Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2018-08-27 City Council Agenda Packet
City Council 1 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTI ON 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, August 27, 2018 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. Public comment may be addressed to the full City Council via email at City.Council@cityofpaloalto.org. 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 Study Session 5:00-6:00 PM 1.Palo Alto Safe Routes to School Partnership Annual Update Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions City Manager Comments 6:00-6:10 PM Oral Communications 6:10-6:30 PM Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. Minutes Approval 6:30-6:35 PM 2.Approval of Action Minutes for the August 13, 2018 Council Meeting REVISED -2 08/24/2018 2 August 27, 2018 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. Consent Calendar 6:35-6:40 PM Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members. 3.Approval of: 1) Contract Number C19171727 With DeSilva Gates Construction, LP in the Amount of $12,497,319; 2) Amendment Number 3 to Contract Number C15155208B With Mead & Hunt, Inc. in the Amount of $1,345,644; and 3) Amendment Number 6 to Contract Number C15155208A With C&S Engineers, Inc. in the Amount of $373,451 for Phase II of the Airport Apron Reconstruction Capital Improvements Program Project AP-16000; Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Future Grant Agreements Offered by the California Department of Transportation for Airport Improvement Program Matching Grant Funds for Apron Reconstruction at the Palo Alto Airport, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Supporting Documents or Contracts Associated With the Application and Acceptance of Said Grant Funds; Approval of a Budget Amendment in the Airport Enterprise Fund; and Approval of Findings That the Proposed Project is Exempt From Environmental Review Under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 15301 and 15302 and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Order 1050.1F 4.THIS ITEM HAS BEEN REMOVED AND WILL BE HEARD AT A LATER DATE 5.Vote to Endorse the Slate of Candidates for the Peninsula Division’s Executive Committee for 2018-19 and Direct the City Clerk to Forward to Seth Miller, the Regional Public Affairs Manager for the Peninsula Division, League of California Cities the Completed Ballot for the City of Palo Alto 6.Acceptance of the 2018 Zero Waste Plan; Direction to Staff to Develop a Proposed Contract Extension to the Current Refuse Hauling and Processing Contract With GreenWaste of Palo Alto to Implement the New Zero Waste Plan; and Direction to Staff to Prepare a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Related Refuse Services Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 6:40-8:00 PM 7.Discussion and Direction on an Operating Agreement With Pets In Need and Interim Improvements for the Palo Alto Animal Shelter MEMO Q&A 3 August 27, 2018 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. 8:00-9:00 PM 8.Consideration and Adoption of an Ordinance and Emergency Ordinance Amending Chapter 9.68 of the Municipal Code to Require, for Multifamily Housing Developments of 50 Units or More: Relocation Assistance for No-fault Evictions or Cause for Eviction and Relocation Assistance for No-fault Evictions 9:00-9:30 PM 9.Recommendations From the Human Relations Commission in Response to Council Resolution Number 9653 Reaffirming Palo Alto’s Commitment to a Diverse, Supportive, Inclusive, and Protective Community 9:30-10:30 PM 10.PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.42.040 Related to Accessory and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU/JADU) to Clarify or Modify Various Provisions Including Setback Requirements for Detached ADU Basements, Allowance for Setback and Daylight Plane Encroachments for Detached ADUs, Bonus Lot Coverage and Floor Area Eligibility, Bonus Floor Area Amount to Match Minimum Unit Size as Established by Building Code, Reduced Height Limit for Detached ADUs Located Within Identified Eichler Tracts, Replacement Parking Provisions as Applicable to JADUs, Allowance for Replacement Parking to be Located Within Driveways Located in Street-side Setbacks, Allowance for Existing Driveways to be Expanded to Accommodate Replacement Parking, Allowance for Noncomplying Structures to be Rebuilt as Part of Conversion to ADU, and Applicable Zoning Districts That Allow ADU Development; Finding the Ordinance Exempt From Review Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3); and Discussion of Other Potential ADU-related Regulations. The Planning & Transportation Commission Recommended Adoption of the Ordinance State/Federal Legislation Update/Action Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) Adjournment AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. 10:30-10:40 PM 11.Appointment of Cory Wolbach as Alternate Board Member to the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Board of Directors 4 August 27, 2018 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 Council and Standing Committee Meetings Sp. City Council Meeting-Closed Session August 29, 2018 Schedule of Meetings Schedule of Meetings Tentative Agenda Tentative Agenda Informational Report Report to City Council on Accessory Dwelling Unit/Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit Development Activity for Second Quarter 2018 Informational Report on Mechanical Parking Studies for Lot D and Other Surface Parking Lots in Downtown Business District City of Palo Alto Sales Tax Digest Summary Fourth Quarter Sales (October - December 2017) Public Letters to Council Set 1 City of Palo Alto (ID # 9031) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 8/27/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Safe Routes to School Annual Update Title: Palo Alto Safe Routes to School Partnership Annual Update From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that the Council receive a present ation, review the enclosed annual update for the Safe Routes to School Partnership, and comment on the City / School Traffic Safety Committee’s adopted Five-Year Work Plan. No formal action is requested. Executive Summary The local Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Partnership between the City, the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD), and the Palo Alto Council of PTAs (PTAC) works to reduce risk to students en route to and from school and to encourage more families to choose alternatives to driving solo more often. In May 2017, the Palo Alto Safe Routes to School Partnership adopted its first Five-Year Work Plan. This report documents the progress of the Safe Routes Partnership since then and presents the newly-updated Five-Year Work Plan. Background For 40 years, the City, PAUSD, and the PTA have maintained a child transportation safety - focused collaboration in Palo Alto, meeting monthly as the City/School Traffic Safety Committee (CSTSC). In 2006, this collaboration adopted a National Consensus Statemen t relying on a ‘5-E’ (Encouragement, Education, Engineering, Enforcement and Evaluation) injury prevention framework to support safe, healthy and active school commutes. In 2016, the Partnership adopted a sixth ‘E’ for Equity to align with national standar ds and to ensure that the SRTS Partnership provides additional resources to support the needs of under -resourced or under- represented student populations. City of Palo Alto Page 2 While the Five-Year Work Plan objectives remain somewhat fixed from year to year, the strategies to achieve the goals change each year, based on priorities set by program partners. The 2017-18 school year is considered Year 1 of the plan. The 2018-19 year is Year 2. Activities The 2017-18 school year was a period of increased community engagement amidst a number of highlights listed below. ● An updated Five-Year Work Plan and a newly developed Equity objective (See Attachment A) ● 169 educational trainings to PAUSD students and parents ● Intensified field outreach and revised student safety curriculum to provide more hands-on, experiential engagement opportunities ● Sustained levels of active transportation mode-share ● County-level recognition for contributing to Palo Alto's Healthy City status Education and Outreach: Show & Tell This year, the SRTS Partnership broadened education and outreach tools to serve the needs of traditionally under-resourced and under-represented communities and to respond to growing community concerns about both student and adult transportation safety behaviors. Staff experimented with more hands-on education events, curriculum activities, and direct outreach to "show" rather than "tell" students when educating them about basic pedestrian and bicycle safety road rules. Here are some examples: ● Demonstration Bicycle: Safe Routes staff use an e-assist box bike to move program materials to support sustainability SOV reduction goals and to demonstrate that bicycling can be a viable choice to replace a motor vehicle, even when moving heavy loads. Almost 500 miles have been logged riding the bicycle to various, mostly SRTS- focused community events, while also raising awareness about diverse bicycle types. The box bike functions as an outreach tool, drawing in those who are curious about the vehicle. ● Safe Routes to School Transportation Safety Mascots: Purchased with PTA funds, costumes for Coney and Siggy, a traffic cone and traffic signal, are now available for use by SRTS partners for education and encouragement events. These mascots bring levity to the serious work of transportation safety education, creating opportunities for residents and students to approach staff or volunteers with smiles and questions regarding the proper use of the new infrastructure. The hands-on outreach staff provided on-site when the first roundabout was installed in February inspired the development of the traffic safety education mascots as a more effective teaching tool. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Coney and Siggy could be seen “pace biking” in April along the Ross Road Bicycle Boulevard to demonstrate to drivers and cyclists how to share the road safely. ● Enhanced Outreach: With community partner and Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC) support, staff organized an all-day Ross Road Bicycle Boulevard education event in April with information tables that was both educational and entertaining. Food, such as “roundabout pancakes,” scooter and bikeshare demonstrations, free bike repair, and support from City planning and engineering staff helped attract 60 to 80 residents to the event. In June, the second iteration of the Bicycle Boulevard education events attracted over 180 participants. The Midtown Transportation Safety Fair at Greer Park featured free bike repair, helmet fitting by Stanford Healthcare and PAMF partners, e-scooter and bikeshare test rides, a PAPD demonstration vehicle, and information tables about Bicycle Boulevards, Safe Routes to School, the City of Palo Alto Public Arts Program, Abilities United, the City of Palo Alto Shuttle, and VTA. Attendees asked questions about upcoming construction, and over 20 residents made Palo Alto 311 service requests at the “Live 311” table and provided feedback on Bicycle Boulevard plans. ● Education Inroads: The construction of new roundabouts on Ross Road called for new curriculum development and delivery methods. Staff designed a 5th grade PE lesson using a roundabout layout on the school playing field. Similarly, the YMCA hosted the Lucille Packard Children’s Hospital (LPCH) Safetyville, a small-scale town simulation, and included a mini-roundabout that SRTS staff used to teach students. An all-school morning assembly pilot at Palo Verde Elementary School provided a lesson on how to use the new roundabout. Information on use of the new facilities is being added to all of the 3rd through 8th grade in-school PAUSD bicycle education safety curriculum activities. ● Expanded Experiential Learning: Staff piloted a walking field trip program for second graders at Addison Elementary School in place of the previous grade-wide assemblies. This field-based approach, in which students actually practice crossing the street, not only more effectively reinforced basic pedestrian safety skills but offered the added benefit of providing to the community visibility into Safe Routes to School student transportation safety education. ● Equity and Education: This year, a Jordan Middle School student from East Palo Alto was injured while riding a bike that was in serious need of maintenance. In response, the SRTS team helped teachers and students set up a bicycle repair clinic and facilitated the donation of bikes and helmets. Staff will also support a student-developed Jordan Walk and Roll Map in Year 2 for East Palo Alto students. City of Palo Alto Page 4 ● Translation and Outreach: To increase program reach in the Chinese-speaking community, City staff hosted an outreach table at the Chinese New Year Festival and partnered with native Chinese speakers to help disseminate SRTS materials that have been translated into Mandarin. ● Expanded Middle School Reach: For the first time this year, by the invitation of PAUSD staff, the 8th Grade Getting to High School Program was presented as an in-school assembly at all three middle schools, not as an optional after -school activity. Expanding this program to all 8th graders had been a key equity goal since the program’s inception. ● Community Responsiveness: Due to community conversations about student inattentiveness, travel behaviors, and lack of appropriate safety gear, staff overhauled both the middle and elementary school bicycle safety curriculums to emphasize correct behaviors in a more interactive and engaging format. ● Infrastructure and Education: The SRTS Partnership collaborates on educational materials when new infrastructure affects school commutes. Attachment B presents a selection of new education resources generated this year. Infrastructure and Education Case Study: The Terman Bike Box In June of 2016, the Safe Routes Champion at Terman Middle School and other parents brought to the City/School Traffic Safety Committee concerns about student cyclists crossing mid -block to ride wrong-way on the road and sidewalk of Donald Drive. After consulting with parents, school staff, and residents, a new striping plan was developed to install a green bike box at the intersection to create space for cyclists on the road. Installation occu rred in August of 2017, accompanied by notification to residents and the school community, educational materials, and on-site training of students by SRTS staff in concert with the adult crossing guard. Today, the crossing guard sees virtually no student cyclists riding the wrong way on the street or on either sidewalk on Donald Drive. A comprehensive table of 2017-18 SRTS activities organized by the Six Es is provided below. Table 1: Safe Routes to School Program Activities, 2017 -2018 Activity Partners (in order of leadership) Description Outcomes Encouragement Bike Palo Alto! Helmet Fitting Palo Alto Green Teams, CPA SRTS, LPCH Coordinated a bicycle safety education table and offered customized helmet fittings ● Ten 15-minute presentations ● Est. 50 participants City of Palo Alto Page 5 Bike to Work Day Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition, CPA SRTS, community volunteers Coordinated four volunteer-run Energizer Stations and assisted with developing promotional materials targeted to residents and City staff ● All-time high of 2370 cyclists counted at stations ● Captured aerial drone footage of Cal Ave energizer station Fall & Spring Walk & Roll to School Events PTA, PAUSD, CPA SRTS Events to encourage families to try walking, biking, carpooling, or transit ● 34 events ● Est. 200 volunteers Middle & High School Back to School Events PTA, PAUSD, CPA SRTS, PAAPD, Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF) Commute planning, bicycle licensing, bike check-ups, and helmet fitting ● Five 2-3 hour events Safe Routes PTA Champion Volunteer Orientation PTA, CPA SRTS 2.5 hour training for incoming Safe Routes to School Champions ● 12 participants New Principal Orientations CPA SRTS, PAUSD SRTS information session for new principals on how they can support student safety ● Terman, Jordan, Gunn Parent Outreach Discussions CPA SRTS, PTA Met with PTA Safe Routes Champions and others to address on- or off-campus circulation concerns and encourage mode shift ● Greendell ● Palo Verde ● Ohlone ● JLS ● Paly ● Gunn Carpool Matching Mobile Application Resource PTA, CPA SRTS Matrix comparing currently available mobile apps for carpool matching ● Posted on CPA SRTS website Education Biking with Preschoolers Workshop CPA SRTS Bicycle safety education for parents of preschoolers ● One 1-hour presentation ● 8 participants K-2 Pedestrian Safety Safe Moves, CPA SRTS Pedestrian safety assemblies for all PAUSD K-2nd graders ● 58 45-minute presentations ● 2,340 students Walk Smart Pedestrian Safety Pilot Walk Smart, CPA SRTS, PAUSD On-street walking field trip pilot for Addison second graders ● Four 45-minute classes ● 76 students City of Palo Alto Page 6 Getting Ready for the Bike Rodeo CPA SRTS, PTA, Wheelkids Bicycle skills class for tentative third graders ● Two classes ● 16 students Bicycle Life Skills Curriculum CPA SRTS, PAUSD, PAPD, PTA, Stanford, PAMF, Bicycle Outfitter Three-lesson bicycle safety trainings for all PAUSD 3rd graders ● Approx. 4.5 hours of bike safety education per student ● 36 presentations ● 861 students Fifth Grade Bicycle Safety Refresher CPA SRTS, PAUSD Bicycle safety assembly for all 5th graders entering middle school ● Twelve 40-60 minute presentations ● 926 students Sixth Grade Back to School Bicycle Safety Orientation PAUSD, CPA SRTS Bicycle safety assembly for all 6th graders ● 14 one-hour presentations ● 950 students Middle School Bike Skills Wheelkids Bicycle Club, CPA SRTS On-bike safety education for middle school students and parents (opt-in program) ● Six 4.5- hour classes ● 86 students ● 84 parents Eighth Grade Getting to High School Event CPA SRTS, PTA, PAUSD Bike safety and high school commute planning information for all 8th graders ● Three 2-hour presentations ● 1,000 students YES Conference Outreach CPA SRTS, PAUSD Outreach to encourage participation in MTC's Spare the Air Youth Environment & Sustainability conference by PAUSD students ● Presentations to 1 leadership class & 2 AVID classes as Jordan MS Bringing Up Bicyclists PTA, CPA SRTS Bicycle safety education for parents of elementary-age children ● One 2-hour presentation ● 10 participants Bike Rodeo Captain Training CPA, PTA Prepared Bike Rodeo Captains for Bike Rodeo event coordination at their school ● 5 trainings ● 11 schools trained Bike to Work Day Employee Bike Commute Workshop Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition, CPA SRTS Bike safety education for City Employees interested in bike commuting ● One 1-hour presentation ● 10 participants City of Palo Alto Page 7 Palo Alto Library Walk & Roll Map Update CPA SRTS, Palo Alto Library Assist in 2018 update of Library Walk and Roll Map ● Distributed over 900 in Bike to Work Day bags and at outreach events ● Posted on SRTS website Educational Materials for New Infrastructure CPA SRTS, Transportation staff Developed educational materials to encourage safe use of new infrastructure, including the Walter Hays protected intersection, Terman bike box, Ross Rd Bicycle Boulevard, and raised crosswalks ● See Attachment B for example posters and flyers SRTS Website Update CPA SRTS, PCE Update of SRTS website including new pages for Walk and Roll Maps, Enforcement, Data, and Partners ● More succinct, user-friendly website design Terman On-site Bike Box Education CPA SRTS, PAPD Crossing Guard On-street education of student cyclists after installation of bike box and new traffic signal timing ● Approx. 100 students ● 4 sessions On-site Roundabout Education CPA SRTS, PTA On-street education of student cyclists after installation of roundabout ● Approx. 