Friday, 8am to 5pm. All three of California’s cannabis licensing authorities also can be reached via the California Cannabis Portal at: cannabis.ca.gov CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK October 30, 2017 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Independent Police Auditor's Report 2016 Part Two Attached you will find the Independent Police Auditor's Report 2016 Part Two. We are also including the links to the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office Press Release and full report of the fatal shooting of William Raff on December 25, 2015. Press Release: https://www.sccgov.org/sites/da/newsroom/newsreleases/Pages/NRA2016/RAFF-OIS.aspx Full Report: https://www.sccgov.org/sites/da/newsroom/newsreleases/Documents/OIS%20-W.%20Raff.pdf ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Independent Police Auditor's Report 2016 Part Two (PDF) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 1 OIR GROUP www.oirgroup.com INDEPENDENT POLICE AUDITOR’S SECOND REPORT - 2016 Presented to the Honorable City Council City of Palo Alto September 2017 Prepared by: Michael Gennaco and Stephen Connolly Independent Police Auditors for the City of Palo Alto Michael.Gennaco@oirgroup.com Stephen.Connolly@oirgroup.com 2 I. Introduction This report addresses materials received by the Independent Police Auditor (“IPA”) for review from the second half of 2016. It covers investigations by the Palo Alto Police Department (“PAPD”) that fall within the scope of our auditing responsibilities and that were completed prior to December 31. As it happens, there are only two: a Taser deployment and an officer-involved shooting. The Taser case involved one officer’s prolonged struggle to control a physically resistant DUI suspect who had gotten out of his car and was attempting to walk away after a lengthy and uncooperative interaction. We agree with the Department’s findings about the justification for the use of the Taser (and other force options), and also commend the review for noting – and acting upon – a couple of tactical issues that merited remediation. The other incident covered in this Report occurred in December of 2015 and resulted in the death of an adult male who engaged officers while holding a knife. It was the first shooting case involving the PAPD in more than a decade. In keeping with established protocol, the legality of the shooting was first investigated by PAPD and evaluated by the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office.1 The District Attorney released his findings in May of 2016, having determined that the officers’ use of deadly force was justified in response to the perceived threat posed by the decedent. At that point, the Department moved to complete its administrative review process, which had begun on the night of the shooting but which deferred to the criminal investigation before being finalized. Obviously, the shooting was a significant event for the Department and the community. The administrative investigation reflects a recognition of this fact in constructive ways. As we discuss below, the Department’s review goes beyond the important but narrow questions of legality and pursues broader insights and lessons about the incident – on its own terms and as a potential guide for the future. We offer additional ideas along these lines while commending PAPD for the efforts it has already made. We also note that there were no misconduct investigations for us to evaluate during this period. Though some of this is a matter of timing, it’s also the simple result of a decrease in new allegations for 2016. Our understanding is that four cases were initiated near the end of the year and will be completed soon, an activity level that comes closer to matching the averages we’ve experienced in our 10 years as independent monitors in Palo Alto. And we also hesitate to 1 Per Santa Clara County officer-involved shooting protocols, representatives from the District Attorney also responded to the shooting scene and played an active role monitoring the investigation. 3 ascribe too much significance to the number of investigations alone, since many variables apart from “amount of misconduct” can affect this total. Nonetheless, the outcome is unusual and noteworthy, and it’s a trend line we will continue to monitor. Finally, we also wish to congratulate Chief Dennis Burns and Acting Assistant Chief Bob Beacom on their recent retirements. We had multiple dealings with both men, and in many ways they served as the “front line” liaisons for PAPD in providing us with information, updates, and feedback about our monitoring efforts. We didn’t agree with them on every point. We did, however, come to value the candid and constructive dialogue that we developed with them over time. From our vantage point, they provided effective leadership to the Department and honorable service to the residents of Palo Alto. We will miss working with them.2 II. Officer-Involved Shooting Review An officer involved-shooting investigation and review was closed during this review period. The shooting was the first time since 2002 that PAPD officers were involved in a deadly force incident. The Christmas Day 2015 incident began when an individual with a history of mental illness called 911 from a transitional housing facility caring for residents suffering from mental illness and/or substance abuse. The caller told dispatch there was a person at the home who was violent and intended to harm others. Officers were dispatched to the location while dispatchers called the home and talked to a social worker, who informed them that there was no person staying at the facility with the name identified by the caller. The worker further informed dispatch who the caller was and that he was “sick and psychotic” but not dangerous. The worker told communications that it was probably okay if the officers did not respond to the call. The dispatcher informed the worker that officers were already at the location and would probably want to talk with him. Other than the fact that no one “by that name” lived at the residence, the responding officers were not provided this additional information in the tight window of their response time. According to the video record3 of the incident, the three involved officers were out of their patrol cars when a man was observed screaming with a silver object in his hand. At least one of the officers immediately identified the object as a knife.4 Officers called for backup and retreated to the area where they had parked their patrol cars, and one officer requested that a less 2 Encouragingly, the interim Chief and his leadership team have already taken steps to continue a transparent and constructive dialogue going forward, including inviting us to present at a recent sergeant and lieutenant’s training. 