150 students ● 3 sessions Palo Verde Information Table & Morning Assembly Event CPA SRTS, PAUSD Parent information table and coffee prior to schoolwide morning assembly educating school community about new roundabout ● 402 students ● 20 parents Palo Verde Roundabout PE Lesson CPA SRTS, PAUSD Developed and delivered roundabout curriculum for all 5th graders during PE ● 30-minute walk- through lessons ● 75 students Safetyville & Roundabout Education Event CPA SRTS, Ross Rd YMCA, Stanford, LPCH Pedestrian and bicycle safety lessons using child-scale mock-up of intersection types ● Two-hour event ● 50 children Ross Rd Orientation: Tabling/Bikeshare /Roundabout Education Event CPA SRTS, PTA, PABAC, PAPD Education and outreach for residents and users of the new bicycle boulevard ● Nine-hour event ● 50 residents ● 20 youth City of Palo Alto Page 8 Midtown Transportation Safety Fair CPA SRTS, PTA, PABAC, PAPD Education and outreach for residents and users of the new bicycle boulevard ● Four-hour event ● 184 participants Traffic Safety Education Mascots CPA SRTS, PTA Education and outreach mascots ● 20 hours of pace biking Engineering 2012 Bicycle + Pedestrian Transportation Plan Projects Transportation staff, Public Works staff Improvements identified by the community to enhance walking and bicycling ● Ongoing design feedback ● CSTSC input Neighborhood Traffic Safety & Bicycle Boulevard Program Transportation and Public Works staff Bicycle Boulevard projects that prioritize improvements for school children, pedestrians, and people on bicycles ● Ongoing design feedback ● CSTSC input ● Education/ outreach assistance Complete Streets Projects Public Works staff with Transportation staff input Roadway maintenance projects that consider all road users, including people on foot or on bicycles ● Ongoing design feedback ● CSTSC input ● Education/ outreach assistance Safe Routes to School Projects Transportation and Public Works staff Projects on school routes arising from VERBS grant analysis and from PAUSD or PTA requests ● Ongoing design feedback ● CSTSC input ● Education/ outreach assistance Palo Alto 311 Service Requests CPA SRTS Requests for improvements on school routes submitted by the community ● 52 requests since June, 2017 SRTS Site Assessments CPA SRTS Generate updated Walk and Roll Maps and document infrastructure needs at 2 schools per year. ● Site assessments completed at Duveneck and Ohlone Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC) Support CPA SRTS Monthly reports of SRTS activities and collision data given to advisory committee ● Reports at monthly PABAC meetings City of Palo Alto Page 9 Policy Work in Support of Engineering CPA SRTS, PTA, PAUSD Meetings to advance improved infrastructure for active commutes ● One Stanford GUP briefing at CSTSC ● Two meetings with PAUSD/PTA on SRTS policy Enforcement Adult Crossing Guards PAPD Crossing guards for elementary and middle school students at qualifying intersections ● 29 crossing guards Juvenile Diversion Program PAPD, Traffic Safe Communities Network of Santa Clara County “Traffic School” for youth with on-bike citations ● 20 Participants Monthly Collision Reporting PAPD Bicycle and pedestrian collision data shared monthly with Safe Routes/Transportation staff ● Monthly reports Traffic Law Enforcement PAPD Enforcement of traffic laws for both drivers and bicyclists ● 56 citations (mostly helmet violations) Evaluation Classroom Commute Tallies CPA SRTS, PAUSD Increased response rate of online collection of commute mode tallies for all PAUSD students ● See Table 4 Ongoing Program Evaluation CPA SRTS Post-program surveys of teachers, administrators, and volunteers ● 67 Evaluations Parked Bicycle Counts PTA, CPA SRTS Counts of parked bicycles at all PAUSD schools ● See Table 3 Equity Bike, Helmet, & Bike Light Giveaways CPA SRTS, PAUSD, PTA, Palo Alto Bicycles, Gunn ReCycle Donations by SRTS partners for distribution to students in need of equipment ● 25 bike lights to PAPD ● 72 bicycles via Gunn ReCycle Bike Repair Bay Area BikeMobile, VeloFix, PTA, CPA SRTS Free school-based bicycle repair clinics that engage students in hands-on bike repair ● 5 schools ● 100 bikes repaired City of Palo Alto Page 10 Greendell Programming CPA SRTS, PAUSD Initiated Train-the-Trainer curriculum development for ESL classes, held walkabouts for Walk and Roll Map production, and identified Safe Routes to School Champion ● 2 walk audits ● 1 community survey planned Materials Translation Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Spare the Air Youth Staff, CPA SRTS Translation of educational, map, and evaluation materials into Spanish and Mandarin ● 8 documents translated ● 150 Mandarin flyers shared at Chinese New Year Festival Jordan Middle School Programming CPA SRTS, PAUSD, VeloFix, Gunn ReCycle, LPCH Middle school classroom activities and bicycle repair workshop at request of Jordan teacher ● 1 repair clinic ● 33 students ● 32 helmets and 20 bicycles donated by partners Chinese New Year Festival Table CPA SRTS, PTA SRTS information table with translated materials and native Chinese speakers ● Second annual appearance ● 30 interactions Source: Planning and Community Environment Department, July 2018 Program Evaluation As shown in Table 2, the 2017-18 education programs touched approximately 6,077 students, or roughly 49% of total PAUSD enrollment. To further increase program reach, 201 8-19 strategies will include expanding secondary programming to enhance middle school curriculum and explore high school educational opportunities. Table 2: Safe Routes to School Core Education Program Reach Program Number of Lessons/ Assemblies Number of PAUSD Students Taught K-2 Pedestrian Safety 58 2,340 Third Grade Bicycle Life Skills Curriculum 36 861 Fifth Grade Bicycle Refresher 12 926 Sixth Grade Back to School Bicycle Safety Orientation 14 950 Eighth Grade Getting to High School Event 3 1,000 Total for Core Education Programs 123 6,077 Source: Planning and Community Environment Department, May 2018 City of Palo Alto Page 11 In addition to post-program surveys of teachers, administrators, and volunteers, the Partnership collects data to estimate levels of school com mute alternative mode use. Tables 3 and 4 present yearly alternative mode share/shift, calculated by using classroom travel tallies and bike rack counts each fall. Bike rack counts are administered by PTA volunteers calculating the number of parked bikes at their school. More detailed SRTS data can be found in Attachment C. Table 3: 2017 Parked Bicycle Counts at PAUSD Schools School Type 2017 Parked Bikes % Biking % pt. + or – since 2016-17 Elementary 785 16% 0 Middle 1,500 50% +1 High 1,616 40% -4* Total 3,901 31% -2 Source: Planning and Community Environment Department, April 2018 *Both the Gunn and Paly bike counts were lower this year at 42% and 38%, respectively. Classroom travel tallies are administered by teachers through a show of student hands. In 2016- 17, new online data gathering methods for the classroom travel tally helped expand the program’s capacity to conduct travel tallies at the secondary level. The City has a goal of reaching a mean district response rate of 70%. The mean tally response rate was 49% in the first year of this effort; this year the mean district response rate was 65%. Table 4 shows the travel mode percentages aggregated by school type for the current school year. Table 4: 2017 PAUSD Classroom Tally of Mode to School Walk Scooter Skate (%) Bike (%) Carpool (%) Transit (%) Drive (%) Resp. Rate (%) Alt. Transp. Mode (%) Alt. Mode Shift + or – since 2016- 17 (%) Elem. 25 15 2 5 53 72 47 1 Middle 13 56 3 5 22 66 77 -1 High 7 52 6 5 29 57 70 0.5 Average 15 41 4 5 35 65 65 0.17 Source: Planning and Community Environment Department, April 201 8 Data Interpretation Weather variations, date of data collection, absenteeism, classroom tally participation rates, school-based special events, volunteer-based calculation errors, and whether bicycles are left in the rack or removed during the school day impact the validity of these results. This year, the fall Palo Alto High School (Paly) bike count was taken a month later than usual and after rain, City of Palo Alto Page 12 possibly depressing the number of parked bikes counted from last year’s 44% to this year’s 38% of enrollment. Combining Paly and Gunn High School counts, SRTS Champions counted 91 fewer high school bikes. Interestingly, the high school classroom tally, taken earlier in the fall, showed bicycle mode shares of 51% at Gunn and 54% at Paly. This wide difference between the bike counts and travel tallies exposes the differences between the two types of data. Importantly, the small mode shift changes across all school levels are well withi n the norm of data fluctuations and suggest sustained levels of alternative mode use at a rate that is more than twice the national average. Nevertheless, the relatively high use of the family car for school commutes of two miles or less particularly at th e elementary level continues to represent a growth area for the program, and staff is investigating programming to increase carpooling by those with longer commutes and small children. During the continued construction of the Neighborhood Traffic Safety and Bicycle Boulevard projects, the SRTS Partnership will seek to: Sustain alternative mode share numbers and Provide bicycle, pedestrian and driver safety education to accommodate the buildout of infrastructure appropriate for such high levels of alternative transportation. Discussion Adopted SRTS Objectives, 2018-2022 The 2018 Five-Year Work Plan that was reviewed and accepted at the April 19, 2018, City School Traffic Safety Committee (CSTSC) meeting will serve as a roadmap for the program’s development. The goal of the plan is to grow and strengthen community-wide support through the SRTS Six E's model for safe, active, healthy, and sustainable school commutes . The seven objectives of the Five-Year Plan are listed below. To accommodate partner feedback, Objective 7 was added to the plan this year to reflect the Partnership’s commitment to reach as many students as possible. The Safe Routes to School Partnership will advance these objectives through various strategies while providing core programming and assisting with other outreach and engagement efforts as needed, including Conne cting Palo Alto, the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Project, and the Neighborhood Traffic Safety and Bicycle Boulevard Project. The detailed work plan is presented in Attachment A. 1. Adopt and institutionalize key SRTS practices and policies across the Partnership and gather best practices from elsewhere 2. Provide, continue, and enhance school and community-based SRTS education programs, materials, and communications 3. Expand and enhance SRTS events, encouragement programs, and materials to communicate the value of SRTS to parents, students, and the community 4. Gather data to assess and improve SRTS program outcomes City of Palo Alto Page 13 5. Engineer routes to school to develop a more safe and efficient network for families choosing active transportation 6. Increase awareness and engagement between City Departments and the community to advance awareness of the SRTS mission, goals, and strategies 7. Commit to an equitable distribution of SRTS resources to encourage broad SRTS community participation Key activities for Year 2 include the development of a localized parent survey to identify challenges to more active transportation, the initiation of two new site assessments with associated Walk and Roll map updates, and a new PAPD traffic enforcement strategy to support students who walk and bike to school. Policy Implications This program is consistent with key transportation goals in the City’s Comprehensive Plan 2030, including creating a sustainable transportation system, reducing congestion, and providing a safe environment for all road users. Specific policies and programs include: ● Policy T-1.16: Promote personal transportation vehicles as an alternative to cars (e.g. bicycles, skateboards, roller blades) to get to work, school, shopping, recreational facilities and transit stops. ● Program T-1.16.4: Participate in local and regional encouragement events such as Palo Alto Walk and Rolls, Bike to Work Day, and Bike Palo Alto! that encourage a culture of bicycling and walking as alternative to single-occupant vehicle trips. ● Policy T1.19: Provide facilities that encourage and support bicycling and walking. ● Program T1.19.2: Prioritize investment for enhanced pedestrian access and bicycle use within Palo Alto and to/from surrounding communities, including by incorporating improvements from related city plans, for example the 2012 Palo Alto Bicycle + Pedestrian Transportation Plan and the Parks, Trails & Open Space master Plan, as amended, into the Capital Improvements Program. ● Policy T-2.7: Work with the PAUSD to resolve traffic congestion issues associated with student drop-off and pick-up. Address pedestrian and bicycle access, circulation and related issues such as coordinating bell schedules on City rights -of-way adjacent to schools and on PAUSD property. ● 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 al l designated school commute corridors. ● Program T6.1.2: Develop, distribute, and aggressively promote maps and apps showing safe routes to work, shopping, community services, parks and schools within Palo Alto in collaboration with stakeholders, including PAUSD, major employers, TMA's, local businesses and community organizations. City of Palo Alto Page 14 ● Policy T-6.2: Pursue the goal of zero severe injuries and roadway fatalities on Palo Alto city streets. ● Policy T-6.4: Continue the Safe Routes to School partnership with PAUSD and the Palo Alto Council of PTAs. ● Policy T-6.5: Support PAUSD adoption of standard Safe Routes to School policies and regulations that address the five E's of education, encouragement, enforcement, engineering and evaluation. ● 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. ● Program T6.6.3: Work with PAUSD and employers to promote roadway safety for all users, including motorized alternatives to cars and bikes such as mopeds and e -bikes, through educational programs for children and adults. Timeline The Safe Routes to School Partnership supports an ongoing, year-round program which includes both engineering and programmatic elements. A timeline of recently completed and upcoming infrastructure projects that reduce risk to students is included in Table 5. The Neighborhood Traffic Safety and Bicycle Boulevard Phase 1 project is noted as NTSBB1 in the table. Table 5: SRTS Infrastructure Project Timeline Project School Routes to be Improved Completion Date or Future Construction Start Churchill Avenue Enhanced Bikeway, Phase 0 Palo Alto HS Completed April 2016 Cowper Street at Coleridge Avenue High-visibility Crosswalks Walter Hays Completed April 2016 Georgia Ave High-visibility Crosswalk and Curb Extension Terman MS Gunn HS Completed Summer 2016 Los Robles Avenue Bikeway Enhancements Briones Terman MS Gunn HS Completed Summer 2016 Park Boulevard Bicycle Boulevard Early Implementation (Stanford Avenue to Cambridge Avenue) Jordan MS Palo Alto HS Completed Summer 2016 Middlefield Road and North California Avenue Complete Street Project Jordan MS Palo Alto HS Completed Fall 2016 Garland Drive Sharrows Jordan MS Completed Winter 2017 Overcrossing/Undercrossing Improvements Jordan MS Palo Alto HS Completed August 2017 City of Palo Alto Page 15 Arastradero Road at Donald Drive Spot Safety Improvements Terman MS Completed September 2017 Cowper Street at Coleridge Avenue Traffic Circle Trial Walter Hays Completed September 2017 Colorado Avenue at Sandra Place Spot Safety Improvements Ohlone Completed July 2018 Amarillo Avenue-Moreno Avenue Bicycle Boulevard El Carmelo Ohlone Palo Verde Under construction as part of NTSBB1* Bryant Street Bicycle Boulevard Upgrade (Menlo Park City Limits to East Meadow Road) Addison El Carmelo JLS MS Jordan MS Palo Alto HS Gunn HS Under construction as part of NTSBB1* Louis Road-Montrose Avenue Bicycle Boulevard Fairmeadow JLS MS Gunn HS Under construction as part of NTSBB1* Ross Road Bicycle Boulevard El Carmelo Ohlone Palo Verde Jordan MS Gunn HS Palo Alto HS Under construction as part of NTSBB1* Channing Avenue and St Francis Drive Enhanced Bikeway Duveneck Summer 2018 Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Project Phase 1 and 2 Barron Park Briones Hoover Fairmeadow JLS MS Terman MS Gunn HS Summer 2018 Bryant Street Bicycle Boulevard Extension (East Meadow Drive to San Antonio Road) Fairmeadow Hoover JLS MS Gunn HS Fall 2018 Churchill Avenue Enhanced Bikeway, Phase 1 Palo Alto HS Fall 2018 Maybell Avenue Bicycle Boulevard Briones Terman MS Gunn HS Summer 2019 as part of NTSBB2 Park Boulevard-Wilkie Way Bicycle Boulevard Barron Park Briones Summer 2019 as part of NTSBB2 City of Palo Alto Page 16 Terman MS Gunn HS Stanford Avenue Bicycle Boulevard Barron Park Briones Terman MS Gunn HS Summer 2019 as part of NTSBB2 Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Project Phase 3 Barron Park Briones Hoover Fairmeadow JLS MS Terman MS Gunn HS Summer 2019 Churchill Avenue Highway-Railroad Crossing Safety Improvement Project Palo Alto HS Fall 2019 East Meadow Drive and Fabian Way Enhanced Bikeway Fairmeadow Hoover Palo Verde JLS MS Gunn HS January 2020 *Additional information on these items will be provided to the City Council prior to the study session. Source: Planning and Community Environment Department, July 2018 Resource Impacts The City’s Safe Routes to School team currently consists of one full-time and two part-time coordinators for a total of 2.0 FTE (full time equivalent). The FY2019 Proposed Capital Budget includes $128,354 for the Safe Routes to School CIP Project, PL-00026, and proposes funding through Fiscal Year 2023, for a five year total of $1.83 million for this project. The FY2019 Proposed Budget is subject to adoption by the City Council, which is currently scheduled for June 18. The CIP project allows for strategic investments in school route safety infrastructure, such as crosswalks, pedestrian flashing beacons, improved signage, and street markings. Safe Routes to School infrastructure projects are financed through a variety of means, including the Safe Routes to School CIP, street maintenance program, Bicycle + Pedestrian Transportation Plan Implementation CIP, and through several grant programs. Environmental Review This agenda item is for City Council review and input and is not a “project” requiring review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: Attachment A: 2018 SRTS Five-Year Work Plan (PDF) Attachment B: Sample Education Resources (PDF) City of Palo Alto Page 17 Attachment C: 2017-18 Secondary School Bike Count Graphs (PDF) 2018 PALO ALTO SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL CITY/PTA/PAUSD PARTNERSHIP FIVE-YEAR WORK PLAN* MISSION To enhance and sustain the City / PAUSD / PTA community partnership to reduce risk to students en route to and from school, and to encourage more families to choose healthy, active, sustainable alternatives to driving solo more often. GOAL To grow and strengthen community -wide support through the SRTS E’s model for safe, active, healthy, sustainable school commutes OBJECTIVES YEAR 1 STRATEGIES: 7/1/17-6/30/18 – TO BE COMPLETED BY 6/30/18 YEAR 2 STRATEGIES: 7/1/18 -6/30/19 Adopt and institutionalize key SRTS practices and policies across the Partnership and gather best practices from elsewhere Provide, continue and enhance school and community- based SRTS education programs, materials and communications Expand and enhance SRTS events and encouragement programs and materials to communicate the value of SRTS to parents, students and the community Gather data to assess and improve SRTS program outcomes Engineer routes to school to develop a more safe and efficient network for families choosing active transportation 2 3 4 5 1 Increase awareness & engagement between City Departments and the community to advance awareness of the SRTS mission, goals & strategies Commit to an equitable distribution of SRTS resources to encourage broad SRTS community participation 7 This goal was not developed Update City Comprehensive Plan policies Complete two site assessments and update Walk and Roll Maps Work toward PAUSD SRTS policy adoption Conduct a bike repair class with student input Promote safer routes for East Palo Alto PAUSD student bicyclists Create an enforcement strategy to reflect changing staffing levels by shifting traffic enforcement role to patrol officers Complete two site assessments with updated Walk and Roll Maps for Palo Verde and Gunn H.S. Develop a PAUSD parent survey to evaluate participant demographics and identify challenges to more active transportation Develop a communications plan outline Develop a public list of carpooling resources Explore optional and compulsory SRTS high school education programs Develop a PAUSD SRTS policy to sustain ongoing commitment from PAUSD Build out two Stanford service learning education, evaluation & enforcement projects Expand Youth for Environmental Sustainability Conf. Participation Increase Spanish and Mandarin materials Develop SRTS educational posters Develop SRTS Public Service Announcements Participate in countywide SRTS data pilot Integrate Statewide Traffic System (SWITRS) data into SRTS Pilot online travel tally 6 *Five-Year Work Plan goals and strategies depend on the Safe Routes to School Partnership’s funding and capacity, and may be subject to change as demand dictates. 2018 PALO ALTO SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL CITY/PTA/PAUSD PARTNERSHIP FIVE-YEAR WORK PLAN YEARS 3 -5 STRATEGIES: 7/1/19 -6/30/22 ONGOING STRATEGIES Goal 1: Adopt and institutionalize key SRTS practices and policies across the Partnership and gather best practices from elsewhere •Support SRTS Champions/Teams at each school site •PTA advocates for rebuilding the PAPD traffic team •PTA inspires action and educates potential leaders about public process, governance and SRTS Advocacy •Support increased uniform patrol presence to encourage and enforce compliance with existing laws •Revisit, renew and confirm the roles of the Partnership through the Five-Year Work plan •Maintain the City School Traffic Safety Committee as a forum to further the Safe Routes Partnership’s mission, goals and strategies •Improve communication of the policy and policy dissemination Goal 2: Provide, expand and enhance school and community-based SRTS education programs and materials •Cultivate a community of parents and others to build a network of skilled leaders for education and advocacy •Support active transportation events during the year by setting up information tables, assisting families with route planning and responding to infrastructure concerns •Maintain K-2 in-class educational offerings and optimize the program to match student capabilities, support educational best practices and incorporate infrastructure updates •Maintain 3rd grade Bicycle Life Skills Curriculum in-class and optimize program to match student capabilities, support educational best practices and incorporate infrastructure updates •Maintain 5th grade in-class educational offerings and optimize the program to match student capabilities, support educational best practices and incorporate infrastructure updates •Maintain 6th grade in-class educational offerings and optimize programs to match student capabilities, support educational best practices and incorporate infrastructure updates •Maintain 8th grade offerings and optimize programs to match student capabilities, support educational best practices and incorporate infrastructure updates •Align parent messages with student educational programming •Grow Youth for Environmental Sustainability Conference participation •Build out bus/shuttle resources and assist with schedules Goal 3: Expand and enhance SRTS encouragement programs and materials to communicate the value of the SRTS program to parents and across the community •Support Spring Walk & Roll Week •Support Fall Walk & Roll Week •Support Bike to Work Day •Support Bike Palo Alto •Communicate program activities and successes to the broader community Develop plan and program to outreach to audiences with special needs Develop a crossing guard training and curriculum to standardize how crossing guards perform common tasks. PAUSD develops a yearly CSTSC presentation to assess transportation impacts from school attendance, boundary changes and overflow Develop a behavior change- focused SRTS infographic Develop an interactive SRTS Google map Develop Back to School Night presentation slide Ensure standard SRTS language included in all PAUSD websites and parent handbooks Explore 2019- 20 optional and compulsory SRTS Middle School education programs This strategy has not yet been developed 2 2018 PALO ALTO SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL CITY/PTA/PAUSD PARTNERSHIP FIVE-YEAR WORK PLAN •Use Walk and Roll Maps and “Safety Tips for Peds/Bikes/Drivers” as part of messaging •Employ purposeful incentives to support SRTS participation •Communicate the value of bicycling, walking, transit and sharing rides •Enhance website functionality and user experience. •Support parent education, including Back to School Nights, spring information nights for rising 5th, 6th and 7th graders and providing SRTS information in Back to School packets. Goal 4: Gather data to assess and improve SRTS program outcomes •Incorporate traffic and engineering data into mode split and modal share assessments •Explain the purpose of data collection to PAUSD administrators and share the data in a way that encourages and does not compare schools •Conduct yearly online travel tallies for PAUSD grades K-12 •Conduct yearly bike counts •Submit yearly travel tally data to the Santa Clara County Health Department •Manage local and administrative data requests Goal 5: Engineer routes to school to develop a more safe and efficient network for families choosing active transportation •Assist with bicycle infrastructure design review to inform the planning process. •Design and provide materials and education about new infrastructure improvements •Advocate as a Partnership for the rapid implementation of bike network, bike boulevards and arterial projects •Respond to Palo Alto 311 requests. •Conduct community site visits •Update school Walk and Roll Maps upon request •Provide crossing guard management, including assessing needs, developing contracts and replying to public feedback Goal 6: Deepen SRTS awareness and engagement across City Departments and among community representatives to advance and institutionalize awareness of the SRTS mission, goals and strategies •Support the build-out of the City of Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan •Provide students and families with transit system information and offer guidance on proposed transit changes •Model walking, biking, carpool and transit through daily transportation decisions •Assist with plans to develop a more efficient roadway network for families choosing active transportation. •Collaborate with local agencies, including public works, utilities, law enforcement and district officials to support motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists •Update SRTS Onboarding Manual •Promote awareness of Traffic Safety Control guidelines •Integrate SRTS into long range planning efforts •Integrate SRTS into current planning efforts Goal 7: Commit to an equitable distribution of SRTS resources to encourage broad SRTS community participation •Develop Spanish and Chinese language materials •Promote a “no-guilt approach” to encourage participation via all transportation modes •Support free services, such as bike repair, helmet and bike light distribution and compulsory education to ensure that under-resourced students can access important safety resources in a way that does not stigmatize them •Ensure ongoing awareness regarding the geographic distribution of SRTS staff time and resources among Palo Alto regions and across neighborhoods •Support off-site free or low-cost alternative commute transportation services that are targeted to at-risk families 3 How to Cross Middlefield and EmbarcaderoHow to Cross Middlefield and Embarcadero Submit questions or concerns through Palo Alto 311: www.cityofpaloalto.org/311 1+50.00 1+00.00 1+53.50 1+50.00 EM B A R C A D E R O R D CO L E R I D G E S T MIDDLEFIELD RD N new connection crossbike (crosswalk for bikes) bicycle waiting area 2 1 Bike accross the street in the crossbike when light is green.2 Wait in the bicycle waiting area when light is red.1 Student Riders Use the yellow crosswalk to cross the street.2 Wait on the sidewalk when light is red.1 Student Walkers 1 2 How to use the Bike Box How to use the Bike Box Proceed cautiously to multi-use path. Yield to pedestrians. 5 Dismount and walk with crossing guard during all-walk signal. OR Turn left by bike with green arrow. 4Line up in green box during red light, as far left as possible, or in green lane. Wait for green light. 3Look over left shoulder for cars coming from behind. Signal left. Merge into green lane. 2Cycle on right side of street, not on sidewalks. 1Cyclists: Drivers: Wait behind the bike box. Yield to cyclists in front of you. Submit questions or concerns through Palo Alto 311: www.cityofpaloalto.org/311 to Termanto Terman DONAL D D R I V E AR A S T R A D E R O RO A D No parking at the new red curbs on Donald 1 2 3 4 5 xx x New Signal Pattern:Green lights on Donald and Terman will begin running separately starting early September. The new pattern will be: 1) Donald, 2) All-walk phase, 3) Terman, 4) Arastradero New Signal Pattern! SEEN THE NEW RAISED CROSSWALKS. A raised crosswalk is a speed hump with a crosswalk on top. Drivers slow down, so they are more likely to stop for people crossing. It is safer and easier to cross the street on a raised crosswalk. What to know about raised crosswalks... Raised crosswalks have a speed hump marking to alert drivers and cyclists to slow down. People in a raised crosswalk are easier to see and stop for because they are higher than the rest of the roadway. L SCHOOL MI It is easy to cross the street at a raised crosswalk because there are no ramps to go up or down. • Our i Palo Alto Visit us at www.cityofpaloalto.org/bike If you're crossing... Use a raised crosswalk like any other crosswalk. Look left, right, left again, then cross when it's safe. Make eye contact with drivers and bicyclists before stepping into the crosswalk. Make sure they've seen you and are waiting for you to cross. Pay attention to your surroundings. What’s a Bicycle Boulevard? As defined in the City of Palo Alto's Comprehensive Plan 2030 adopted by City Council on November 13, 2017, a bicycle boulevard is "a low volume through-street where bicycles have priority over automobiles, conflicts between bicycles and automobiles are minimized, and bicycle travel time is reduced by the removal of stop signs and other impediments to bicycle travel." Palo Alto’s Bicycle Network, defined in the 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan is made of several types of bicycle facilities, including bike lanes, multi-use paths, bike routes, and bicycle boulevards. How do I drive safely on a bike boulevard? ● Expect people on bikes to be in the travel lane. ● Obey the posted speed limits. ● Pass people on bikes only when it is safe. California law requires three feet of space between you and the bicycle. ● Do not pass a person on a bike if: ○ you are going through narrow areas ○ you would have to cross a double yellow line ○ there is not enough space to pass ○ there is oncoming traffic ● Do not honk at cyclists unless you are warning of imminent danger. How do I bike safely on a bike boulevard? ● Ride in a straight line in the travel lane so that you are highly visible and out of the “door zone.” The large “Bike Blvd” stencils indicate where you should be positioned in the lane. ● Do not ride on the sidewalk or so far to the curb that you have to swerve back into the travel lane when you encounter a parked car or a curb extension. ● Obey all stop signs and signal your turns. What about the roundabouts? ● Before approaching the roundabout, cyclists in a bike lane should carefully signal and merge into the car lane, making sure to look over their left shoulder for cars. Yield to traffic already in the roundabout. Enter the circle by bearing right and ride in the center of the lane. Do not let cars try to pass or share the lane with you in the roundabout. Young children or cyclists uncomfortable merging into the car lane can use the bike exit ramps leading to the sidewalk, then dismount from their bike, and proceed as a pedestrian. ● Before approaching the roundabout, Drivers should not share the approach with a bike. Slow down in advance of the approach and expect bicycles in the bike lane to merge into the car lane before entering the roundabout approach. Yield to oncoming traffic, then proceed right and travel around the circle pictured above. Drive single file. Do not share the lane with bikes. ●Pedestrians should cross in the designated crosswalks, using the splitter island as a safe space to wait if cars are approaching. spr 1985 fall 1985 1991 1993 1997 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Jordan 581 420 370 273 275 290 333 358 364 361 443 495 527 546 624 736 610 633 627 581 629 JLS 298 537 290 320 290 191 241 185 200 271 280 319 351 463 456 490 512 533 584 581 651 617 Terman 150 151 190 167 210 184 199 236 253 263 275 279 276 254 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 PAUSD MIDDLE SCHOOL BIKE COUNTS, 1985-2017 Jordan JLS Terman spr 1985 fall 1985 1991 1993 1997 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Jordan 74%61%41%25%26%29%37%41%41%40%49%53%55%56%61%72%60%57%55%50%56% JLS 46%49%33%33%27%16%23%20%25%34%32%37%38%48%45%49%51%53%53%52%54%51% Terman 26%24%29%25%32%28%31%36%37%37%38%37%39%37% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% PAUSD MIDDLE SCHOOL BIKE COUNTS (%), 1985-2017 Jordan JLS Terman 1985 1993 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Gunn 284 180 230 166 240 252 308 447 478 600 633 671 679 750 836 811 830 838 830 Paly 553 300 220 160 160 200 234 289 273 377 433 520 582 741 787 758 805 837 845 869 786 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 PAUSD HIGH SCHOOL BIKE COUNTS, 1985 - 2017 Gunn Paly 1985 1993 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Gunn 20%11%14%10%14%15%18%24%25%31%33%36%36%41%45%43%44%44%42% Paly 33%25%15%11%11%12%14%17%16%22%26%30%32%40%42%39%42%43%43%44%38% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% PAUSD HIGH SCHOOL BIKE COUNTS (%), 1985-2017 Gunn Paly CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK August 27, 2018 The Honorable City Council Attention: Finance Committee Palo Alto, California Approval of Action Minutes for the August 13, 2018 Council Meeting Staff is requesting Council review and approve the attached Action Minutes. ATTACHMENTS: • Attachment A: 08-13-18 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 August 13, 2018 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 5:00 P.M. Present: DuBois; Filseth arrived at 5:03 P.M., Fine; Holman arrived at 6:20 P.M., Kniss, Kou, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Absent: Closed Session 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his Designees Pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (James Keene, Ed Shikada, Kiely Nose, Rumi Portillo, Sandra Blanch, Nicholas Raisch, Molly Stump, Terence Howzell, and Michelle Flaherty) Employee Organizations: 1) Service Employees International Union, (SEIU) Local 521; 2) Palo Alto Fire Chiefs’ Association (FCA); 3) International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Local 1319; 4) Palo Alto Police Managers’ Association (PAPMA); and 5) Utilities Management and Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA) Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) (HR). 2. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY-POTENTIAL LITIGATION Significant Exposure to Litigation Under Section 54956.9(d)(2) (One Potential Case, as Defendant)–Palo Alto-Stanford Fire Protection Agreement Authority: Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2). MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to go into Closed Session. MOTION PASSED: 5-0 Filseth, Holman, Kou, Scharff absent Council went into Closed Session at 5:01 P.M. Council returned from Closed Session at 7:43 P.M. Mayor Kniss announced no reportable action. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 08/13/18 MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to continue Agenda Item Number 16- PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Title 16 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Modify and Increase the Citywide Transportation Impact Fee (Chapter 16.59); Indefinitely Suspend Application of the Existing Area-specific Transportation Impact Fees for the Stanford Research Park/El Camino Real CS Zone (Chapter 16.45)… to October 1, 2018. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Minutes Approval 3. Approval of Action Minutes for the July 30, 2018 Council Meeting. MOTION: Vice Mayor Filseth moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to approve the Action Minutes for the July 30, 2018 Council Meeting. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Consent Calendar MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to approve Agenda Item Numbers 4-15. 4. Approval of an Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Unified School District for School Resource Officer Services and Shared Funding of the Positions in the Form of Reimbursable Payment (Revenue) to the City, up to $200,000 in Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 and $250,000 in FY2020. 5. Approval of a Construction Contract With Waterproofing Associates, Inc. in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $250,298 and Authorization of a Contract Contingency in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $25,030 to Replace the Existing Pavilion Wing Roof at Cubberley Community Center. 6. Resolution 9784 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Secured and Unsecured Property Tax Levy for the City of Palo Alto’s General Obligation Bond Indebtedness (Measure N).” 7. Approval of a Blanket Purchase Order With Hill Brothers Chemical Company for a One-year Period in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $464,405 for Bulk Magnesium Hydroxide Slurry for the Regional Water Quality Control Plant, With the Option to Renew for two Additional One-year Periods Not-to-Exceed $464,405 per Year Subject to Consumer Price Index (CPI) Increases. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 08/13/18 8. Approval of the Response to the Grand Jury Report on Law Enforcement Mental Health Training. 9. Resolution 9785 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the City Manager to Purchase a Portion of the City’s Natural Gas Requirements From the City of Redding, CA Under Specified Terms and Conditions During Calendar Years 2018 Through 2030, Inclusive.” 10. Resolution 9786 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the Submittal of a Financial Assistance Application to the United States Bureau of Reclamation for the WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects.” 11. Approval of Amendment No. 5 to Contract No. C869 Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University Related to the Regional Water Quality Control Plant's Pretreatment Program as Applied to Stanford. 12. Approval of Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. C17163750 With Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $198,514 to Provide Construction Administration Services for the Baylands Boardwalk Improvement Project (PE-14018), for a new Total Not-to- Exceed Amount of $638,506, and to Extend the Term Through June 30, 2019. 13. Approval of an Agreement With Prospect Silicon Valley, for a Not-to- Exceed Amount of $225,000, for a Term of 18 Months, to be Principal Investigator for the City's Fair Value Commuting Project in Cooperation With the Federal Transit Administration. 14. Resolution 9787 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the City Manager to Purchase a Portion of the City’s Verified Emission Reductions Requirements From Carbonfund.org Foundation Under Specified Terms and Conditions During Calendar Years 2018 Through 2027, Inclusive.” 15. Approval to Submit a National Endowment for the Arts Art Works Grant Request for $40,000 to Support Code:ART2 in Downtown P alo Alto in October 2019. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 08/13/18 MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Action Items 16. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Title 16 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Modify and Increase the Citywide Transportation Impact Fee (Chapter 16.59); Indefinitely Suspend Application of the Existing Area-specific Transportation Impact Fees for the Stanford Research Park/El Camino Real CS Zone (Chapter 16.45) and the San Antonio/West Bayshore Area (Chapter 16.46); and Amend the Municipal Fee Schedule to Update the City’s Transportation Impact Fees in Accordance With These Changes, all in Furtherance of Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. The Citywide Transportation Impact Fee is a One-time fee on new Development and Redevelopment Throughout Palo Alto to Fund Transportation Improvements to Accommodate and Mitigate the Impacts of Future Development in the City. This Ordinance is Within the Scope of the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Certified and Adopted on November 13, 2017 by Council Resolution No. 9720 (Continued From May 7, 2018). 17. Resolution 9788 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto to Join the Santa Clara/Santa Cruz Airport/Community Roundtable.” MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to: A. Approve and adopt a Resolution to Join the Santa Clara/Santa Cruz Community Roundtable; and B. Approve a Memorandum of Understanding Providing for the Continuing Operation of the Santa Clara/Santa Cruz Counties Airport/Community Roundtable; and C. Approve the Santa Clara/Santa Cruz Counties Airport/Community Roundtable Purpose and By-laws to address community noise concerns and make recommendations to the Regional Airports and FAA on noise related issues. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 18. Designation of Voting Delegate and Alternate for the League of California Cities Annual 2018 Conference, to be Held September 12-14, 2018 in Long Beach, CA. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 5 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 08/13/18 MOTION: Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to designate Council Member Wolbach as the voting delegate for the 2018 League of California Cities Annual Conference. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 P.M. City of Palo Alto (ID # 9439) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 8/27/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of Airport Contracts & Budget Amendments Title: Approval of: 1) Contract Number C19171727 With DeSilva Gates Construction, LP in the Amount of $12,497,319; 2) Amendment Number 3 to Contract Number C15155208B With Mead & Hunt, Inc. in the Amount of $1,345,644; and 3) Amendment Number 6 to Contract Number C15155208A With C&S Engineers, Inc. in the Amount of $373,451 for Phase II of the Airport Apron Reconstruction Capital Improvements Program Project AP - 16000; Adoption of a Resoluti on Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Future Grant Agreements Offered by the California Department of Transportation for Airport Improvement Program Matching Grant Funds for Apron Reconstruction at the Palo Alto Airport, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Supporting Documents or Contracts Associated With the Application and Acceptance of Said Grant Funds; Approval of a Budget Amendment in the Airport Enterprise Fund; and Approval of Findings that the Proposed Project is Exempt From Environmen tal Review under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 15301 and 15302 and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Order 1050.1F From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract number C19171727 with DeSilva Gates Construction LP, (Attachment A) in an amount not to exceed $10,867,235 for the Airport Apron Reconstruction project (AP-16000); City of Palo Alto Page 2 2. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or more change orders to the contract with DeSilva Gates Construction LP for related, additional but unforeseen work that may develop during the project, the total value of which shall not exceed $1,630,085; 3. Approve Amendment No. Three to Contract C15155208B with Mead & Hunt, Inc. (Attachment B) in the amount of $1,345,644 for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $2,192,806 for inspection and construction administration services related to the Airport Apron Reconstruction project (AP-16000); and 4. Approve Amendment No. Six to Contract C15155208A with C & S Engineers, Inc. (Attachment C) in the amount of $373,451 for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $2,220,463 for construction administration services related to the Airport Apron Reconstruction project (AP-16000); and 5. Amend the Fiscal Year 2019 Budget Appropriation Ordinance for the Airport Enterprise Fund by: a. increasing the revenue estimate by $2,804,610 in grants from the federal government; b. increasing the Airport Apron Reconstruction project (AP-16000) appropriation in the amount of $3,125,335; c. decreasing contract services expenditure appropriation by $20,725; and d. decreasing the ending fund balance in the amount of $300,000. 6. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute grant agreements offered to the City of Palo Alto by the California Department of Transportation for Airport Improvement Program (AIP) matching grant funds to be used for the Apron Reconstruction project (Attachment D). Executive Summary Since the transfer of operations of the Palo Alto Airport (PAO) from Santa Clara County in August 2014, the City of Palo Alto has been working with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to rehabilitate and update PAO to current FAA City of Palo Alto Page 3 standards. To meet FAA design standards, correct deficiencies and ultimately improve airport safety, a multi-phase apron reconstruction capital project (AP- 16000) was established. In support of completing the project sooner, the FAA is encouraging reconstruction of more of the apron in this phase than originally planned and is willing to fund up to 90% of the project through a reimbursable grant. With Council’s approval, the middle section of the apron will be reconstructed, including the installation of underground conduit for future solar projects. Background As a General Aviation Reliever Airport for three primary Bay Area airports, PAO is an important airport in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS), thereby qualifying for FAA airport improvement grant funding for capital improvements necessary for continued safe and efficient operation of an airport. If eligible, 90% of project costs could be reimbursed. In accepting grant funding, PAO is required by law to meet grant assurances (Attachment E) and operate the airport in compliance with FAA requirements. The California Department of Transportation (DOT), pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21683.1, is authorized to provide AIP matching grants of up to five percent (5%) of FAA grant amounts. Staff will apply for and seek the maximum amount of state matching grant funds if these funds are available from DOT (Attachment D). If state matching grant funds are secured, they will be in addition to the reimbursements currently budgeted and proposed in the budget amendment. The Airport Apron Reconstruction project, recommended as an important safety- related maintenance and modernization project as part of an airport infrastructure analysis, was designed to be constructed in as many as five phases dependent on funding and the logistics of moving tie-downs and mobilization. To provide on-call design services, construction administration, environmental studies, and planning functions required for FAA Airport CIP projects, PAO contracts with consultants C & S Engineers, Inc. and Mead & Hunt, Inc. On-call consultant services contracts compliant with FAA requirements are eligible for 90% reimbursement. City of Palo Alto Page 4 To support operations and provide seed funding for capital improvement projects, the General Fund has loaned PAO $3.1 million since the City took over operations from Santa Clara County. The table to the right shows the breakdown of loans by fiscal year, and it is anticipated that Airport Fund will begin to repay the General Fund in Fiscal Year 2020. Discussion Project Description Pending Council approval, Phase II of the Airport Apron Reconstruction project will continue installation of underground conduit for future solar projects, reconstruct the pavement section of the middle section of the apron and replace the aircraft washrack. The project includes add-alternate joint repairs to the 54” diameter outfall pipeline delivering final treated water from the Regional Water Quality Control Plant to an unnamed slough at the San Francisco Bay. The RWQCP outflow pipeline crosses under the airport apron. The current pipeline leakage into the soil is compromising the structural integrity of the apron. The work in this contract will seal the leaks to ensure the stability of the new pavement. These improvements are not eligible for FAA funding, and are funded by the Regional Water Quality Control Plant. 