3As noted in further detail below, the video evidence was voluminous, and was compiled from multiple police car cameras. 4 The object in fact was a table knife which the man had apparently procured from the residential treatment facility. 4 lethal munition be brought to the location. Officers commanded the individual to drop the knife but the man ran to the middle of the street, bounced from foot to foot and continued to scream. Within approximately 20 seconds of the officers first spotting him, the man raised the hand in which he was holding the knife and charged them. Two officers fired at the man while the third officer deployed a Taser. The man was struck with four bullets. Officers provided first aid and the man was transported by paramedics to the hospital, where he later died. Per Santa Clara County officer-involved shooting protocols, the investigation was presented to the District Attorney, who determined that the officers’ use of deadly force was justified. Similarly, during its administrative review PAPD determined that the use of deadly force was consistent with the Constitutional standard regarding use of deadly force, and that the officers’ tactics were reasonable. Investigative Issues: During the investigation, the involved officers agreed to provide voluntary statements to both the criminal and administrative investigators. The willingness of the officers to provide voluntary statements to both sets of investigators is remarkable; in reviewing hundreds of officer-involved shootings from different agencies over the years, we cannot recall a time when officers were willing to provide voluntary statements in the administrative context.5 Moreover, consistent with Santa Clara County’s officer-involved shooting protocols, the involved officers were not shown video of the information until they provided their statements to investigators.6 Less effectively, there was a two and a half day delay before the officers were interviewed. Several factors contributed to this, including the lateness of the hour when the shooting occurred, the length of time that the officers and investigators had been on duty, and the interest in giving investigators another day to review preliminary evidence and the video recordings. A couple of these factors merit further attention. 5 Routinely, officers require their agencies to compel this testimony, to protect it from being used against them outside of the criminal arena. 6 We agree with PAPD that ordinarily, such as when video captures an arrest, officers should be reviewing that video while preparing their reports in support of that arrest. However, as we have commented in previous reports, in Palo Alto when it is the officers’ conduct which is under review, such as an internal affairs investigation or use of force incident, officers should not be provided the opportunity to review video of the incident before a “pure” statement is obtained from them, whether it be an interview or written report. We use this opportunity to again urge the Department to adopt the video review protocols used County-wide for officer-involved shootings for their own internal investigations. 5 One complication was the length of time required to download and review the large amount of recorded material. Apparently, the in-car videos were left running for hours after the incident, to no useful purpose. This unnecessarily increased the workload on the back end, and could have led to an inadvertent “over-taping” of important material.7 Investigators identified this issue and have recognized that, once a critical incident has stabilized, a field supervisor should at some point order that the relevant camera systems be turned off. Moreover, we have been informed that, to the Department’s credit, this issue was identified and discussed during a quarterly training meeting. However, because this is so important a “lesson learned” and PAPD will have future sergeants who were not privy to the one-time training, a more formal directive should be devised to ensure that current and future supervisors remain cognizant of the need to perform this function. Recommendation: PAPD should modify its in-car video policy to instruct field supervisors to order deactivation of any running in-car video once a critical incident is static. Apart from adjustments that could prevent this “technological” obstacle in the future, we also take the broader position that agencies should emphasize timely statements from involved officers. We acknowledge that debate exists on this topic under the premise that rest and some distance from the event actually will enhance recall. These must be balanced against delay’s potential to obscure memory, particularly given the likelihood of exposure to outside information. And, in favoring sooner over later, we also cite the standard preference for immediacy that characterizes investigative practice in most contexts and our experience that many officers involved in such incidents would prefer to provide their account as soon as practicable. Recommendation: PAPD should strive to obtain investigative statements from involved officers on the date of an incident. Once the interviews of the involved officers occurred, they were fairly comprehensive and detailed. However, with regard to at least one on-scene officer, a critical line of questioning involved the use of leading questions: Q: When this subject is running towards you with the knife at his side are you scared for your safety? A: Absolutely. Q: Were you scared for your partner’s safety? A: Yes. 7 Fortunately, the “over-taping” that occurred did not involve critical information. 