76 percent of the airport apron will reconstructed upon completion of Phase II. When all phases of the reconstruction project are complete, PAO will meet FAA design standards, with deficiencies corrected and airport safety improved. The areas impacted by Phase II of this project are highlighted in Attachment F. Bid Process On June 18, 2018, a notice inviting formal bids (IFB) for the Apron Construction Phase II Plan was posted at City Hall and on the City’s eProcurement system. The bidding period was 38 days. Bids were received from six contractors on July 26, 2018, as listed on the attached Bid Summary (Attachment G). Summary of Bid Process Fiscal Year Loan Amount 2011 $300,000 2013 $310,000 2014 $325,000 2015 $760,000 2016 $515,601 2017 $704,150 2018 $200,000 TOTAL $3,114,751 City of Palo Alto Page 5 Bid Name/Number IFB171727 Proposed Length of Project 170 days Number of notices sent to Contractors and Builder’s Exchanges via City’s eProcurement system 717 Number of Bid Packages downloaded by Contractors 37 Number of Bid Packages downloaded by Builder’s Exchanges 6 Total Days to Respond to Bid 38 Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting Yes Number of Company Attendees at Pre-Bid Meeting 10 Number of Bids Received: 6 Bid Price Range $10,867,234 to $17,056,029 Bids ranged from $10,867,234 to $17,056,029 and 20% below to 20% above the project estimate of $13,576,748. Staff has reviewed the bids submitted and recommends the Base Bid and Alternates, totaling $10,867,234 submitted by DeSilva Gates Construction LP be accepted, and DeSilva Gates Construction LP be declared the lowest responsible bidder. The contingency amount of $1,630,085 (15 percent of the total contract) is requested for related additional, but unforeseen work that may develop during the project. Staff is requesting a 15% contingency (5% more than the standard 10% contingency) for the project because additional stabilization procedures related to re-treatment of “bay mud” subgrade are costly and time-consuming. Subgrade re-treatment was encountered in Phase I of the Apron Reconstruction and that phase of the project fully utilized its 10% contingency. Consultant services have been vital to the successful delivery of CIP projects, providing on-call design services, construction administration, environmental studies, and planning functions required for FAA Airport CIP projects. Contract amendment number six with C & S Engineers, Inc. will increase the contract by $373,451 for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $2,220,463 for construction administration services for Phase II and bidding services for Phase III. Similarly, contract amendment number three with Mead & Hunt, Inc., will increase the contract by $1,345,644 for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $2,192,806 for City of Palo Alto Page 6 construction observation and administration. FAA reimbursement of 90% for services under these contracts is anticipated to equal $1,547,186. Resource Impact The adopted Fiscal Year 2019 non-salary funding for the Airport Apron Reconstruction project (AP-16000) is $10,555,000, which is insufficient to award and amend the contracts necessary to complete Phase II work at a total cost of $14,216,415. Of this total contract amount, $536,080 is encumbered in the Wastewater Treatment Fund’s Plant Repair, Retrofit, and Equipment Replacement project (WQ-19002) to fund the outfall pipeline repair portion of the Apron Reconstruction project. Therefore, additional funding of $3,125,335 will need to be appropriated to AP-16000 in Fiscal Year 2019 to fund the full cost of phase II. FAA grant reimbursements of 90% of these costs, $2,804,610, will be recognized and appropriated in the Airport Fund. The remaining 10% matching amount of $320,725 will be funded through a one-time reduction in Airport contract services expenditures by $20,725 and $300,000 from the fund balance. This will exhaust the estimated fund balance in the Airport Fund for FY 2019. Staff will closely monitor, scrutinize, and prioritize spending throughout FY 2019 to ensure overall expenditures stay within budget in the Airport Fund. Additionally, staff will explore potential short-term revenue opportunities during the year. Due to the nature of a contingency, FAA grant funding for the construction contingency cannot be requested until an action to use contingency is exercised. Therefore, the current FAA grant application will not include these potential costs; however, staff will seek FAA approval for reimbursement prior to providing notices to proceed on change order requests. Environmental Review National Environmental Policy Act Based on FAA direction, C & S Engineers, Inc. prepared documentation necessary to comply with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements for the proposed apron rehabilitation project at the Palo Alto Airport (PAO). As a project that involves only the rehabilitation and minor expansion of existing facilities it qualified as a categorical exclusion (CATEX) under FAA Order 1050.1F- Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures. At the request of the FAA, two separate CATEX forms were submitted for review. The initial CATEX form, which only focused on the rehabilitation of the existing pavement and ancillary facilities, City of Palo Alto Page 7 was approved in January 2017. A second CATEX form was submitted for the minor apron expansion only. The CATEX was approved by the FAA in April 2017. The NEPA findings were adopted in CMR 8127. California Environmental Quality Act Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the Provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Guideline Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction). The subject project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. Specifically, the project is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA per Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). See the Notice of Exemption included in Attachment B of CMR 8127, which was filed with the County following Minor Architectural Review approval of the project. The CEQA findings were adopted in the same report. Policy Implications Authorization of this project does not represent a change in existing policies. Attachments: • Attachment A: DeSilva Gates Contract No. C19171727 • Attachment B: Mead Hunt C15155208B Amendment 3-Final • Attachment C: C15155208A C S Engineers- Amendment No. 6-Final • Attachment D: RESO DOT Grant Agreement • Attachment E: FAA Grant Assurances • Attachment F: Phasing Exhibit Map • Attachment G: Bid Tabulation Attachment A DeSilva Gates Construction Contract C19171727 will go in late packet, and will be distributed on Thursday, August 23, 2018. Page 1 of 2 Revision July 20, 2016 AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO CONTRACT NO. C15155208B BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND MEAD & HUNT, INC. This Amendment No. 3 to Contract No. C15155208B (“Contract”) is entered into August 27, 2018, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and MEAD & HUNT, INC., a Wisconsin corporation, located at 133 Aviation Boulevard, Suite 100, Santa Rosa, California 95403 (“CONSULTANT”). R E C I T A L S A. The Contract was entered into October 27, 2014 between the parties for the provision of On-call engineering services including planning, design engineering, environmental analyses, grant management and construction management. B. The parties wish to amend the Contract to increase the compensation to cover additional anticipated task orders which includes a task order for Phase II of the Airport Apron Reconstruction Capital Improvement Project; to increase the total not-to-exceed amount by One Million Three Hundred Forty Five Thousand Six hundred Forty Four Dollars ($1,345,644.00), from Eight Hundred Forty Seven Thousand One Hundred Sixty Two Dollars ($847,162.00), to a new total not-to-exceed amount of Two Million One Hundred Ninety Two Thousand Eight Hundred Six Dollars ($2,192,806); as detailed herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION is hereby amended to read as follows: “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 Two Million One Hundred Ninety Two Thousand Eight Hundred Six D ollars ($2,192,806) for the entire five-year term. The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. SECTION 2. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. (SIGNATURE BLOCK FOLLOWS ON THE NEXT PAGE.) DocuSign Envelope ID: CB25490C-19A7-4C41-A10D-588E7378989D Page 2 of 2 Revision July 20, 2016 SIGNATURES OF THE PARTIES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO _________________________ City Manager or Designee APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________ City Attorney or Designee ________________________ Director of Public Works MEAD & HUNT, INC. Officer 1 By: Name: Title: Officer 2 By: Name: Title: DocuSign Envelope ID: CB25490C-19A7-4C41-A10D-588E7378989D Bob Casagrande Vice President Vice President Jon J. Faucher Page 1 of 2 Revision July 20, 2016 AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO CONTRACT NO. C15155208A BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND C & S ENGINEERS, INC. This Amendment No. 6 to Contract No. C15155208A (“Contract”) is entered into August 27, 2018 by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and C & S ENGINEEERS, INC., a New York corporation, located at 499 Col. Eileen Collins Boulevard, Syracuse, New York 13212 (“CONSULTANT”). R E C I T A L S A. The Contract was entered into October 27, 2014 between the parties for the provision of on-call engineering services including planning, design, engineering, environmental analyses, grant management and construction management in connection various projects. B. The parties now wish to amend the Contract to increase the compensation to cover additional anticipated task orders and to include a task order for Phase II of the Airport Apron Reconstruction Capital Improvement Project; to increase the total not-to-exceed amount of the by an amount not to exceed Three Hundred Seventy Three Thousand Four hundred Fifty One Dollars($373,451.00), from One Million Eight Hundred Eighty Hundred Forty Seven Thousand Twelve Dollars ($1,847,012.00), to a new total not-to-exceed amount of Two Million Two Hundred Twenty Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Three Dollars ($2,220,463.00); as detailed herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION is hereby amended to read as follows: “ The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”), and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Two Million Two Hundred Twenty Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Three Dollars ($2,220,463).” SECTION 2. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. (SIGNATURE BLOCK FOLLOWS ON THE NEXT PAGE.) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F38ECB7-172E-43CC-A485-EE5340B70AA0 Page 2 of 2 Revision July 20, 2016 SIGNATURES OF THE PARTIES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO _________________________ City Manager or Designee APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________ City Attorney or Designee _________________________ Director of Public Works C & S ENGINEERS, INC. Officer 1: By: Name: Title: Officer 2: By: Name: Title: DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F38ECB7-172E-43CC-A485-EE5340B70AA0 Department Manager Jessica Bryan Department Manager Cory Hazlewood Page 1 Attachment D Resolution No. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Grant Agreements Offered to the City of Palo Alto by the California Department of Transportation for Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Matching Grant Funds to be Used for Apron Reconstruction, Phase II, for the Palo Alto Airport; and Authorizing the City Manager or his Designee to Execute, on Behalf of the City, any Other Documents Associated with the Application and Acceptance of Grant Funds from the California Department of Transportation; and Certifying that the Airport Enterprise Fund has Sufficient Local Matching Funds to Finance One Hundred Percent (100%) of the California Department of Transportation Grant Funded Projects R E C I T A L S A. The City of Palo Alto (“the City”) and the Federal Aviation Administration are parties to federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant 3-06-0182-14 for Apron Reconstruction, Phase II, at Palo Alto Airport. B. The California Department of Transportation (“DOT”), pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21683.1, is authorized to provide AIP matching grants of up to five percent (5%) of FAA grant amounts. C. The DOT requires a local agency, as a condition of receiving these AIP matching grant funds, to adopt a resolution authorizing the submittal of an application and the execution of grant agreements for the acceptance of said grant funds and to certify the availability of the local matching funds for AIP grants. D. The Council wishes to authorize the City to receive the maximum of available DOT grant funds for Apron Reconstruction, Phase II, for the Palo Alto Airport. E. The Council has recommended that grant agreements offered to the City by DOT for the Palo Alto Airport be executed by the City Manager or his designee on behalf of the City. F. This Council has considered the recommendation of the City Manager. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does hereby RESOLVE, as follows: SECTION 1. Authorizes the City Manager to execute AIP Matching Grant agreements offered to the City by the California Department of Transportation to be used for Apron Reconstruction, Phase II, for Palo Alto Airport. SECTION 2. Authorizes the City Manager or his designee to execute on behalf of the City any other documents associated with the application and acceptance of the allocation of AIP Matching grant funds from the California Department of Transportation. Page 2 SECTION 3. Certifies that the Airport Enterprise Fund has sufficient local matching funds to finance one hundred percent (100%) of the California Department of Transportation grant funded projects. SECTION 4. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not constitute a ‘project’ under Section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code and Sections 15378(b)(4) and 9b)(5) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, and therefore, no environmental assessment is required. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: ___________________________ ___________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ___________________________ ____________________________ Chief Assistant City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Public Works FAA Airports Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 1 of 20 ASSURANCES Airport Sponsors A.General. These assurances shall be complied with in the performance of grant agreements for 1. airport development, airport planning, and noise compatibility program grants for airport sponsors. These assurances are required to be submitted as part of the project application by2. sponsors requesting funds under the provisions of Title 49, U.S.C., subtitle VII, as amended. As used herein, the term "public agency sponsor" means a public agency with control of a public-use airport; the term "private sponsor" means a private owner of a public-use airport; and the term "sponsor" includes both public agency sponsors and private sponsors. Upon acceptance of this grant offer by the sponsor, these assurances are incorporated3. in and become part of this grant agreement. B.Duration and Applicability. Airport development or Noise Compatibility Program Projects Undertaken by a1. Public Agency Sponsor. The terms, conditions and assurances of this grant agreement shall remain in full force and effect throughout the useful life of the facilities developed or equipment acquired for an airport development or noise compatibility program project, or throughout the useful life of the project items installed within a facility under a noise compatibility program project, but in any event not to exceed twenty (20) years from the date of acceptance of a grant offer of Federal funds for the project. However, there shall be no limit on the duration of the assurances regarding Exclusive Rights and Airport Revenue so long as the airport is used as an airport. There shall be no limit on the duration of the terms, conditions, and assurances with respect to real property acquired with federal funds. Furthermore, the duration of the Civil Rights assurance shall be specified in the assurances. Airport Development or Noise Compatibility Projects Undertaken by a Private2. Sponsor. The preceding paragraph 1 also applies to a private sponsor except that the useful life of project items installed within a facility or the useful life of the facilities developed or equipment acquired under an airport development or noise compatibility program project shall be no less than ten (10) years from the date of acceptance of Federal aid for the project. Attachment E Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 2 of 20 Airport Planning Undertaken by a Sponsor. 3. Unless otherwise specified in this grant agreement, only Assurances 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 13, 18, 25, 30, 32, 33, and 34 in Section C apply to planning projects. The terms, conditions, and assurances of this grant agreement shall remain in full force and effect during the life of the project; there shall be no limit on the duration of the assurances regarding Airport Revenue so long as the airport is used as an airport. C. Sponsor Certification. The sponsor hereby assures and certifies, with respect to this grant that: General Federal Requirements. 1. It will comply with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, executive orders, policies, guidelines, and requirements as they relate to the application, acceptance and use of Federal funds for this project including but not limited to the following: Federal Legislation a. Title 49, U.S.C., subtitle VII, as amended. b. Davis-Bacon Act - 40 U.S.C. 276(a), et seq.1 c. Federal Fair Labor Standards Act - 29 U.S.C. 201, et seq. d. Hatch Act – 5 U.S.C. 1501, et seq.2 e. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 Title 42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.1 2 f. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 - Section 106 - 16 U.S.C. 470(f).1 g. Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 - 16 U.S.C. 469 through 469c.1 h. Native Americans Grave Repatriation Act - 25 U.S.C. Section 3001, et seq. i. Clean Air Act, P.L. 90-148, as amended. j. Coastal Zone Management Act, P.L. 93-205, as amended. k. Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 - Section 102(a) - 42 U.S.C. 4012a.1 l. Title 49, U.S.C., Section 303, (formerly known as Section 4(f)) m. Rehabilitation Act of 1973 - 29 U.S.C. 794. n. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., 78 stat. 252) (prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin); o. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, (42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.), prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability). p. Age Discrimination Act of 1975 - 42 U.S.C. 6101, et seq. q. American Indian Religious Freedom Act, P.L. 95-341, as amended. r. Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 -42 U.S.C. 4151, et seq.1 s. Power plant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 - Section 403- 2 U.S.C. 8373.1 t. Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act - 40 U.S.C. 327, et seq.1 u. Copeland Anti-kickback Act - 18 U.S.C. 874.1 v. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 - 42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.1 w. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, P.L. 90-542, as amended. x. Single Audit Act of 1984 - 31 U.S.C. 7501, et seq.2 y. Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 - 41 U.S.C. 702 through 706. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 3 of 20 z. The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, as amended (Pub. L. 109-282, as amended by section 6202 of Pub. L. 110-252). Executive Orders a. Executive Order 11246 - Equal Employment Opportunity1 b. Executive Order 11990 - Protection of Wetlands c. Executive Order 11998 – Flood Plain Management d. Executive Order 12372 - Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs e. Executive Order 12699 - Seismic Safety of Federal and Federally Assisted New Building Construction1 f. Executive Order 12898 - Environmental Justice Federal Regulations a. 2 CFR Part 180 - OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement). b. 2 CFR Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. [OMB Circular A-87 Cost Principles Applicable to Grants and Contracts with State and Local Governments, and OMB Circular A-133 - Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations].4, 5, 6 c. 2 CFR Part 1200 – Nonprocurement Suspension and Debarment d. 14 CFR Part 13 - Investigative and Enforcement Procedures14 CFR Part 16 - Rules of Practice For Federally Assisted Airport Enforcement Proceedings. e. 14 CFR Part 150 - Airport noise compatibility planning. f. 28 CFR Part 35- Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services. g. 28 CFR § 50.3 - U.S. Department of Justice Guidelines for Enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. h. 29 CFR Part 1 - Procedures for predetermination of wage rates.1 i. 29 CFR Part 3 - Contractors and subcontractors on public building or public work financed in whole or part by loans or grants from the United States.1 j. 29 CFR Part 5 - Labor standards provisions applicable to contracts covering federally financed and assisted construction (also labor standards provisions applicable to non-construction contracts subject to the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act).1 k. 41 CFR Part 60 - Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor (Federal and federally assisted contracting requirements).1 l. 49 CFR Part 18 - Uniform administrative requirements for grants and cooperative agreements to state and local governments.3 m. 49 CFR Part 20 - New restrictions on lobbying. n. 49 CFR Part 21 – Nondiscrimination in federally-assisted programs of the Department of Transportation - effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. o. 49 CFR Part 23 - Participation by Disadvantage Business Enterprise in Airport Concessions. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 4 of 20 p. 49 CFR Part 24 – Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs.1 2 q. 49 CFR Part 26 – Participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in Department of Transportation Programs. r. 49 CFR Part 27 – Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs and Activities Receiving or Benefiting from Federal Financial Assistance.1 s. 49 CFR Part 28 – Enforcement of Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs or Activities conducted by the Department of Transportation. t. 49 CFR Part 30 - Denial of public works contracts to suppliers of goods and services of countries that deny procurement market access to U.S. contractors. u. 49 CFR Part 32 – Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Financial Assistance) v. 49 CFR Part 37 – Transportation Services for Individuals with Disabilities (ADA). w. 49 CFR Part 41 - Seismic safety of Federal and federally assisted or regulated new building construction. Specific Assurances Specific assurances required to be included in grant agreements by any of the above laws, regulations or circulars are incorporated by reference in this grant agreement. Footnotes to Assurance C.1. 1 These laws do not apply to airport planning sponsors. 2 These laws do not apply to private sponsors. 3 49 CFR Part 18 and 2 CFR Part 200 contain requirements for State and Local Governments receiving Federal assistance. Any requirement levied upon State and Local Governments by this regulation and circular shall also be applicable to private sponsors receiving Federal assistance under Title 49, United States Code. 4 On December 26, 2013 at 78 FR 78590, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR Part 200. 2 CFR Part 200 replaces and combines the former Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants (OMB Circular A-102 and Circular A-110 or 2 CFR Part 215 or Circular) as well as the Cost Principles (Circulars A-21 or 2 CFR part 220; Circular A-87 or 2 CFR part 225; and A-122, 2 CFR part 230). Additionally it replaces Circular A-133 guidance on the Single Annual Audit. In accordance with 2 CFR section 200.110, the standards set forth in Part 200 which affect administration of Federal awards issued by Federal agencies become effective once implemented by Federal agencies or when any future amendment to this Part becomes final. Federal agencies, including the Department of Transportation, must implement the policies and procedures applicable to Federal awards by promulgating a regulation to be effective by December 26, 2014 unless different provisions are required by statute or approved by OMB. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 5 of 20 5 Cost principles established in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E must be used as guidelines for determining the eligibility of specific types of expenses. 6 Audit requirements established in 2 CFR part 200 subpart F are the guidelines for audits. Responsibility and Authority of the Sponsor. 2. a. Public Agency Sponsor: It has legal authority to apply for this grant, and to finance and carry out the proposed project; that a resolution, motion or similar action has been duly adopted or passed as an official act of the applicant's governing body authorizing the filing of the application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein, and directing and authorizing the person identified as the official representative of the applicant to act in connection with the application and to provide such additional information as may be required. b. Private Sponsor: It has legal authority to apply for this grant and to finance and carry out the proposed project and comply with all terms, conditions, and assurances of this grant agreement. It shall designate an official representative and shall in writing direct and authorize that person to file this application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein; to act in connection with this application; and to provide such additional information as may be required. Sponsor Fund Availability. 3. It has sufficient funds available for that portion of the project costs which are not to be paid by the United States. It has sufficient funds available to assure operation and maintenance of items funded under this grant agreement which it will own or control. Good Title. 4. a. It, a public agency or the Federal government, holds good title, satisfactory to the Secretary, to the landing area of the airport or site thereof, or will give assurance satisfactory to the Secretary that good title will be acquired. b. For noise compatibility program projects to be carried out on the property of the sponsor, it holds good title satisfactory to the Secretary to that portion of the property upon which Federal funds will be expended or will give assurance to the Secretary that good title will be obtained. Preserving Rights and Powers. 5. a. It will not take or permit any action which would operate to deprive it of any of the rights and powers necessary to perform any or all of the terms, conditions, and assurances in this grant agreement without the written approval of the Secretary, and will act promptly to acquire, extinguish or modify any outstanding rights or claims of right of others which would interfere with such performance by the sponsor. This shall be done in a manner acceptable to the Secretary. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 6 of 20 b. It will not sell, lease, encumber, or otherwise transfer or dispose of any part of its title or other interests in the property shown on Exhibit A to this application or, for a noise compatibility program project, that portion of the property upon which Federal funds have been expended, for the duration of the terms, conditions, and assurances in this grant agreement without approval by the Secretary. If the transferee is found by the Secretary to be eligible under Title 49, United States Code, to assume the obligations of this grant agreement and to have the power, authority, and financial resources to carry out all such obligations, the sponsor shall insert in the contract or document transferring or disposing of the sponsor's interest, and make binding upon the transferee all of the terms, conditions, and assurances contained in this grant agreement. c. For all noise compatibility program projects which are to be carried out by another unit of local government or are on property owned by a unit of local government other than the sponsor, it will enter into an agreement with that government. Except as otherwise specified by the Secretary, that agreement shall obligate that government to the same terms, conditions, and assurances that would be applicable to it if it applied directly to the FAA for a grant to undertake the noise compatibility program project. That agreement and changes thereto must be satisfactory to the Secretary. It will take steps to enforce this agreement against the local government if there is substantial non-compliance with the terms of the agreement. d. For noise compatibility program projects to be carried out on privately owned property, it will enter into an agreement with the owner of that property which includes provisions specified by the Secretary. It will take steps to enforce this agreement against the property owner whenever there is substantial non- compliance with the terms of the agreement. e. If the sponsor is a private sponsor, it will take steps satisfactory to the Secretary to ensure that the airport will continue to function as a public-use airport in accordance with these assurances for the duration of these assurances. f. If an arrangement is made for management and operation of the airport by any agency or person other than the sponsor or an employee of the sponsor, the sponsor will reserve sufficient rights and authority to insure that the airport will be operated and maintained in accordance Title 49, United States Code, the regulations and the terms, conditions and assurances in this grant agreement and shall insure that such arrangement also requires compliance therewith. g. Sponsors of commercial service airports will not permit or enter into any arrangement that results in permission for the owner or tenant of a property used as a residence, or zoned for residential use, to taxi an aircraft between that property and any location on airport. Sponsors of general aviation airports entering into any arrangement that results in permission for the owner of residential real property adjacent to or near the airport must comply with the requirements of Sec. 136 of Public Law 112-95 and the sponsor assurances. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 7 of 20 Consistency with Local Plans. 6. The project is reasonably consistent with plans (existing at the time of submission of this application) of public agencies that are authorized by the State in which the project is located to plan for the development of the area surrounding the airport. Consideration of Local Interest. 7. It has given fair consideration to the interest of communities in or near where the project may be located. Consultation with Users. 8. In making a decision to undertake any airport development project under Title 49, United States Code, it has undertaken reasonable consultations with affected parties using the airport at which project is proposed. Public Hearings. 9. In projects involving the location of an airport, an airport runway, or a major runway extension, it has afforded the opportunity for public hearings for the purpose of considering the economic, social, and environmental effects of the airport or runway location and its consistency with goals and objectives of such planning as has been carried out by the community and it shall, when requested by the Secretary, submit a copy of the transcript of such hearings to the Secretary. Further, for such projects, it has on its management board either voting representation from the communities where the project is located or has advised the communities that they have the right to petition the Secretary concerning a proposed project. Metropolitan Planning Organization. 10. In projects involving the location of an airport, an airport runway, or a major runway extension at a medium or large hub airport, the sponsor has made available to and has provided upon request to the metropolitan planning organization in the area in which the airport is located, if any, a copy of the proposed amendment to the airport layout plan to depict the project and a copy of any airport master plan in which the project is described or depicted. Pavement Preventive Maintenance. 11. With respect to a project approved after January 1, 1995, for the replacement or reconstruction of pavement at the airport, it assures or certifies that it has implemented an effective airport pavement maintenance-management program and it assures that it will use such program for the useful life of any pavement constructed, reconstructed or repaired with Federal financial assistance at the airport. It will provide such reports on pavement condition and pavement management programs as the Secretary determines may be useful. Terminal Development Prerequisites. 12. For projects which include terminal development at a public use airport, as defined in Title 49, it has, on the date of submittal of the project grant application, all the safety equipment required for certification of such airport under section 44706 of Title 49, United States Code, and all the security equipment required by rule or regulation, and Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 8 of 20 has provided for access to the passenger enplaning and deplaning area of such airport to passengers enplaning and deplaning from aircraft other than air carrier aircraft. Accounting System, Audit, and Record Keeping Requirements. 13. a. It shall keep all project accounts and records which fully disclose the amount and disposition by the recipient of the proceeds of this grant, the total cost of the project in connection with which this grant is given or used, and the amount or nature of that portion of the cost of the project supplied by other sources, and such other financial records pertinent to the project. The accounts and records shall be kept in accordance with an accounting system that will facilitate an effective audit in accordance with the Single Audit Act of 1984. b. It shall make available to the Secretary and the Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives, for the purpose of audit and examination, any books, documents, papers, and records of the recipient that are pertinent to this grant. The Secretary may require that an appropriate audit be conducted by a recipient. In any case in which an independent audit is made of the accounts of a sponsor relating to the disposition of the proceeds of a grant or relating to the project in connection with which this grant was given or used, it shall file a certified copy of such audit with the Comptroller General of the United States not later than six (6) months following the close of the fiscal year for which the audit was made. Minimum Wage Rates. 14. It shall include, in all contracts in excess of $2,000 for work on any projects funded under this grant agreement which involve labor, provisions establishing minimum rates of wages, to be predetermined by the Secretary of Labor, in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 276a-276a-5), which contractors shall pay to skilled and unskilled labor, and such minimum rates shall be stated in the invitation for bids and shall be included in proposals or bids for the work. Veteran's Preference. 15. It shall include in all contracts for work on any project funded under this grant agreement which involve labor, such provisions as are necessary to insure that, in the employment of labor (except in executive, administrative, and supervisory positions), preference shall be given to Vietnam era veterans, Persian Gulf veterans, Afghanistan-Iraq war veterans, disabled veterans, and small business concerns owned and controlled by disabled veterans as defined in Section 47112 of Title 49, United States Code. However, this preference shall apply only where the individuals are available and qualified to perform the work to which the employment relates. Conformity to Plans and Specifications. 16. It will execute the project subject to plans, specifications, and schedules approved by the Secretary. Such plans, specifications, and schedules shall be submitted to the Secretary prior to commencement of site preparation, construction, or other performance under this grant agreement, and, upon approval of the Secretary, shall be incorporated into this grant agreement. Any modification to the approved plans, Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 9 of 20 specifications, and schedules shall also be subject to approval of the Secretary, and incorporated into this grant agreement. Construction Inspection and Approval. 17. It will provide and maintain competent technical supervision at the construction site throughout the project to assure that the work conforms to the plans, specifications, and schedules approved by the Secretary for the project. It shall subject the construction work on any project contained in an approved project application to inspection and approval by the Secretary and such work shall be in accordance with regulations and procedures prescribed by the Secretary. Such regulations and procedures shall require such cost and progress reporting by the sponsor or sponsors of such project as the Secretary shall deem necessary. Planning Projects. 18. In carrying out planning projects: a. It will execute the project in accordance with the approved program narrative contained in the project application or with the modifications similarly approved. b. It will furnish the Secretary with such periodic reports as required pertaining to the planning project and planning work activities. c. It will include in all published material prepared in connection with the planning project a notice that the material was prepared under a grant provided by the United States. d. It will make such material available for examination by the public, and agrees that no material prepared with funds under this project shall be subject to copyright in the United States or any other country. e. It will give the Secretary unrestricted authority to publish, disclose, distribute, and otherwise use any of the material prepared in connection with this grant. f. It will grant the Secretary the right to disapprove the sponsor's employment of specific consultants and their subcontractors to do all or any part of this project as well as the right to disapprove the proposed scope and cost of professional services. g. It will grant the Secretary the right to disapprove the use of the sponsor's employees to do all or any part of the project. h. It understands and agrees that the Secretary's approval of this project grant or the Secretary's approval of any planning material developed as part of this grant does not constitute or imply any assurance or commitment on the part of the Secretary to approve any pending or future application for a Federal airport grant. Operation and Maintenance. 19. a. The airport and all facilities which are necessary to serve the aeronautical users of the airport, other than facilities owned or controlled by the United States, shall be operated at all times in a safe and serviceable condition and in accordance with the minimum standards as may be required or prescribed by applicable Federal, Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 10 of 20 state and local agencies for maintenance and operation. It will not cause or permit any activity or action thereon which would interfere with its use for airport purposes. It will suitably operate and maintain the airport and all facilities thereon or connected therewith, with due regard to climatic and flood conditions. Any proposal to temporarily close the airport for non-aeronautical purposes must first be approved by the Secretary. In furtherance of this assurance, the sponsor will have in effect arrangements for- Operating the airport's aeronautical facilities whenever required; 1) Promptly marking and lighting hazards resulting from airport conditions, 2) including temporary conditions; and Promptly notifying airmen of any condition affecting aeronautical use of the 3) airport. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to require that the airport be operated for aeronautical use during temporary periods when snow, flood or other climatic conditions interfere with such operation and maintenance. Further, nothing herein shall be construed as requiring the maintenance, repair, restoration, or replacement of any structure or facility which is substantially damaged or destroyed due to an act of God or other condition or circumstance beyond the control of the sponsor. b. It will suitably operate and maintain noise compatibility program items that it owns or controls upon which Federal funds have been expended. Hazard Removal and Mitigation. 20. It will take appropriate action to assure that such terminal airspace as is required to protect instrument and visual operations to the airport (including established minimum flight altitudes) will be adequately cleared and protected by removing, lowering, relocating, marking, or lighting or otherwise mitigating existing airport hazards and by preventing the establishment or creation of future airport hazards. Compatible Land Use. 21. It will take appropriate action, to the extent reasonable, including the adoption of zoning laws, to restrict the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to activities and purposes compatible with normal airport operations, including landing and takeoff of aircraft. In addition, if the project is for noise compatibility program implementation, it will not cause or permit any change in land use, within its jurisdiction, that will reduce its compatibility, with respect to the airport, of the noise compatibility program measures upon which Federal funds have been expended. Economic Nondiscrimination. 22. a. It will make the airport available as an airport for public use on reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination to all types, kinds and classes of aeronautical activities, including commercial aeronautical activities offering services to the public at the airport. b. In any agreement, contract, lease, or other arrangement under which a right or privilege at the airport is granted to any person, firm, or corporation to conduct or Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 11 of 20 to engage in any aeronautical activity for furnishing services to the public at the airport, the sponsor will insert and enforce provisions requiring the contractor to- furnish said services on a reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, basis to 1) all users thereof, and charge reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, prices for each unit or 2) service, provided that the contractor may be allowed to make reasonable and nondiscriminatory discounts, rebates, or other similar types of price reductions to volume purchasers. c. Each fixed-based operator at the airport shall be subject to the same rates, fees, rentals, and other charges as are uniformly applicable to all other fixed-based operators making the same or similar uses of such airport and utilizing the same or similar facilities. d. Each air carrier using such airport shall have the right to service itself or to use any fixed-based operator that is authorized or permitted by the airport to serve any air carrier at such airport. e. Each air carrier using such airport (whether as a tenant, non-tenant, or subtenant of another air carrier tenant) shall be subject to such nondiscriminatory and substantially comparable rules, regulations, conditions, rates, fees, rentals, and other charges with respect to facilities directly and substantially related to providing air transportation as are applicable to all such air carriers which make similar use of such airport and utilize similar facilities, subject to reasonable classifications such as tenants or non-tenants and signatory carriers and non- signatory carriers. Classification or status as tenant or signatory shall not be unreasonably withheld by any airport provided an air carrier assumes obligations substantially similar to those already imposed on air carriers in such classification or status. f. It will not exercise or grant any right or privilege which operates to prevent any person, firm, or corporation operating aircraft on the airport from performing any services on its own aircraft with its own employees [including, but not limited to maintenance, repair, and fueling] that it may choose to perform. g. In the event the sponsor itself exercises any of the rights and privileges referred to in this assurance, the services involved will be provided on the same conditions as would apply to the furnishing of such services by commercial aeronautical service providers authorized by the sponsor under these provisions. h. The sponsor may establish such reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, conditions to be met by all users of the airport as may be necessary for the safe and efficient operation of the airport. i. The sponsor may prohibit or limit any given type, kind or class of aeronautical use of the airport if such action is necessary for the safe operation of the airport or necessary to serve the civil aviation needs of the public. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 12 of 20 Exclusive Rights. 