6 The state of mind of on-scene officers and their perception of threat is the critical question in evaluating the justification of any use of deadly force. A question that effectively includes its own answer, and only requires agreement from the subject, has the potential to undermine the appearance of objectivity and the legitimacy of the response. This is particularly sensitive in the arena of officers investigating their colleagues over the use of deadly force, where the potential for public skepticism about investigative integrity is already high. Recommendation: PAPD should emphasize with its detectives the need to avoid the use of leading questions when questioning officers regarding the use of force, especially as it relates to their mindset and reasons for acting. Additionally, there was at least one critical subject area that was not directly pursued by investigators with the involved officers. One of the employees at the residential facility reported that while the officers were on-scene and prior to the shooting, he told the officers that the object that was in the hand of the man was a butter knife. One of the in-car videos confirmed that the witness did say the words “butter knife” just prior to the use of deadly force. While the involved officers were asked generally whether they heard anyone else yelling at them, this specific witness statement was not specifically pursued. Even if officers had specifically heard the employee’s comment, it would not necessarily have changed their decision-making or perception of threat, especially considering the aggressive move of the subject seconds thereafter.8 Nonetheless, we view the comment captured on tape as significant enough to warrant thorough scrutiny. Recommendation: PAPD supervision should review interviews of involved officers in critical incidents for completeness and, if necessary, schedule follow-up interviews to ensure a complete account of the incident is obtained. Apart from the issues discussed above, the criminal investigation was thorough and well- organized – features that were especially impressive given the long gap since the Department’s last officer-involved shooting case. We were, however, struck by the way in which the lead detective opined in her report about the appropriateness of the officers’ actions: “It appears that [the involved officers] used a reasonable amount of force to stop [the subject] from causing great bodily injury or death to one of the officers.” Criminal investigations of officer-involved shootings are intended to be evidence-gathering exercises. The application of the law to those facts is a responsibility that should be left to the sole province of the District Attorney. In this case, those important bright lines were blurred by including the investigator’s own conclusion as part of the documentation. Our understanding from PAPD is that this was done at the specific request of the Deputy District 8 We discuss this point in further detail below. 7 Attorney assigned to the case. We have subsequently had conversations with the Supervisory Deputy District Attorneys responsible for overseeing the DA Office’s review of officer-involved shootings who has informed us that it is the Office’s preference that the investigative police agency not opine about the appropriateness of the shooting. Recommendation: PAPD should develop written protocols that remind investigators to focus solely on fact-gathering when conducting criminal officer-involved shooting investigations. Meanwhile, the PAPD investigator responsible for the subsequent administrative investigation monitored the detective interviews in real time and was afforded the opportunity to ask follow-up questions after the criminal investigators finished. However, the relevant investigator determined that he did not have any additional questions of the involved officers – including further potential inquiry about the “butter knife” characterization by the percipient witness. We noted other tactical issues that further administrative questions, beyond the scope of the initial criminal interview, might have effectively amplified. Those included more detailed exploration as to whether the presence of less lethal munitions on scene may have been helpful, especially if they were in the cabin of a patrol car,9 and additional information about one officer’s deployment of his Taser at almost the precise time that deadly force was used. An administrative interview can also address collateral but important issues such as the decision by one officer to drive himself away from the scene rather than being escorted. A subsequent administrative interview with the involved officers could also have included sharing relevant parts of the recordings with them, to see whether it refreshed the officers’ recollection regarding certain aspects of the incident. An initial interview, designed specifically to address the split-second decision to use deadly force, will rarely be sufficient to fully explore tactical issues or other on-scene actions and decision-making by the officers and supervisors. This kind of thoroughness and wide-ranging evaluation cannot reasonably be accomplished at the time of the first interview session. For obvious reasons, the initial focus will lie on the most central questions. This is why best practices call for a second and later interview. Making a follow-up administrative interview a standard expectation not only insures comprehensive fact-gathering, but does so in a way that promotes rigorous and constructive self-scrutiny, even when officers 9 Administrative interviews can not only obtain a more detailed understanding into the involved officers’ decision-making, they can also gain additional insight from the involved officers about what equipment might have been helpful if it had been available. 8 have performed well.10 We have been informed that a conscious decision was made not to conduct a second interview, in the interest of the officers’ health and well-being and a belief that all pertinent facts to the shooting had been obtained. Though we certainly respect the issue of officer wellness, we also have dealt with agencies who work carefully to push past the inherent stress of the situation in the interest of the additional information to be gleaned. Moreover, if a “second interview protocol” were to become the norm, officer expectations – and perhaps attendant stress levels – would adjust accordingly.11 Recommendation: PAPD should devise investigative protocols requiring a subsequent administrative interview of officers in deadly force incidents. PAPD’s Administrative Review of the Incident As with the criminal investigation, PAPD’s internal review of the incident had several noteworthy strengths. We detail these below. And we reiterate that the length of time since its last shooting – and the subsequent inexperience of most if not all the active participants in the process – made the Department’s accomplishments all the more impressive. To the extent we offer suggestions for improvement, many of these stem from gaps that could have