23. It will permit no exclusive right for the use of the airport by any person providing, or intending to provide, aeronautical services to the public. For purposes of this paragraph, the providing of the services at an airport by a single fixed-based operator shall not be construed as an exclusive right if both of the following apply: a. It would be unreasonably costly, burdensome, or impractical for more than one fixed-based operator to provide such services, and b. If allowing more than one fixed-based operator to provide such services would require the reduction of space leased pursuant to an existing agreement between such single fixed-based operator and such airport. It further agrees that it will not, either directly or indirectly, grant or permit any person, firm, or corporation, the exclusive right at the airport to conduct any aeronautical activities, including, but not limited to charter flights, pilot training, aircraft rental and sightseeing, aerial photography, crop dusting, aerial advertising and surveying, air carrier operations, aircraft sales and services, sale of aviation petroleum products whether or not conducted in conjunction with other aeronautical activity, repair and maintenance of aircraft, sale of aircraft parts, and any other activities which because of their direct relationship to the operation of aircraft can be regarded as an aeronautical activity, and that it will terminate any exclusive right to conduct an aeronautical activity now existing at such an airport before the grant of any assistance under Title 49, United States Code. Fee and Rental Structure. 24. It will maintain a fee and rental structure for the facilities and services at the airport which will make the airport as self-sustaining as possible under the circumstances existing at the particular airport, taking into account such factors as the volume of traffic and economy of collection. No part of the Federal share of an airport development, airport planning or noise compatibility project for which a grant is made under Title 49, United States Code, the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, the Federal Airport Act or the Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970 shall be included in the rate basis in establishing fees, rates, and charges for users of that airport. Airport Revenues. 25. a. All revenues generated by the airport and any local taxes on aviation fuel established after December 30, 1987, will be expended by it for the capital or operating costs of the airport; the local airport system; or other local facilities which are owned or operated by the owner or operator of the airport and which are directly and substantially related to the actual air transportation of passengers or property; or for noise mitigation purposes on or off the airport. The following exceptions apply to this paragraph: If covenants or assurances in debt obligations issued before September 3, 1) 1982, by the owner or operator of the airport, or provisions enacted before September 3, 1982, in governing statutes controlling the owner or operator's financing, provide for the use of the revenues from any of the airport owner or Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 13 of 20 operator's facilities, including the airport, to support not only the airport but also the airport owner or operator's general debt obligations or other facilities, then this limitation on the use of all revenues generated by the airport (and, in the case of a public airport, local taxes on aviation fuel) shall not apply. If the Secretary approves the sale of a privately owned airport to a public 2) sponsor and provides funding for any portion of the public sponsor’s acquisition of land, this limitation on the use of all revenues generated by the sale shall not apply to certain proceeds from the sale. This is conditioned on repayment to the Secretary by the private owner of an amount equal to the remaining unamortized portion (amortized over a 20-year period) of any airport improvement grant made to the private owner for any purpose other than land acquisition on or after October 1, 1996, plus an amount equal to the federal share of the current fair market value of any land acquired with an airport improvement grant made to that airport on or after October 1, 1996. Certain revenue derived from or generated by mineral extraction, production, 3) lease, or other means at a general aviation airport (as defined at Section 47102 of title 49 United States Code), if the FAA determines the airport sponsor meets the requirements set forth in Sec. 813 of Public Law 112-95. b. As part of the annual audit required under the Single Audit Act of 1984, the sponsor will direct that the audit will review, and the resulting audit report will provide an opinion concerning, the use of airport revenue and taxes in paragraph (a), and indicating whether funds paid or transferred to the owner or operator are paid or transferred in a manner consistent with Title 49, United States Code and any other applicable provision of law, including any regulation promulgated by the Secretary or Administrator. c. Any civil penalties or other sanctions will be imposed for violation of this assurance in accordance with the provisions of Section 47107 of Title 49, United States Code. Reports and Inspections. 26. It will: a. submit to the Secretary such annual or special financial and operations reports as the Secretary may reasonably request and make such reports available to the public; make available to the public at reasonable times and places a report of the airport budget in a format prescribed by the Secretary; b. for airport development projects, make the airport and all airport records and documents affecting the airport, including deeds, leases, operation and use agreements, regulations and other instruments, available for inspection by any duly authorized agent of the Secretary upon reasonable request; c. for noise compatibility program projects, make records and documents relating to the project and continued compliance with the terms, conditions, and assurances of this grant agreement including deeds, leases, agreements, regulations, and other instruments, available for inspection by any duly authorized agent of the Secretary upon reasonable request; and Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 14 of 20 d. in a format and time prescribed by the Secretary, provide to the Secretary and make available to the public following each of its fiscal years, an annual report listing in detail: all amounts paid by the airport to any other unit of government and the 1) purposes for which each such payment was made; and all services and property provided by the airport to other units of government 2) and the amount of compensation received for provision of each such service and property. Use by Government Aircraft. 27. It will make available all of the facilities of the airport developed with Federal financial assistance and all those usable for landing and takeoff of aircraft to the United States for use by Government aircraft in common with other aircraft at all times without charge, except, if the use by Government aircraft is substantial, charge may be made for a reasonable share, proportional to such use, for the cost of operating and maintaining the facilities used. Unless otherwise determined by the Secretary, or otherwise agreed to by the sponsor and the using agency, substantial use of an airport by Government aircraft will be considered to exist when operations of such aircraft are in excess of those which, in the opinion of the Secretary, would unduly interfere with use of the landing areas by other authorized aircraft, or during any calendar month that – a. Five (5) or more Government aircraft are regularly based at the airport or on land adjacent thereto; or b. The total number of movements (counting each landing as a movement) of Government aircraft is 300 or more, or the gross accumulative weight of Government aircraft using the airport (the total movement of Government aircraft multiplied by gross weights of such aircraft) is in excess of five million pounds. Land for Federal Facilities. 28. It will furnish without cost to the Federal Government for use in connection with any air traffic control or air navigation activities, or weather-reporting and communication activities related to air traffic control, any areas of land or water, or estate therein, or rights in buildings of the sponsor as the Secretary considers necessary or desirable for construction, operation, and maintenance at Federal expense of space or facilities for such purposes. Such areas or any portion thereof will be made available as provided herein within four months after receipt of a written request from the Secretary. Airport Layout Plan. 29. a. It will keep up to date at all times an airport layout plan of the airport showing boundaries of the airport and all proposed additions thereto, together with the 1) boundaries of all offsite areas owned or controlled by the sponsor for airport purposes and proposed additions thereto; the location and nature of all existing and proposed airport facilities and 2) structures (such as runways, taxiways, aprons, terminal buildings, hangars and Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 15 of 20 roads), including all proposed extensions and reductions of existing airport facilities; the location of all existing and proposed nonaviation areas and of all existing 3) improvements thereon; and all proposed and existing access points used to taxi aircraft across the airport’s 4) property boundary. Such airport layout plans and each amendment, revision, or modification thereof, shall be subject to the approval of the Secretary which approval shall be evidenced by the signature of a duly authorized representative of the Secretary on the face of the airport layout plan. The sponsor will not make or permit any changes or alterations in the airport or any of its facilities which are not in conformity with the airport layout plan as approved by the Secretary and which might, in the opinion of the Secretary, adversely affect the safety, utility or efficiency of the airport. b. If a change or alteration in the airport or the facilities is made which the Secretary determines adversely affects the safety, utility, or efficiency of any federally owned, leased, or funded property on or off the airport and which is not in conformity with the airport layout plan as approved by the Secretary, the owner or operator will, if requested, by the Secretary (1) eliminate such adverse effect in a manner approved by the Secretary; or (2) bear all costs of relocating such property (or replacement thereof) to a site acceptable to the Secretary and all costs of restoring such property (or replacement thereof) to the level of safety, utility, efficiency, and cost of operation existing before the unapproved change in the airport or its facilities except in the case of a relocation or replacement of an existing airport facility due to a change in the Secretary’s design standards beyond the control of the airport sponsor. Civil Rights. 30. It will promptly take any measures necessary to ensure that no person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in any activity conducted with, or benefiting from, funds received from this grant. a. Using the definitions of activity, facility and program as found and defined in §§ 21.23 (b) and 21.23 (e) of 49 CFR § 21, the sponsor will facilitate all programs, operate all facilities, or conduct all programs in compliance with all non- discrimination requirements imposed by, or pursuant to these assurances. b. Applicability Programs and Activities. If the sponsor has received a grant (or other federal 1) assistance) for any of the sponsor’s program or activities, these requirements extend to all of the sponsor’s programs and activities. Facilities. Where it receives a grant or other federal financial assistance to 2) construct, expand, renovate, remodel, alter or acquire a facility, or part of a facility, the assurance extends to the entire facility and facilities operated in connection therewith. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 16 of 20 Real Property. Where the sponsor receives a grant or other Federal financial 3) assistance in the form of, or for the acquisition of real property or an interest in real property, the assurance will extend to rights to space on, over, or under such property. c. Duration. The sponsor agrees that it is obligated to this assurance for the period during which Federal financial assistance is extended to the program, except where the Federal financial assistance is to provide, or is in the form of, personal property, or real property, or interest therein, or structures or improvements thereon, in which case the assurance obligates the sponsor, or any transferee for the longer of the following periods: So long as the airport is used as an airport, or for another purpose involving 1) the provision of similar services or benefits; or So long as the sponsor retains ownership or possession of the property. 2) d. Required Solicitation Language. It will include the following notification in all solicitations for bids, Requests For Proposals for work, or material under this grant agreement and in all proposals for agreements, including airport concessions, regardless of funding source: “The (Name of Sponsor), in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-4) and the Regulations, hereby notifies all bidders that it will affirmatively ensure that any contract entered into pursuant to this advertisement, disadvantaged business enterprises and airport concession disadvantaged business enterprises will be afforded full and fair opportunity to submit bids in response to this invitation and will not be discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in consideration for an award.” e. Required Contract Provisions. It will insert the non-discrimination contract clauses requiring compliance 1) with the acts and regulations relative to non-discrimination in Federally- assisted programs of the DOT, and incorporating the acts and regulations into the contracts by reference in every contract or agreement subject to the non- discrimination in Federally-assisted programs of the DOT acts and regulations. It will include a list of the pertinent non-discrimination authorities in every 2) contract that is subject to the non-discrimination acts and regulations. It will insert non-discrimination contract clauses as a covenant running with 3) the land, in any deed from the United States effecting or recording a transfer of real property, structures, use, or improvements thereon or interest therein to a sponsor. It will insert non-discrimination contract clauses prohibiting discrimination on 4) the basis of race, color, national origin, creed, sex, age, or handicap as a Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 17 of 20 covenant running with the land, in any future deeds, leases, license, permits, or similar instruments entered into by the sponsor with other parties: a) For the subsequent transfer of real property acquired or improved under the applicable activity, project, or program; and b) For the construction or use of, or access to, space on, over, or under real property acquired or improved under the applicable activity, project, or program. f. It will provide for such methods of administration for the program as are found by the Secretary to give reasonable guarantee that it, other recipients, sub-recipients, sub-grantees, contractors, subcontractors, consultants, transferees, successors in interest, and other participants of Federal financial assistance under such program will comply with all requirements imposed or pursuant to the acts, the regulations, and this assurance. g. It agrees that the United States has a right to seek judicial enforcement with regard to any matter arising under the acts, the regulations, and this assurance. Disposal of Land. 31. a. For land purchased under a grant for airport noise compatibility purposes, including land serving as a noise buffer, it will dispose of the land, when the land is no longer needed for such purposes, at fair market value, at the earliest practicable time. That portion of the proceeds of such disposition which is proportionate to the United States' share of acquisition of such land will be, at the discretion of the Secretary, (1) reinvested in another project at the airport, or (2) transferred to another eligible airport as prescribed by the Secretary. The Secretary shall give preference to the following, in descending order, (1) reinvestment in an approved noise compatibility project, (2) reinvestment in an approved project that is eligible for grant funding under Section 47117(e) of title 49 United States Code, (3) reinvestment in an approved airport development project that is eligible for grant funding under Sections 47114, 47115, or 47117 of title 49 United States Code, (4) transferred to an eligible sponsor of another public airport to be reinvested in an approved noise compatibility project at that airport, and (5) paid to the Secretary for deposit in the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. If land acquired under a grant for noise compatibility purposes is leased at fair market value and consistent with noise buffering purposes, the lease will not be considered a disposal of the land. Revenues derived from such a lease may be used for an approved airport development project that would otherwise be eligible for grant funding or any permitted use of airport revenue. b. For land purchased under a grant for airport development purposes (other than noise compatibility), it will, when the land is no longer needed for airport purposes, dispose of such land at fair market value or make available to the Secretary an amount equal to the United States' proportionate share of the fair market value of the land. That portion of the proceeds of such disposition which is proportionate to the United States' share of the cost of acquisition of such land will, (1) upon application to the Secretary, be reinvested or transferred to another Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 18 of 20 eligible airport as prescribed by the Secretary. The Secretary shall give preference to the following, in descending order: (1) reinvestment in an approved noise compatibility project, (2) reinvestment in an approved project that is eligible for grant funding under Section 47117(e) of title 49 United States Code, (3) reinvestment in an approved airport development project that is eligible for grant funding under Sections 47114, 47115, or 47117 of title 49 United States Code, (4) transferred to an eligible sponsor of another public airport to be reinvested in an approved noise compatibility project at that airport, and (5) paid to the Secretary for deposit in the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. c. Land shall be considered to be needed for airport purposes under this assurance if (1) it may be needed for aeronautical purposes (including runway protection zones) or serve as noise buffer land, and (2) the revenue from interim uses of such land contributes to the financial self-sufficiency of the airport. Further, land purchased with a grant received by an airport operator or owner before December 31, 1987, will be considered to be needed for airport purposes if the Secretary or Federal agency making such grant before December 31, 1987, was notified by the operator or owner of the uses of such land, did not object to such use, and the land continues to be used for that purpose, such use having commenced no later than December 15, 1989. d. Disposition of such land under (a) (b) or (c) will be subject to the retention or reservation of any interest or right therein necessary to ensure that such land will only be used for purposes which are compatible with noise levels associated with operation of the airport. Engineering and Design Services. 32. It will award each contract, or sub-contract for program management, construction management, planning studies, feasibility studies, architectural services, preliminary engineering, design, engineering, surveying, mapping or related services with respect to the project in the same manner as a contract for architectural and engineering services is negotiated under Title IX of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 or an equivalent qualifications-based requirement prescribed for or by the sponsor of the airport. Foreign Market Restrictions. 33. It will not allow funds provided under this grant to be used to fund any project which uses any product or service of a foreign country during the period in which such foreign country is listed by the United States Trade Representative as denying fair and equitable market opportunities for products and suppliers of the United States in procurement and construction. Policies, Standards, and Specifications. 34. It will carry out the project in accordance with policies, standards, and specifications approved by the Secretary including but not limited to the advisory circulars listed in the Current FAA Advisory Circulars for AIP projects, dated ___________ (the latest approved version as of this grant offer) and included in this grant, and in accordance _ Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 19 of 20 with applicable state policies, standards, and specifications approved by the Secretary. Relocation and Real Property Acquisition. 35. a. It will be guided in acquiring real property, to the greatest extent practicable under State law, by the land acquisition policies in Subpart B of 49 CFR Part 24 and will pay or reimburse property owners for necessary expenses as specified in Subpart B. b. It will provide a relocation assistance program offering the services described in Subpart C and fair and reasonable relocation payments and assistance to displaced persons as required in Subpart D and E of 49 CFR Part 24. c. It will make available within a reasonable period of time prior to displacement, comparable replacement dwellings to displaced persons in accordance with Subpart E of 49 CFR Part 24. Access By Intercity Buses. 36. The airport owner or operator will permit, to the maximum extent practicable, intercity buses or other modes of transportation to have access to the airport; however, it has no obligation to fund special facilities for intercity buses or for other modes of transportation. Disadvantaged Business Enterprises. 37. The sponsor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the award and performance of any DOT-assisted contract covered by 49 CFR Part 26, or in the award and performance of any concession activity contract covered by 49 CFR Part 23. In addition, the sponsor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the administration of its DBE and ACDBE programs or the requirements of 49 CFR Parts 23 and 26. The sponsor shall take all necessary and reasonable steps under 49 CFR Parts 23 and 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts, and/or concession contracts. The sponsor’s DBE and ACDBE programs, as required by 49 CFR Parts 26 and 23, and as approved by DOT, are incorporated by reference in this agreement. Implementation of these programs is a legal obligation and failure to carry out its terms shall be treated as a violation of this agreement. Upon notification to the sponsor of its failure to carry out its approved program, the Department may impose sanctions as provided for under Parts 26 and 23 and may, in appropriate cases, refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 and/or the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1936 (31 U.S.C. 3801). Hangar Construction. 