been filled with a follow-up interview of participants. The investigator responsible for PAPD’s administrative review produced a detailed assessment of the information collected and evaluated the involved officers’ actions. The review set out in detail relevant observations derived from the in-car video footage, the involved officer statements, witness statements, Taser data, radio communications, and other physical evidence. The administrative review concluded that even if a less-lethal option had been on scene, it could not have been retrieved from a vehicle and deployed within the mere seconds that transpired before the subject charged the officers. The review further concluded that the officers purposely coordinated the deployment of those force options that were readily available (firearms and Taser) to provide more flexibility to respond to the threat. The review determined that the officers had no meaningful opportunity to assess the subject’s mental faculties, or employ conflict resolution or de-escalation techniques. 10 To its credit, the administrative investigation was not simply a repackaging of the criminal investigation. One key area that the administrative investigation addressed involved conducting interviews of PAPD personnel responsible for taking the initial call, engaging in further communications with a staff member at the scene, and dispatching information to responding officers. 11 PAPD notes that in the region in and around Santa Clara County, it is common practice for the administrative report to rely on the criminal interview for the administrative report. We urge PAPD to move away from that “common practice” and adopt the practice that other California police agencies use for the reasons we articulate. 9 The review noted that the officers repeatedly gave clear verbal commands to the subject to disarm, but that the subject did not respond in any intelligible way. The review further observed that the officers did not close the distance or force a confrontation with the subject but instead asked for backup and maintained distance. We appreciate the detailed assessment of the officers’ on-scene decision-making and agree that the decisions to ask for backup, request a less-lethal munition, provide verbal commands, and maintain distance were appropriate tactics. We also agree that the very compressed time frame between arrival on scene and the sprint by the subject toward the officers forestalled the use of other tactics such as mental health assessment, conflict resolution, and de-escalation. However, in our view, the Department seemed to reach some of these conclusions without a clear foundation in the evidence – particularly in the form of supporting statements from the involved officers. For example, the officers were not asked about the extent to which having a SAGE munition12 at the ready inside of their patrol car would have led them to choose it as they existed their vehicles at the scene. The officers were also not asked how the knowledge that a SAGE was on scene might have shaped a strategy wherein two officers provided cover while the third obtained it as a supplemental option. We also are left with questions as to how much affirmative coordination and planning occurred between the three officers, given the lack of apparent articulation among them regarding a tactical plan. A similarly thoughtful and in-depth analysis characterized the discussion of the Taser’s role in the incident. The review found that the Taser deployment was not effective in stopping the subject and that it would have been extremely difficult to effectively deploy the Taser and neutralize the threat under the circumstances presented. The review particularly noted the fact that Taser probes deploy at off-set angles, that the laser sight is of little use when targeting a fast- moving subject, and that even when both Taser probes connect only that musculature that falls between the probes is disrupted. Accordingly, the review opined that the extent to which the subject would be debilitated is unpredictable. The review concluded that by the time the subject entered the maximum range of the Taser, he was moving at a near sprint and that it was questionable whether even a successful application of the Taser would have neutralized the threat in time to avoid the necessity of deadly force. This analysis is impressively comprehensive and seemingly legitimate in its conclusions. Again though, the lack of further questioning of the deploying officer limited the inquiry in our view. We also note that the review did not remark on the fact that the Taser was deployed after shots were already fired, albeit momentarily so. Both these questions speak to potential performance and training issues that an administrative review should encompass. 12 A SAGE munition is a less lethal device that can be used to effectively disable a person who is presenting a threat to officers. SAGE refers to the company that makes the less lethal weapon. 10 Additionally, as noted above, the absence of a specific question about whether the officers heard a staff member’s mentioning of a “butter knife” had several implications for threat assessment.13 It’s important to reiterate that the officers may have not heard the statement, and, even if they had, may still have reasonably believed that the knife in question presented a deadly threat as brandished by the aggressive subject. Again, though, because these facts were not developed during the investigative stage, the effectiveness of the tactical review is impeded. Additional collateral but significant issues were not addressed during PAPD’s review of the incident. As mentioned above, the administrative investigator interviewed the two PAPD employees responsible for dispatching communications on the date of the incident. However, there is no tactical analysis or critique with regard to the way information from the residential facility was obtained and transmitted to the responding officers. For example, the dispatcher who took the call dispatched the call as a “5150”14 as opposed to a “Criminal Threats” call. Moreover, there is no discussion about whether in retrospect it may have been more advisable to keep the initial caller on the phone until his story could be further researched and verified. While the additional information collected during the administrative interviews of the communications personnel was admirable, the analysis does not then evaluate this additional fact gathering in assessing the way