38. If the airport owner or operator and a person who owns an aircraft agree that a hangar is to be constructed at the airport for the aircraft at the aircraft owner’s expense, the airport owner or operator will grant to the aircraft owner for the hangar a long term lease that is subject to such terms and conditions on the hangar as the airport owner or operator may impose. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 20 of 20 Competitive Access. 39. a. If the airport owner or operator of a medium or large hub airport (as defined in section 47102 of title 49, U.S.C.) has been unable to accommodate one or more requests by an air carrier for access to gates or other facilities at that airport in order to allow the air carrier to provide service to the airport or to expand service at the airport, the airport owner or operator shall transmit a report to the Secretary that- Describes the requests; 1) Provides an explanation as to why the requests could not be accommodated; 2) and Provides a time frame within which, if any, the airport will be able to 3) accommodate the requests. b. Such report shall be due on either February 1 or August 1 of each year if the airport has been unable to accommodate the request(s) in the six month period prior to the applicable due date. 6 4 2 8 10 12 14 16 18 5 3 1 6 4 2 11 9 7 13 8 10 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 5 3 1 11 9 7 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 F K L M J H N P Q R S T U U Y Y Y Y K Y Y 4 6 8 7 9 13 2 1 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 3 5 11 15 17 19 21 2 4 1 3 6 5 8 7 10 9 12 11 14 13 15 G H J K 23 24 Y3 Y2 Y1 V W YYYYY X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X TERMINAL BUILDING CIVIL AIR PATROL BUILDING PROPOSED RUN-UP AREA FB O HA N G A R HA N G A R HAN G A R HA N G A R HA N G A R HA N G A R HA N G A R FB O HA N G A R FB O HA N G A R RUNWAY 13-31 TAXIWAY Z TW B TW A EM B A R C A D E R O R O A D FBO FB O HA N G A R PHASE I & III BASE BID BASE BID/ ALT 3 ALT 1/4 ALT 1 ALT 2/5 ALT 2/5 ALT 1/4 PHASE II PHASE I PHASE III BASE BID/ ALT 3 33190 SY 21410 SY 32307 SY 24065 SY 22315 SY 34895 SY 29150 SY 14730 SY FULL PAVEMENT SECTION CONSTRUCTED IN PHASE I. TIE DOWNS, STRIPING AND LIGHTING TO BE INSTALLED WITH PHASE III The preparation of this document may have been supported, in part, through the Airport Improvement Program financial assistance from the Federal Aviation Administration (Project Number Unassigned) as provided under Title 49 U.S.C., Section 47104. The contents do not in any way constitute a commitment on the part of the United States to participate in any development depicted therein nor does it indicate that the proposed development is environmentally acceptable or would have justification in accordance with appropriate public laws. PALO ALTO AIRPORT PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA 8950 Cal Center Drive, Suite 112 Sacramento, CA 95826 Phone: 916-364-1470 www.cscos.com C&S Engineers, Inc. 4321 C B A 4321 A B C NO.REVISION SPONSOR DATE APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT OF DATE: SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN: CHECK: 1 AUGUST 2017 200FT.1000100 100'#5%#.' 18'4#..2*#5+0)2.#0 2*#5'+Ä%105647%6'&+0 2*#5'++Ä17661$+& #06+%+2#6'&(;(70&+0) 2*#5'+++Ä%744'06.;241)4#//'&(14(;(70&+0) .')'0& OVERALL PHASING PLAN PH-1 5; 5; 5; 4GHGTUVQ(GFGTCN(WPFKPI;GCTU PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II 5225 Hellyer Avenue, #220 FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 001 P-151 CLEARING AND GRUBBING 0.2 ACRE $5,000.00 $1,000.00 $100,000.00 $20,000.00 $100,000.00 $20,000.00 002 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1.0 LS $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 003 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 34,000 SY $2.00 $68,000.00 $2.50 $85,000.00 $1.20 $40,800.00 004 P-608 EMULSIFIED ASPHALT SEAL COAT 2,750 SY $11.00 $30,250.00 $8.00 $22,000.00 $10.00 $27,500.00 005 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $431,000.00 $431,000.00 006 P-620 MARKING REMOVAL 400 SF $10.00 $4,000.00 $25.00 $10,000.00 $37.50 $15,000.00 007 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED)4,200 SF $5.00 $21,000.00 $10.00 $42,000.00 $12.00 $50,400.00 008 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (WHITE, REFLECTORIZED)2,200 SF $5.00 $11,000.00 $10.00 $22,000.00 $12.00 $26,400.00 009 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (GREEN, NON-REFLECTORIZED)11,100 SF $5.00 $55,500.00 $7.00 $77,700.00 $5.00 $55,500.00 010 P-620 SURFACE PAINTED TAXILANE MARKINGS 11 EACH $700.00 $7,700.00 $2,000.00 $22,000.00 $2,475.00 $27,225.00 011 P-620 TIE-DOWN NUMBERING 56 EACH $50.00 $2,800.00 $100.00 $5,600.00 $112.00 $6,272.00 012 D-701 15" HDPE STORM DRAIN 225 LF $150.00 $33,750.00 $120.00 $27,000.00 $200.00 $45,000.00 013 D-751 ADJUST CATCH BASIN TO GRADE 7 EACH $4,000.00 $28,000.00 $2,000.00 $14,000.00 $4,000.00 $28,000.00 014 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 7 EACH $2,500.00 $17,500.00 $2,000.00 $14,000.00 $2,000.00 $14,000.00 015 D-751 48" MANHOLE 4 EACH $8,000.00 $32,000.00 $7,000.00 $28,000.00 $7,500.00 $30,000.00 016 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)1 EACH $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 017 SP-3 VERTICAL FLOW CLARIFIER 1 EACH $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $143,000.00 $143,000.00 018 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 8 EACH $15,000.00 $120,000.00 $10,000.00 $80,000.00 $2,500.00 $20,000.00 019 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 100 LF $80.00 $8,000.00 $100.00 $10,000.00 $120.00 $12,000.00 020 SP-11 BOLLARD 2 EACH $800.00 $1,600.00 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 021 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 2,300 LF $15.00 $34,500.00 $8.00 $18,400.00 $8.00 $18,400.00 022 SP-14 ADJUST UTILITY VAULT TO GRADE 2 EACH $4,000.00 $8,000.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 023 SP-15 ADJUST JUNCTION BOX/HANDHOLE TO GRADE 6 EACH $3,000.00 $18,000.00 $5,000.00 $30,000.00 $1,300.00 $7,800.00 024 SP-16 REMOVE EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 207 EACH $250.00 $51,750.00 $100.00 $20,700.00 $75.00 $15,525.00 025 SP-17 MILLING 4,900 SY $20.00 $98,000.00 $10.00 $49,000.00 $8.00 $39,200.00 026 SP-23 POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY AND APPURTENANCES 1 EACH $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 027 SP-24 6" SEWERLINE 470 LF $150.00 $70,500.00 $100.00 $47,000.00 $185.00 $86,950.00 028 SP-25 SEWER CLEAN OUT 1 EACH $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $800.00 $800.00 $1,900.00 $1,900.00 029 SP-26 10" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 1,600 LF $300.00 $480,000.00 $115.00 $184,000.00 $190.00 $304,000.00 030 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 130 LF $250.00 $32,500.00 $100.00 $13,000.00 $225.00 $29,250.00 031 SP-27 10" GATE VALVE 4 EACH $5,500.00 $22,000.00 $4,000.00 $16,000.00 $5,500.00 $22,000.00 032 SP-27 6" GATE VALVE 1 EACH $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 033 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT & APPURTENANCES 1 EACH $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 034 SP-29 DOUBLE DETECTOR CHECK VALVE 1 EACH $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $31,000.00 $31,000.00 035 T-906 HYDRO-SEEDING 500 SY $2.00 $1,000.00 $4.00 $2,000.00 $8.00 $4,000.00 036 L-100 REMOVAL OF EXISTING LIGHT POLE ASSEMBLY (POLE, FIXTURE, PULL BOXES AND FOUNDATION)5 EACH $6,000.00 $30,000.00 $8,000.00 $40,000.00 $7,000.00 $35,000.00 037 L-100 NEW 30-FOOT APRON AREA LIGHT POLE WITH MOUNTING APPARATUS AND MAINTENANCE HINGES 4 EACH $25,000.00 $100,000.00 $25,000.00 $100,000.00 $75,000.00 $300,000.00 038 L-100 NEW LED APRON AREA LIGHTING FIXTURE 8 EACH $7,000.00 $56,000.00 $10,000.00 $80,000.00 $8,000.00 $64,000.00 039 L-100 NEW LED OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE (DOUBLE-HEAD)4 EACH $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 040 L-100 TRANSFORMER AND ENCLOSURE FOR OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE 4 EACH $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 041 L-100 1" RIGID GALVANIZED STEEL CONDUIT 20 LF $150.00 $3,000.00 $150.00 $3,000.00 $125.00 $2,500.00 042 L-100 NO. 6 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 4,000 LF $4.00 $16,000.00 $5.00 $20,000.00 $4.25 $17,000.00 043 L-100 NO. 8 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 1,300 LF $2.50 $3,250.00 $5.00 $6,500.00 $3.00 $3,900.00 044 L-108 NO. 6 AWG, BARE COUNTERPOISE WIRE 13,000 LF $4.00 $52,000.00 $5.00 $65,000.00 $4.25 $55,250.00 045 L-110 2" CONCRETE-ENCASED SCHEDULE-40 PVC CONDUIT IN PAVEMENT 340 LF $40.00 $13,600.00 $40.00 $13,600.00 $35.00 $11,900.00 046 L-110 1" PVC CONCRETE ENCASED CONDUIT 650 LF $6.00 $3,900.00 $40.00 $26,000.00 $6.00 $3,900.00 047 L-110 2-2" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 380 LF $60.00 $22,800.00 $100.00 $38,000.00 $90.00 $34,200.00 048 L-110 4-4" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 150 LF $120.00 $18,000.00 $200.00 $30,000.00 $145.00 $21,750.00 049 L-100 36"X36" PULL BOX 9 EACH $7,000.00 $63,000.00 $15,000.00 $135,000.00 $13,000.00 $117,000.00 050 L-100 36"X60" PULL BOX 2 EACH $8,000.00 $16,000.00 $15,000.00 $30,000.00 $13,000.00 $26,000.00 051 L-100 36"X72" PULL BOX 1 EACH $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 052 L-100 48"X48" PULL BOX 1 EACH $11,000.00 $11,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 053 L-110 2-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 510 LF $70.00 $35,700.00 $200.00 $102,000.00 $185.00 $94,350.00 054 L-110 3-4" 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 490 LF $80.00 $39,200.00 $250.00 $122,500.00 $225.00 $110,250.00 BASE BID ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL ENGINEERS OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST San Jose, CA 95138 C&S Engineers, Inc. 8950 Cal Center Drive, #102 Sacramento, CA 95826 Granite Rock CompanyDeSilva Gates Construction LP 11555 Dublin Blvd. Dublin, CA 94568 Page 1 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II 5225 Hellyer Avenue, #220 FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL ENGINEERS OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST San Jose, CA 95138 C&S Engineers, Inc. 8950 Cal Center Drive, #102 Sacramento, CA 95826 Granite Rock CompanyDeSilva Gates Construction LP 11555 Dublin Blvd. Dublin, CA 94568 055 L-110 4-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 150 LF $90.00 $13,500.00 $250.00 $37,500.00 $235.00 $35,250.00 056 L-110 8-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 210 LF $150.00 $31,500.00 $400.00 $84,000.00 $345.00 $72,450.00 057 L-110 2-5" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED CONDUIT ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 190 LF $80.00 $15,200.00 $250.00 $47,500.00 $195.00 $37,050.00 058 L-110 3-5" PVC CONDUIT DUCT BANK 150 LF $100.00 $15,000.00 $250.00 $37,500.00 $215.00 $32,250.00 059 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, H20 TRAFFIC RATED 5 EACH $6,000.00 $30,000.00 $8,000.00 $40,000.00 $6,500.00 $32,500.00 060 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, AIRCRAFT-RATED, 36" BY 36" BY 30"3 EACH $13,000.00 $39,000.00 $15,000.00 $45,000.00 $15,000.00 $45,000.00 061 L-115 ELECTRICAL MANHOLE 1 EACH $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 062 L-125 TAXIWAY EDGE LIGHTING BASE CAN 10 EACH $3,500.00 $35,000.00 $2,500.00 $25,000.00 $2,200.00 $22,000.00 063 L-126 INSTALL TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 168 EACH $900.00 $151,200.00 $1,000.00 $168,000.00 $1,100.00 $184,800.00 064 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 065 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 066 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 067 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $173,247.00 $173,247.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $210,000.00 $210,000.00 $3,058,447.00 $2,693,300.00 $3,818,922.00 068 P-151 CLEARING AND GRUBBING 0.3 ACRE $5,000.00 $1,250.00 $100,000.00 $30,000.00 $100,000.00 $30,000.00 069 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 26,550 SY $2.00 $53,100.00 $2.50 $66,375.00 $1.20 $31,860.00 070 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1 LS $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 071 T-906 HYDRO-SEEDING 650 SY $2.00 $1,300.00 $4.00 $2,600.00 $8.00 $5,200.00 072 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 073 P-620 MARKING REMOVAL 120 SF $10.00 $1,200.00 $25.00 $3,000.00 $37.50 $4,500.00 074 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED)3,100 SF $5.00 $15,500.00 $10.00 $31,000.00 $8.00 $24,800.00 075 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (WHITE, REFLECTORIZED)2,350 SF $5.00 $11,750.00 $10.00 $23,500.00 $12.00 $28,200.00 076 P-620 SURFACE PAINTED TAXILANE MARKINGS 7 EACH $700.00 $4,900.00 $2,000.00 $14,000.00 $2,475.00 $17,325.00 077 P-620 TIE-DOWN NUMBERING 44 EACH $50.00 $2,200.00 $100.00 $4,400.00 $112.00 $4,928.00 078 D-701 15" HDPE STORM DRAIN 425 LF $150.00 $63,750.00 $120.00 $51,000.00 $235.00 $99,875.00 079 D-751 ADJUST CATCH BASIN TO GRADE 4 EACH $4,000.00 $16,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $3,000.00 $12,000.00 080 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)2 EACH $6,000.00 $12,000.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $6,000.00 $12,000.00 081 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 4 EACH $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 082 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 4 EACH $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $10,000.00 $40,000.00 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 083 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 125 LF $80.00 $10,000.00 $100.00 $12,500.00 $120.00 $15,000.00 084 SP-16 REMOVE EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 208 EACH $250.00 $52,000.00 $100.00 $20,800.00 $75.00 $15,600.00 085 SP-17 MILLING 4,650 SY $20.00 $93,000.00 $10.00 $46,500.00 $8.00 $37,200.00 086 SP-26 10" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 575 LF $300.00 $172,500.00 $115.00 $66,125.00 $190.00 $109,250.00 087 SP-27 10" GATE VALVE 1 EACH $5,500.00 $5,500.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $5,500.00 $5,500.00 088 SP-33 ABANDON EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 5 EACH $100.00 $500.00 $300.00 $1,500.00 $75.00 $375.00 089 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 975 LF $15.00 $14,625.00 $8.00 $7,800.00 $8.00 $7,800.00 090 SP-14 ADJUST UTILITY VAULT TO GRADE 3 EACH $4,000.00 $12,000.00 $5,000.00 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 $15,000.00 091 SP-15 ADJUST JUNCTION BOX/HANDHOLE TO GRADE 7 EACH $3,000.00 $21,000.00 $4,000.00 $28,000.00 $1,300.00 $9,100.00 092 L-100 REMOVAL OF EXISTING LIGHT POLE ASSEMBLY (POLE, FIXTURE, PULL BOXES AND FOUNDATION)11 EACH $6,000.00 $66,000.00 $8,000.00 $88,000.00 $7,000.00 $77,000.00 093 L-100 NEW 30-FOOT APRON AREA LIGHT POLE WITH MOUNTING APPARATUS AND MAINTENANCE HINGES 4 EACH $25,000.00 $100,000.00 $30,000.00 $120,000.00 $50,000.00 $200,000.00 094 L-100 NEW LED APRON AREA LIGHTING FIXTURE 7 EACH $7,000.00 $49,000.00 $10,000.00 $70,000.00 $8,000.00 $56,000.00 095 L-100 NEW LED OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE (DOUBLE-HEAD)4 EACH $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 096 L-100 TRANSFORMER AND ENCLOSURE FOR OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE 4 EACH $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 097 L-100 1" RIGID GALVANIZED STEEL CONDUIT 20 LF $150.00 $3,000.00 $150.00 $3,000.00 $125.00 $2,500.00 098 L-100 2" CONCRETE-ENCASED SCHEDULE-40 PVC CONDUIT IN PAVEMENT 1,100 LF $40.00 $44,000.00 $40.00 $44,000.00 $35.00 $38,500.00 099 L-100 NO. 6 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 5,000 LF $4.00 $20,000.00 $5.00 $25,000.00 $4.25 $21,250.00 100 L-100 NO. 8 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 1,600 LF $2.50 $4,000.00 $5.00 $8,000.00 $3.00 $4,800.00 101 L-100 36"X36" PULL BOX 11 EACH $7,000.00 $77,000.00 $15,000.00 $165,000.00 $15,000.00 $165,000.00 102 L-100 36"X60" PULL BOX 2 EACH $8,000.00 $16,000.00 $15,000.00 $30,000.00 $15,000.00 $30,000.00 103 L-100 36"X72" PULL BOX 1 EACH $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 104 L-100 48"X48" PULL BOX 1 EACH $11,000.00 $11,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 105 L-108 NO. 6 AWG, BARE COUNTERPOISE WIRE 1,100 LF $4.00 $4,400.00 $5.00 $5,500.00 $2.00 $2,200.00 106 L-110 '1" PVC CONCRETE ENCASED CONDUIT 1,100 LF $6.00 $6,600.00 $40.00 $44,000.00 $6.00 $6,600.00 107 L-110 2-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 700 LF $70.00 $49,000.00 $200.00 $140,000.00 $200.00 $140,000.00 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #1 SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE BASE BID (ITEMS 001 THROUGH 067) Page 2 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II 5225 Hellyer Avenue, #220 FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL ENGINEERS OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST San Jose, CA 95138 C&S Engineers, Inc. 8950 Cal Center Drive, #102 Sacramento, CA 95826 Granite Rock CompanyDeSilva Gates Construction LP 11555 Dublin Blvd. Dublin, CA 94568 108 L-110 3-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 450 LF $80.00 $36,000.00 $250.00 $112,500.00 $225.00 $101,250.00 109 L-110 4-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 320 LF $90.00 $28,800.00 $250.00 $80,000.00 $235.00 $75,200.00 110 L-110 6-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 115 LF $120.00 $13,800.00 $350.00 $40,250.00 $315.00 $36,225.00 111 L-110 10-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 270 LF $200.00 $54,000.00 $400.00 $108,000.00 $385.00 $103,950.00 112 L-110 15-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 270 LF $250.00 $67,500.00 $550.00 $148,500.00 $525.00 $141,750.00 113 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, H20 TRAFFIC RATED 5 EACH $6,000.00 $30,000.00 $8,000.00 $40,000.00 $6,500.00 $32,500.00 114 L-126 INSTALL TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 144 EACH $900.00 $129,600.00 $1,000.00 $144,000.00 $1,100.00 $158,400.00 115 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 116 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $44,000.00 $44,000.00 117 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $12,900.00 $12,900.00 118 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $115,066.50 $115,066.50 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $2,032,841.50 $2,175,850.00 $2,210,538.00 119 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 7,900 SY $2.00 $15,800.00 $2.50 $19,750.00 $1.00 $7,900.00 * 120 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 * 121 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 * 122 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED)850 SF $5.00 $4,250.00 $10.00 $8,500.00 $8.00 $6,800.00 * 123 D-701 8" HDPE STORM DRAIN 310 LF $100.00 $31,000.00 $125.00 $38,750.00 $270.00 $83,700.00 124 D-701 12" HDPE STORM DRAIN 210 LF $150.00 $31,500.00 $125.00 $26,250.00 $240.00 $50,400.00 125 D-701 21" HDPE STORM DRAIN 420 LF $200.00 $84,000.00 $150.00 $63,000.00 $225.00 $94,500.00 126 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)9 EACH $6,000.00 $54,000.00 $5,000.00 $45,000.00 $6,000.00 $54,000.00 127 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 1 EACH $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $1,600.00 $1,600.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 128 D-751 48" MANHOLE 4 EACH $8,000.00 $32,000.00 $7,000.00 $28,000.00 $7,000.00 $28,000.00 129 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 9 EACH $3,000.00 $27,000.00 $10,000.00 $90,000.00 $2,500.00 $22,500.00 130 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 2300 LF $80.00 $184,000.00 $50.00 $115,000.00 $62.00 $142,600.00 131 SP-10 TRENCH DRAIN 2,230 LF $50.00 $111,500.00 $160.00 $356,800.00 $95.00 $211,850.00 132 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 60 LF $15.00 $900.00 $8.00 $480.00 $50.00 $3,000.00 133 SP-24 6" SEWERLINE 560 LF $150.00 $84,000.00 $125.00 $70,000.00 $200.00 $112,000.00 134 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 135 U-201 STORM DRAIN REMOVAL 1 LS $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 136 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 137 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 138 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $57,747.00 $57,747.00 $60,967.80 $60,967.80 *$30,000.00 $30,000.00 $1,020,197.00 $1,077,097.80 *$1,016,750.00 139 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 2,600 CY $50.00 $130,000.00 $50.00 $130,000.00 $95.00 $247,000.00 140 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)34,000 SY $18.00 $612,000.00 $5.50 $187,000.00 $4.00 $136,000.00 141 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)730 TON $150.00 $109,500.00 $175.00 $127,750.00 $165.00 $120,450.00 142 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)35,000 SY $30.00 $1,050,000.00 $20.00 $700,000.00 $18.00 $630,000.00 143 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 6,700 TON $200.00 $1,340,000.00 $130.00 $871,000.00 $95.00 $636,500.00 144 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 47 TON $1,500.00 $70,500.00 $1,000.00 $47,000.00 $500.00 $23,500.00 145 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $198,720.00 $198,720.00 $123,765.00 $123,765.00 *$50,000.00 $50,000.00 $3,510,720.00 $2,186,515.00 *$1,843,450.00 146 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 850 CY $50.00 $42,500.00 $50.00 $42,500.00 $145.00 $123,250.00 147 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)26,550 SY $18.00 $477,900.00 $5.50 $146,025.00 $4.00 $106,200.00 148 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)570 TON $150.00 $85,500.00 $175.00 $99,750.00 $165.00 $94,050.00 149 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)26,550 SY $30.00 $796,500.00 $20.00 $531,000.00 $18.00 $477,900.00 150 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 5,300 TON $200.00 $1,060,000.00 $130.00 $689,000.00 $95.00 $503,500.00 151 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 35 TON $1,500.00 $52,500.00 $1,000.00 $35,000.00 $500.00 $17,500.00 152 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $150,894.00 $150,894.00 $92,596.50 $92,596.50 *$40,000.00 $40,000.00 $2,665,794.00 $1,635,871.50 *$1,362,400.00 153 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 1,900 CY $50.00 $95,000.00 $50.00 $95,000.00 $64.00 $121,600.00 154 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)8,100 SY $18.00 $145,800.00 $5.50 $44,550.00 $4.00 $32,400.00 155 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)180 TON $150.00 $27,000.00 $175.00 $31,500.00 $165.00 $29,700.00 156 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)8,100 SY $30.00 $243,000.00 $20.00 $162,000.00 $20.50 $166,050.00 157 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 1,600 TON $200.00 $320,000.00 $130.00 $208,000.00 $95.00 $152,000.00 158 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 10 TON $1,500.00 $15,000.00 $1,000.00 $10,000.00 $500.00 $5,000.00 159 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $50,748.00 $50,748.