information was collected and transmitted in this incident. The investigative reports further indicated that one involved officer drove himself back to the station. PAPD investigative protocols are that involved officers in deadly force incidents are to be separated and transported away from the scene. Ambiguity about whether this officer – who used his Taser and was a witness but did not use deadly force – fell within the protocol was understandable. However, this type of issue is something that an after-action review can and should address. Similarly, the investigation indicated that an officer who arrived at the scene moments after the shooting had placed himself as “arrived” on his mobile data computer even though, in fact, he was still several blocks away. It was reported that it was common practice for officers to indicate on their computers that they are at a location even though they are not physically there, presumably in the interest of speeding up their ability to act once they do arrive. In our view, though, the practice is just as likely to create confusion regarding efforts to coordinate any 13 For example, all three of the involved officers said in their interviews that the ballistic body armor they were wearing was not designed to stop an edged weapon – which re-introduces the issues of what they understood the subject to be brandishing. 14 “5150” is a short hand reference to individuals who may be going through a mental health crisis. 11 response,15 and we note that the report did not indicate that other responding officers took similar action. Recommendation: PAPD should critically review the practice of officers placing themselves on “arrived” status prior to them actually arriving. The investigative report indicated that at least two parked cars and a door were struck by bullets fired by the officers. While there is no follow up in the after-action reports about whether the City compensated the property owners regarding the damage suffered as a result of the shots fired, we were informed by PAPD that the Department worked with the City Attorney’s Office to “pre-load” the claims process and pay for the property damage. We commend PAPD and the City Attorney’s Office for recognizing the importance of proactively reaching out to non- involved property owners. Our only point here is to recommend inclusion of relevant documentation in the interest of completeness. Recommendation: PAPD should ensure that it documents in its after-action report its actions to compensate property owners for any loss suffered as a result of police action. More positively, the review also noted that after the subject fell to the ground and was no longer a threat, all the involved officers immediately transitioned to providing emergency medical aid and summoned emergency medical assistance. In fact, officers can be heard to tell the subject: “Come on buddy, stay with me.” This is noteworthy in a positive way. The transition from confrontation to rescue is, in our experience, a difficult one for many officers to make; in this case, the responding officers performed admirably. Finally, we encourage the Department to maximize the value of the good work it undertakes in a critical incident response such as this. While follow-up on a less formal level perhaps occurred, there is no indication that either the involved officers or the wider Department were presented any debriefing after the tactical review. For example, sharing the review’s insightful analysis regarding the Taser deployment would have benefitted both the officer involved and the Department. Moreover, while we have been told that a remedial debrief of involved dispatch personnel did occur in conjunction with this case, it is not documented within the materials we reviewed. Focusing the after action report solely on the performance of the involved officers fails to acknowledge the advantages of a holistic review where the entire incident is considered, critiqued, and documented. The time, energy, and expertise spent on issue-spotting and analysis are all things that the Department should seek to maximize in terms of feedback and guidance for the future. We encourage PAPD to consider ways to further and formalize the sharing of “lessons learned” after critical incidents such as this. Recommendation: PAPD should devise feedback mechanisms whereby involved officers and Department members are debriefed on lessons learned from the investigation and tactical 15 This practice could also inaccurately portray the Department’s actual response times. 12 review. Such mechanisms should include written documentation indicating that such debriefings occurred. PAPD’s Systemic Review16 To his credit, the now-retired Chief ordered an overall systemic review of tactics and training after the shooting. The resultant process – which current Department command staff shaped and implemented – produced several findings and recommendations designed to improve officer and Department responses on a going forward basis. For the Department to engage in this type of systemic review is emblematic of progressive policing practices. In the past, we have taken PAPD to task for too narrow a focus on force incidents, where the only written determination is whether the use of force was within policy. Issues such as tactical decision-making, supervision, equipment, and documentation have not been identified, or at least there has not been a written record to document interests and responses. With that mind, we commend the Department for the initiative and the positive reforms that emerged from it (which we discuss below). We hope that the impulse that provided the catalyst for robust systemic review in this case translates to similarly constructive approaches to future incidents. Among the key findings was the recognition that a category of specialized training needed to be re-emphasized. PAPD was the first agency in Santa Clara County to commit to training all officers in Crisis Intervention Training (CIT), and the first agency to voluntarily participate in the scenario-based training administered by the County’s Office of Mental Health. However, as a result of low staffing levels and a reduction in CIT training, only 80% of the current officers had CIT training – and none of the officers involved in the shooting had been through it.17 This gap caused PAPD to redouble their training regimen so that all officers had again been CIT trained when the memorandum closing this case was prepared. In addition, the memorandum reported a commitment to provide updated training to all its officers by the County’s Office of Mental Health which has since been completed. Obviously, this is an exemplary response by the Department. 16 The review took pains to remark that in no way should the systemic recommendations be construed as a poor or critical reflection on the performance of the involved officers. This inclination toward sensitivity comes from an understandable place, particularly in light of all the years that had passed since the Department’s last fatal shooting and the potential impact on involved personnel. Nonetheless, we have found that rigorous internal assessment – even of individual officer performance – is a hallmark of effective agencies, and is not inconsistent with a proper regard for officers’ well-being. 17 This unfortunate circumstance may have been attributable in part to the fact that the incident occurred on Christmas Day; less senior officers are usually assigned to work on holidays. This reality emphasizes the need for all PAPD patrol officers to be trained in critical components. 13 The systemic review also found that the Department lacked staffing and resources to provide CIT training to its dispatchers. We appreciate that PAPD recognized that dispatchers are critical components to a successful resolution in dealing with people in crisis; they are usually the first personnel in communication with such individuals. The ways in which dispatchers relate to the caller, obtain requisite information, and forward that information to responding officers is often critical in increasing the likelihood of a good outcome. Accordingly, it is imperative that dispatchers are provided CIT training geared to their important role. We have been recently informed that the Department continues to retain an interest in providing this training but because supervision in the dispatch unit is in a state of transition and there are some dispatch vacancies, that this training has not yet occurred. Ideally, dispatchers should train with PAPD officers in scenarios designed to approximate real life challenges. We urge PAPD to move forward promptly with this important training initiative that could serve as a model for Santa Clara County. Another issue identified by the systemic review was an interest in providing additional scenario-based training to PAPD officers. Accordingly, a Firearm Training System was obtained by the Department which has the capability to simulate 500 scenarios. The firearms, defensive tactics, and tactical communication instructors in the Department have integrated their training to focus on tactical and force options such as de-escalation, repositioning, less lethal munitions and seeking backup. Additionally, critical incident response topics and training have been rolled out to PAPD sergeants and lieutenants at their quarterly meetings. The delivery of a four-hour block of de-escalation training, already in the works, was expedited because of this officer-involved shooting. We have been informed that the Department has determined to provide ICAT (Intervention, Communication and Tactics) Training developed by the Police Education Resource Foundation (PERF), a progressive organization of police professionals. Trainers were identified by the Department and they have already attended the ICAT course. A one-hour introductory block of the training has already been provided to PAPD officers and the trainers are currently working on the training curriculum. We urge the Department to continue apace on this important training initiative. The comprehensive review of the incident also resulted in some recommendations regarding equipment upgrades intended to increase the “tool kit” of each patrol officer. The investigation had revealed that none of the initial responding officers had any less-lethal munitions in their cars. In fact, as noted above, one of the officers radioed for a less-lethal munition when he arrived on scene, but it did not arrive in time. The investigation further indicated that only one of the three responding officers was qualified to deploy less-lethal munitions. As a result of this information, the commitment was made to place a SAGE less lethal munition in every patrol vehicle. In addition, instead of having the less lethal weapon stored in the trunk of the vehicle, the recommendation was to have each mounted inside the patrol car, so 14 that they could be more readily accessible to officers. Finally, all PAPD officers were to be trained and qualified on the SAGE less lethal munition. To date, all officers have completed the SAGE training and enough SAGE munitions have been purchased to outfit every vehicle. Because PAPD is currently transitioning its fleet to another model of patrol car, as new cars are acquired, mounts are installed so that the SAGE munition can be placed inside the vehicles. For those that are not yet mounted internally, the SAGE weapons are stored in the patrol trunk to ensure that all officers have access. PAPD anticipates that by year’s end, one-half of its fleet will be equipped with the SAGE mounts. The systemic review also recommended that an individualized first aid kit be provided to every PAPD officer and that each officer be provided updated first aid training. We have been informed that the requisite training has been provided and individualized kits have been issued. We have further been informed that officers have been required to bring their first aid kits to recent training. The PAPD review found that its Peer Support Team was deployed within the first hour after the shooting and was instrumental in providing care and support for employees throughout the investigation. The review noted that the Team’s involvement in the incident gave it the ability to self-assess their response and add additional resources. The review reported that the Team had identified an on-call psychologist who met with each of the officers and that the Team held a diffusing for the variety of involved personnel within days of the shooting. The review further reported that the Team has expanded, recently adding several new sworn and professional staff members and expressly commented on the important role served by the Department’s Police Chaplain. The Department’s recognition of this program’s value, and related expansion of it, are both positive outgrowths of the review process. Finally, the systemic review recommended that PAPD respond to President Obama’s 21st Century Policing Task Force Report. That Report issued a number of recommendations suggesting every police agency should consider adopting consistent with progressive policing principles. It was admirable that PAPD took the time to consider to what degree the Department was operating consistent with the Task Force recommendations. In furtherance of that tradition, it would be helpful for PAPD to publish its report so that the public could be provided insight about this self-assessment. Recommendation: PAPD should publish its self-assessment regarding the degree to which the 21st Century Task Force recommendations have been inculcated into the Department. In closing our assessment of this unique undertaking by PAPD, we note that, in the District Attorney’s Office closing letter, it opined that the decedent “was intent on dying at the hands of police officers” and “committed suicide by attacking the officers, who shot him in self- 15 defense”.18 However, regardless of the decedent’s imputed intent, it is incumbent upon police officers and their agencies to continuously pursue means of learning from incidents and taking steps to preserve life to the extent possible. The systemic review of this event completed by PAPD is one example of how, through introspection, examination, and learning the Department has better prepared itself to fact similar future challenges. PAPD’s Document Retention Policy As part of PAPD’s investigative protocols, involved officers are advised in writing that the investigative materials would be retained for six years. 832.5 (b) of the California Penal Code requires that all complaint investigations be retained for at least five years: (b) Complaints and any reports or findings relating to these complaints shall be retained for a period of at least five years. However, the current collective bargaining agreement between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Police Officer’s Association states: Records of disciplinary actions, including references in a performance evaluation, shall be removed from a personnel file upon written request by the employee after a period of three years, or sooner mutually agreed by Management and the employee so long as the disciplinary action did not involve a violation of state and federal harassment and discrimination laws. While the competing language arguably conflicts with the state law provision, the two provisions could be harmonized by PAPD removing disciplinary actions from the personnel file of the officer but retaining the records in another location. We note that elsewhere in the agreement, there is a provision allowing for “sealing” of disciplinary records, subject to state law requirements. That being said, but for the collective bargaining agreement struck between the City and the Officers’ Association, there is no legal bar to retaining such materials for longer periods of time. In fact, several law enforcement agencies in the State retain internal investigative materials permanently. A retention period longer that five years has significant benefits; most importantly, the ability to have available the complete history of an employee’s prior investigations of misconduct rather than having such material destroyed after five years. Progressive policing has recognized the value in retaining the entire history of an officer’s performance for purposes of progressive discipline and mentoring. Finally, the Department may have a Constitutional obligation under Brady v. Maryland to provide such information to a Court for judicial review in criminal cases which cannot be met if older records are routinely destroyed. 18 The Medical Examiner of Santa Clara County found the cause of death to be multiple gunshot wounds and the manner of death not to be “suicide” but a “homicide”. 16 Recommendation: PAPD and the City of Palo Alto should consider changing the retention requirement for disciplinary records when the current collective bargaining agreement expires at the end of 2018, so that such records can be preserved while each officer remains a PAPD employee. III. Taser Case Factual Overview: This incident began on a weekday evening with a 911 call about a possibly intoxicated driver. Identifying information about the vehicle went out over the radio, and an officer happened to be on patrol in the area. He located the car and initiated a traffic stop, which ended up in the parking area of a bank. Upon making contact with the driver, the sergeant quickly determined that he was exhibiting signs of intoxication. He accordingly decided to call for backup and detain the driver, who quickly became uncooperative. There were multiple struggles in the next few minutes. To prevent the suspect from leaving, the officer had to reach into the car to take the keys from the ignition, and tried unsuccessfully to pull the man from his car in response to the man’s concerning movements and failure to comply with directions. Ultimately, the man emerged from the car and walked in the officer’s direction. This was in spite of repeated commands and warnings about the potential use of the Taser, which the officer had taken from its holster. The officer perceived a threat of assault and used the Taser, which was partially effective but seemed also to incite the man. He tried to pull the probes from his body and continued advancing. The officer then tackled the man, and a lengthy wrestling- style struggle on the ground commenced. The officer used commands, punches, and then a carotid hold in an effort to overcome the driver’s resistance. Finally, he was able to get him into handcuffs – just as backup officers arrived to provide assistance. The driver was treated by paramedics at the scene and transported to the hospital, where he was treated for the Taser punctures and several abrasions but was eventually cleared for booking. He was later convicted of criminal charges relating both to drunk driving and his resistance. Outcome and Analysis: Based on its investigation, PAPD determined that the officer was justified and within policy in using the various force options he deployed in this incident – including the Taser. We agree with the Department’s conclusion. The Department was able to base its findings on a variety of evidentiary sources. One of these was the officer’s in-car recording system, which captured audio and video of the incident 17 from the moment he located the suspect’s car and initiated the traffic stop. 19 Additionally, the Department identified and interviewed four civilian eyewitnesses as well as the subject. The officer himself gave a detailed verbal statement to the officer who prepared the formal arrest report. With the exception of the subject’s version, which conflicted with others in terms of sequencing and certain other particulars (but did acknowledge his resistance20), the evidence was largely consistent in establishing what had occurred. In keeping with established protocol, PAPD provided us with the recorded evidence for our own review. It is clear from the first moments of the encounter that the suspect was bothered by the traffic stop and unwilling to cooperate with the officer’s instructions. When he realized that the officer intended to conduct a DUI investigation, his agitation level increased, and he even made an effort to start the car and leave. This moment escalated the situation, and caused the officer first to forcibly remove the keys21 and then to begin physically grappling with the suspect in an effort to remove him from the car. When that didn’t work, he removed his Taser from the holster and issued a warning to the subject, but this also failed to elicit his cooperation. After another moment in which the officer tried different tactics, the subject eventually turned his body on the seat and put his legs out of the open door and onto the ground. Again, he responded defiantly to multiple commands, and finally stood up and stepped toward the officer. At that point, the officer activated the Taser. The probes struck but did not incapacitate the man, who instead became more aggravated and aggressive. A second Taser deployment ensued, followed by the officer wrestling the subject to the ground in the face of significant resistance. The next moments are only partially observable from the camera angle. They feature several punches by the officer, repeated commands and a struggle to secure the arm of the pinned but uncooperative subject. Meanwhile, the man continued to vocalize his hostility and refusal to comply. At one point, the officer tried 19 As it happened, some of the physical struggle after the initial Taser contact occurred off- camera as the suspect (who was out of the car by then) continued moving toward the sergeant. The audio continued to capture what was happening throughout the encounter. 20 The subject consented to an interview about the force that a PAPD lieutenant conducted at the hospital. He cited the “aggressive” initial demeanor of the officer and the initial physical contact with him while he was still in the driver’s seat as the basis for his own defensive mindset. He said he reacted like any “normal person” in defending himself, out of concern that the officer intended to harm him. 21 The maneuver was decisive and effective in this case. It is, however, inherently dangerous because of the vulnerability involved in leaning into the vehicle. We have seen it precipitate serious safety risks and even deadly force on several occasions in other jurisdictions. We hope the Department encourages thoughtfulness and care when it comes to this technique. 18 a carotid control hold, and that appeared to give him the final advantage that he needed to handcuff the suspect.22 Clearly, the subject in this case reached the threshold of physical resistance required for use of the Taser under PAPD policy. The other force that was utilized – given the subject’s ability to pull out the probes and continue to actively resist – was similarly reasonable and justified. This included the grappling, punches, and ultimately the carotid hold. As a tactical matter, the officer did several things well. His initial demeanor with the subject was low-key and non-confrontational, and he did a fine job of putting out timely and useful radio communications as events unfolded – even in the midst of a challenging effort to subdue and handcuff a large, resistant individual. Because the backup units were unusually slow to respond due to the time of day and other external circumstances, the officer’s perseverance and relative poise were all the more impressive. Nonetheless, in conducting its review, the Department identified several tactical issues that “merited further consideration and training.” These ranged from the initial radio broadcast of a “DUI investigation” within earshot of the subject (and to which he visibly reacted), to a couple of moments in which the officer’s positioning in relation to the car and driver were not optimal. (Essentially, because he was closer than he needed to be, he was more vulnerable to the subject’s reaching for him or his weapon.) While none of these issues were egregious, we found each to be worthwhile, and we commend the exercise. Just as importantly, the Department followed through on these issues in the form of a documented memo and a counseling session with the involved officer. We have had prior experiences of wondering whether some of the peripheral issues we noted in a given case were even identified by management. Though we’ve been told they often were, the approach of formally “showing your work” that PAPD took in this case makes our job easier and presumably helps reinforce the underlying messages. We did raise a separate question that the original supervisor’s memo did not cover: namely, the repeated instances of profanity on the part of the officer that occurred during the encounter. This is a topic we have broached before, not out of prudishness or a desire to nitpick, but because it is a matter of Department policy, and because we know that such language can reflect poorly in the eyes of people who expect a high standard of professionalism and control from the police. Here, we note the explanation that we got from Department management, which was that the heated nature of the struggle and the likely inaudibility of the comments to bystanders made 22 This force option was effective here. However, recent high-profile cases across the country have reinforced safety concerns about the unique danger associated with the carotid hold, and offered a reminder that such incidents merit especially careful review. 19 the words negligible in this instance. We acknowledge that not all profanity is equally problematic, but reiterate our point that it matters, and should at least be noted in the Department’s analysis of what occurred. Recommendation: In cases involving allegations or recorded evidence of profanity on the part of PAPD officers, the Department should at least make a formal showing of acknowledgement and evaluation of the relevant language in the context of policy and sound practice.