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $896,548.00 $581,050.00 $521,750.00 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #5 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #4 ADDITIVE BID ALTRENATE #3 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #2 SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 1 (ITEMS 068 THROUGH 118) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 5 (ITEMS 153 THROUGH 159) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 4 (ITEMS 146 THROUGH 152) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 3 (ITEMS 139 THROUGH 145) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 2 (ITEMS 119 THROUGH 138) Page 3 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II 5225 Hellyer Avenue, #220 FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL ENGINEERS OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST San Jose, CA 95138 C&S Engineers, Inc. 8950 Cal Center Drive, #102 Sacramento, CA 95826 Granite Rock CompanyDeSilva Gates Construction LP 11555 Dublin Blvd. Dublin, CA 94568 160 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 2,600 CY $50.00 $130,000.00 $50.00 $130,000.00 $93.00 $241,800.00 161 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)34,000 SY $6.00 $204,000.00 $6.00 $204,000.00 $4.00 $136,000.00 162 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)1,000 TON $100.00 $100,000.00 $175.00 $175,000.00 $165.00 $165,000.00 163 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)35,000 SY $20.00 $700,000.00 $20.00 $700,000.00 $18.25 $638,750.00 164 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 6,700 TON $200.00 $1,340,000.00 $130.00 $871,000.00 $95.00 $636,500.00 165 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 47 TON $1,500.00 $70,500.00 $1,000.00 $47,000.00 $500.00 $23,500.00 166 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $152,670.00 $152,670.00 $127,620.00 $127,620.00 *$55,000.00 $55,000.00 $2,697,170.00 $2,254,620.00 *$1,896,550.00 167 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 850 CY $45.00 $38,250.00 $50.00 $42,500.00 $140.00 $119,000.00 168 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)26,550 SY $6.00 $159,300.00 $6.00 $159,300.00 $4.00 $106,200.00 169 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)900 TON $100.00 $90,000.00 $175.00 $157,500.00 $165.00 $148,500.00 170 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)26,550 SY $20.00 $531,000.00 $20.00 $531,000.00 $18.00 $477,900.00 171 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 5,300 TON $150.00 $795,000.00 $130.00 $689,000.00 $95.00 $503,500.00 172 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 35 TON $1,500.00 $52,500.00 $1,000.00 $35,000.00 $500.00 $17,500.00 173 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $99,963.00 $99,963.00 $96,858.00 $96,858.00 *$40,000.00 $40,000.00 $1,766,013.00 $1,711,158.00 *$1,412,600.00 174 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 1,900 CY $45.00 85,500.00$$50.00 $95,000.00 $64.00 $121,600.00 175 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)8,100 SY $6.00 48,600.00$$6.00 $48,600.00 $4.00 $32,400.00 176 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)240 TON $100.00 24,000.00$$175.00 $42,000.00 $165.00 $39,600.00 177 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)8,100 SY $20.00 162,000.00$$20.00 $162,000.00 $19.00 $153,900.00 178 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 1,600 TON $150.00 240,000.00$$130.00 $208,000.00 $95.00 $152,000.00 179 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 10 TON $1,500.00 15,000.00$$1,000.00 $10,000.00 $500.00 $5,000.00 180 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $34,506.00 34,506.00$$30,000.00 $30,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 609,606.00$$595,600.00 $519,500.00 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #9 181 SP-31 54" OUTFALL PIPE JOINT REPAIR 35 EACH $5,000.00 175,000.00$$8,000.00 $280,000.00 $22,800.00 $798,000.00 182 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 225 LF $250.00 56,250.00$$100.00 $22,500.00 $265.00 $59,625.00 183 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT & APPERTENANCES 2 EACH $10,000.00 20,000.00$$7,500.00 $15,000.00 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 184 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $15,075.00 15,075.00$$19,050.00 $19,050.00 *$20,000.00 $20,000.00 266,325.00$$336,550.00 *$897,625.00 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #10 185 SP-31 54" OUTFALL PIPE JOINT REPAIR 20 EACH $5,000.00 100,000.00$$8,000.00 $160,000.00 $22,800.00 $456,000.00 186 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 35 LF $250.00 8,750.00$$100.00 $3,500.00 $250.00 $8,750.00 187 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT 1 EACH $10,000.00 10,000.00$$7,500.00 $7,500.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 188 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $7,125.00 7,125.00$$10,000.00 $10,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 125,875.00$$181,000.00 $486,750.00 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #7 ADDITIVE BID ALTRENATE #8 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #6 SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 6 (ITEMS 160 THROUGH 166) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 7 (ITEMS 167 THROUGH 173) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 8 (ITEMS 174 THROUGH 180) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 9 (ITEMS 181 THROUGH 184) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 10 (ITEMS 185 THROUGH 188) *DENOTES MATH ERROR. CORRECTED AMOUNT SHOWN.* Math error - Mobilization higher than 6% on Additive Bid Alternates 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 9 * Mobilization error changed Alternates 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 9 Bid Totals (corrected amounts for Mobilization and Alternate Totals shown on bid tab) Page 4 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 001 P-151 CLEARING AND GRUBBING 0.2 ACRE 002 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1.0 LS 003 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 34,000 SY 004 P-608 EMULSIFIED ASPHALT SEAL COAT 2,750 SY 005 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS 006 P-620 MARKING REMOVAL 400 SF 007 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED)4,200 SF 008 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (WHITE, REFLECTORIZED)2,200 SF 009 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (GREEN, NON-REFLECTORIZED)11,100 SF 010 P-620 SURFACE PAINTED TAXILANE MARKINGS 11 EACH 011 P-620 TIE-DOWN NUMBERING 56 EACH 012 D-701 15" HDPE STORM DRAIN 225 LF 013 D-751 ADJUST CATCH BASIN TO GRADE 7 EACH 014 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 7 EACH 015 D-751 48" MANHOLE 4 EACH 016 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)1 EACH 017 SP-3 VERTICAL FLOW CLARIFIER 1 EACH 018 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 8 EACH 019 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 100 LF 020 SP-11 BOLLARD 2 EACH 021 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 2,300 LF 022 SP-14 ADJUST UTILITY VAULT TO GRADE 2 EACH 023 SP-15 ADJUST JUNCTION BOX/HANDHOLE TO GRADE 6 EACH 024 SP-16 REMOVE EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 207 EACH 025 SP-17 MILLING 4,900 SY 026 SP-23 POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY AND APPURTENANCES 1 EACH 027 SP-24 6" SEWERLINE 470 LF 028 SP-25 SEWER CLEAN OUT 1 EACH 029 SP-26 10" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 1,600 LF 030 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 130 LF 031 SP-27 10" GATE VALVE 4 EACH 032 SP-27 6" GATE VALVE 1 EACH 033 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT & APPURTENANCES 1 EACH 034 SP-29 DOUBLE DETECTOR CHECK VALVE 1 EACH 035 T-906 HYDRO-SEEDING 500 SY 036 L-100 REMOVAL OF EXISTING LIGHT POLE ASSEMBLY (POLE, FIXTURE, PULL BOXES AND FOUNDATION)5 EACH 037 L-100 NEW 30-FOOT APRON AREA LIGHT POLE WITH MOUNTING APPARATUS AND MAINTENANCE HINGES 4 EACH 038 L-100 NEW LED APRON AREA LIGHTING FIXTURE 8 EACH 039 L-100 NEW LED OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE (DOUBLE-HEAD)4 EACH 040 L-100 TRANSFORMER AND ENCLOSURE FOR OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE 4 EACH 041 L-100 1" RIGID GALVANIZED STEEL CONDUIT 20 LF 042 L-100 NO. 6 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 4,000 LF 043 L-100 NO. 8 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 1,300 LF 044 L-108 NO. 6 AWG, BARE COUNTERPOISE WIRE 13,000 LF 045 L-110 2" CONCRETE-ENCASED SCHEDULE-40 PVC CONDUIT IN PAVEMENT 340 LF 046 L-110 1" PVC CONCRETE ENCASED CONDUIT 650 LF 047 L-110 2-2" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 380 LF 048 L-110 4-4" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 150 LF 049 L-100 36"X36" PULL BOX 9 EACH 050 L-100 36"X60" PULL BOX 2 EACH 051 L-100 36"X72" PULL BOX 1 EACH 052 L-100 48"X48" PULL BOX 1 EACH 053 L-110 2-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 510 LF 054 L-110 3-4" 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 490 LF BASE BID ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS 246 Ghilotti Avenue 225 3rd Street $25,000.00 $5,000.00 $235,000.00 $47,000.00 $42,500.00 $8,500.00 $78,000.00 $78,000.00 $125,000.00 $125,000.00 $32,400.00 $32,400.00 $2.00 $68,000.00 $3.00 $102,000.00 $10.50 $357,000.00 $7.50 $20,625.00 $3.00 $8,250.00 $40.60 $111,650.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $39,800.00 $39,800.00 $30.00 $12,000.00 $6.00 $2,400.00 $4.00 $1,600.00 $11.00 $46,200.00 $20.00 $84,000.00 $9.75 $40,950.00 $11.00 $24,200.00 $20.00 $44,000.00 $9.75 $21,450.00 $8.00 $88,800.00 $15.00 $166,500.00 $9.75 $108,225.00 $525.00 $5,775.00 $4,200.00 $46,200.00 $776.00 $8,536.00 $100.00 $5,600.00 $185.00 $10,360.00 $194.00 $10,864.00 $250.00 $56,250.00 $160.00 $36,000.00 $700.00 $157,500.00 $4,500.00 $31,500.00 $1,800.00 $12,600.00 $1,200.00 $8,400.00 $1,500.00 $10,500.00 $1,800.00 $12,600.00 $1,400.00 $9,800.00 $15,000.00 $60,000.00 $10,000.00 $40,000.00 $30,046.00 $120,184.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $5,600.00 $5,600.00 $16,024.00 $16,024.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 $339,500.00 $339,500.00 $6,400.00 $51,200.00 $12,000.00 $96,000.00 $6,578.00 $52,624.00 $50.00 $5,000.00 $68.00 $6,800.00 $150.00 $15,000.00 $1,100.00 $2,200.00 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $1,586.00 $3,172.00 $8.00 $18,400.00 $6.00 $13,800.00 $23.80 $54,740.00 $4,500.00 $9,000.00 $6,000.00 $12,000.00 $7,575.00 $15,150.00 $850.00 $5,100.00 $6,000.00 $36,000.00 $3,787.00 $22,722.00 $100.00 $20,700.00 $250.00 $51,750.00 $203.00 $42,021.00 $6.00 $29,400.00 $4.00 $19,600.00 $3.00 $14,700.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $66,137.00 $66,137.00 $275.00 $129,250.00 $185.00 $86,950.00 $701.00 $329,470.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,600.00 $1,600.00 $1,002.00 $1,002.00 $175.00 $280,000.00 $260.00 $416,000.00 $401.00 $641,600.00 $150.00 $19,500.00 $175.00 $22,750.00 $300.00 $39,000.00 $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $4,000.00 $16,000.00 $6,009.00 $24,036.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,004.00 $3,004.00 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $11,000.00 $11,000.00 $40,062.00 $40,062.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $30,046.00 $30,046.00 $3.00 $1,500.00 $3.00 $1,500.00 $16.00 $8,000.00 $7,000.00 $35,000.00 $7,000.00 $35,000.00 $5,215.00 $26,075.00 $50,000.00 $200,000.00 $30,000.00 $120,000.00 $22,156.00 $88,624.00 $8,000.00 $64,000.00 $10,000.00 $80,000.00 $36,300.00 $290,400.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $5,532.00 $22,128.00 $800.00 $3,200.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $9,953.00 $39,812.00 $120.00 $2,400.00 $140.00 $2,800.00 $43.00 $860.00 $4.25 $17,000.00 $0.45 $1,800.00 $5.90 $23,600.00 $4.00 $5,200.00 $4.25 $5,525.00 $6.40 $8,320.00 $4.25 $55,250.00 $4.50 $58,500.00 $6.20 $80,600.00 $35.00 $11,900.00 $42.00 $14,280.00 $44.00 $14,960.00 $30.00 $19,500.00 $35.00 $22,750.00 $44.00 $28,600.00 $90.00 $34,200.00 $105.00 $39,900.00 $88.00 $33,440.00 $145.00 $21,750.00 $200.00 $30,000.00 $175.00 $26,250.00 $13,000.00 $117,000.00 $16,000.00 $144,000.00 $45,356.00 $408,204.00 $13,000.00 $26,000.00 $16,000.00 $32,000.00 $46,500.00 $93,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $46,347.00 $46,347.00 $185.00 $94,350.00 $215.00 $109,650.00 $357.00 $182,070.00 $225.00 $110,250.00 $275.00 $134,750.00 $402.00 $196,980.00 Oakland, CA 94607 TOTAL dba Teichert Construction 5200 Franklin Drive Suite 115 Pleasanton, CA 94588 A. Teichert & Son, Inc. UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc.Proven Management, Inc. UNIT PRICE Page 5 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS 055 L-110 4-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 150 LF 056 L-110 8-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 210 LF 057 L-110 2-5" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED CONDUIT ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 190 LF 058 L-110 3-5" PVC CONDUIT DUCT BANK 150 LF 059 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, H20 TRAFFIC RATED 5 EACH 060 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, AIRCRAFT-RATED, 36" BY 36" BY 30"3 EACH 061 L-115 ELECTRICAL MANHOLE 1 EACH 062 L-125 TAXIWAY EDGE LIGHTING BASE CAN 10 EACH 063 L-126 INSTALL TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 168 EACH 064 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS 065 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS 066 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS 067 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 068 P-151 CLEARING AND GRUBBING 0.3 ACRE 069 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 26,550 SY 070 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1 LS 071 T-906 HYDRO-SEEDING 650 SY 072 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS 073 P-620 MARKING REMOVAL 120 SF 074 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED)3,100 SF 075 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (WHITE, REFLECTORIZED)2,350 SF 076 P-620 SURFACE PAINTED TAXILANE MARKINGS 7 EACH 077 P-620 TIE-DOWN NUMBERING 44 EACH 078 D-701 15" HDPE STORM DRAIN 425 LF 079 D-751 ADJUST CATCH BASIN TO GRADE 4 EACH 080 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)2 EACH 081 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 4 EACH 082 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 4 EACH 083 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 125 LF 084 SP-16 REMOVE EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 208 EACH 085 SP-17 MILLING 4,650 SY 086 SP-26 10" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 575 LF 087 SP-27 10" GATE VALVE 1 EACH 088 SP-33 ABANDON EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 5 EACH 089 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 975 LF 090 SP-14 ADJUST UTILITY VAULT TO GRADE 3 EACH 091 SP-15 ADJUST JUNCTION BOX/HANDHOLE TO GRADE 7 EACH 092 L-100 REMOVAL OF EXISTING LIGHT POLE ASSEMBLY (POLE, FIXTURE, PULL BOXES AND FOUNDATION)11 EACH 093 L-100 NEW 30-FOOT APRON AREA LIGHT POLE WITH MOUNTING APPARATUS AND MAINTENANCE HINGES 4 EACH 094 L-100 NEW LED APRON AREA LIGHTING FIXTURE 7 EACH 095 L-100 NEW LED OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE (DOUBLE-HEAD)4 EACH 096 L-100 TRANSFORMER AND ENCLOSURE FOR OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE 4 EACH 097 L-100 1" RIGID GALVANIZED STEEL CONDUIT 20 LF 098 L-100 2" CONCRETE-ENCASED SCHEDULE-40 PVC CONDUIT IN PAVEMENT 1,100 LF 099 L-100 NO. 6 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 5,000 LF 100 L-100 NO. 8 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 1,600 LF 101 L-100 36"X36" PULL BOX 11 EACH 102 L-100 36"X60" PULL BOX 2 EACH 103 L-100 36"X72" PULL BOX 1 EACH 104 L-100 48"X48" PULL BOX 1 EACH 105 L-108 NO. 6 AWG, BARE COUNTERPOISE WIRE 1,100 LF 106 L-110 '1" PVC CONCRETE ENCASED CONDUIT 1,100 LF 107 L-110 2-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 700 LF ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #1 SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE BASE BID (ITEMS 001 THROUGH 067) 246 Ghilotti Avenue 225 3rd Street Oakland, CA 94607 TOTAL dba Teichert Construction 5200 Franklin Drive Suite 115 Pleasanton, CA 94588 A. Teichert & Son, Inc. UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc.Proven Management, Inc. UNIT PRICE $235.00 $35,250.00 $300.00 $45,000.00 $506.00 $75,900.00 $345.00 $72,450.00 $400.00 $84,000.00 $650.00 $136,500.00 $195.00 $37,050.00 $230.00 $43,700.00 $385.00 $73,150.00 $215.00 $32,250.00 $250.00 $37,500.00 $460.00 $69,000.00 $6,500.00 $32,500.00 $8,000.00 $40,000.00 $12,446.00 $62,230.00 $13,000.00 $39,000.00 $25,000.00 $75,000.00 $46,825.00 $140,475.00 $52,009.00 $52,009.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $48,154.00 $48,154.00 $2,200.00 $22,000.00 $2,600.00 $26,000.00 $5,100.00 $51,000.00 $700.00 $117,600.00 $1,500.00 $252,000.00 $1,609.00 $270,312.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $498,000.00 $498,000.00 $515,087.50 $515,087.50 $141,000.00 $141,000.00 $77,580.00 $77,580.00 $88,000.00 $88,000.00 $76,117.00 $76,117.00 $180,000.00 $180,000.00 $238,470.15 $238,470.15 *$203,000.00 $203,000.00 $3,362,389.00 $4,212,972.65 *$5,891,977.00 $25,000.00 $7,500.00 $75,000.00 $22,500.00 $41,382.00 $12,414.60 $2.00 $53,100.00 $2.00 $53,100.00 $4.54 $120,537.00 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $3.00 $1,950.00 $2.25 $1,462.50 $16.00 $10,400.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $12,163.00 $12,163.00 $40.00 $4,800.00 $6.00 $720.00 $28.00 $3,360.00 $11.00 $34,100.00 $20.00 $62,000.00 $9.45 $29,295.00 $11.00 $25,850.00 $20.00 $47,000.00 $9.40 $22,090.00 $525.00 $3,675.00 $4,200.00 $29,400.00 $755.00 $5,285.00 $100.00 $4,400.00 $185.00 $8,140.00 $189.00 $8,316.00 $250.00 $106,250.00 $175.00 $74,375.00 $660.00 $280,500.00 $4,500.00 $18,000.00 $1,800.00 $7,200.00 $1,887.00 $7,548.00 $7,500.00 $15,000.00 $5,600.00 $11,200.00 $15,097.00 $30,194.00 $1,500.00 $6,000.00 $1,800.00 $7,200.00 $1,321.00 $5,284.00 $6,400.00 $25,600.00 $15,000.00 $60,000.00 $6,198.00 $24,792.00 $50.00 $6,250.00 $60.00 $7,500.00 $141.00 $17,625.00 $100.00 $20,800.00 $200.00 $41,600.00 $191.00 $39,728.00 $6.00 $27,900.00 $4.00 $18,600.00 $2.00 $9,300.00 $175.00 $100,625.00 $2.65 $1,523.75 *$377.00 $216,775.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $7,550.00 $7,550.00 $500.00 $2,500.00 $400.00 $2,000.00 $1,141.00 $5,705.00 $8.00 $7,800.00 $6.00 $5,850.00 $30.00 $29,250.00 $4,500.00 $13,500.00 $5,200.00 $15,600.00 $10,700.00 $32,100.00 $1,500.00 $10,500.00 $4,200.00 $29,400.00 $4,078.00 $28,546.00 $7,000.00 $77,000.00 $10,000.00 $110,000.00 $8,977.00 $98,747.00 $50,000.00 $200,000.00 $30,000.00 $120,000.00 $20,873.00 $83,492.00 $8,000.00 $56,000.00 $10,000.00 $70,000.00 $34,198.00 $239,386.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $4,500.00 $18,000.00 $800.00 $3,200.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $8,854.00 $35,416.00 $120.00 $2,400.00 $140.00 $2,800.00 $41.00 $820.00 $35.00 $38,500.00 $42.00 $46,200.00 $41.00 $45,100.00 $4.25 $21,250.00 $4.50 $22,500.00 $5.50 $27,500.00 $4.00 $6,400.00 $4.25 $6,800.00 $6.00 $9,600.00 $13,000.00 $143,000.00 $18,000.00 $198,000.00 $42,729.00 $470,019.00 $13,000.00 $26,000.00 $18,000.00 $36,000.00 $43,788.00 $87,576.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $61,185.00 $61,185.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $43,664.00 $43,664.00 $4.25 $4,675.00 $4.50 $4,950.00 $5.90 $6,490.00 $30.00 $33,000.00 $35.00 $38,500.00 $41.00 $45,100.00 $185.00 $129,500.00 $215.00 $150,500.00 $331.00 $231,700.00 Page 6 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS 108 L-110 3-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 450 LF 109 L-110 4-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 320 LF 110 L-110 6-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 115 LF 111 L-110 10-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 270 LF 112 L-110 15-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 270 LF 113 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, H20 TRAFFIC RATED 5 EACH 114 L-126 INSTALL TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 144 EACH 115 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS 116 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS 117 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS 118 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 119 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 7,900 SY 120 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1 LS 121 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS 122 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED)850 SF 123 D-701 8" HDPE STORM DRAIN 310 LF 124 D-701 12" HDPE STORM DRAIN 210 LF 125 D-701 21" HDPE STORM DRAIN 420 LF 126 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)9 EACH 127 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 1 EACH 128 D-751 48" MANHOLE 4 EACH 129 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 9 EACH 130 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 2300 LF 131 SP-10 TRENCH DRAIN 2,230 LF 132 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 60 LF 133 SP-24 6" SEWERLINE 560 LF 134 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS 135 U-201 STORM DRAIN REMOVAL 1 LS 136 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS 137 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS 138 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 139 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 2,600 CY 140 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)34,000 SY 141 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)730 TON 142 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)35,000 SY 143 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 6,700 TON 144 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 47 TON 145 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 146 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 850 CY 147 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)26,550 SY 148 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)570 TON 149 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)26,550 SY 150 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 5,300 TON 151 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 35 TON 152 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 153 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 1,900 CY 154 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)8,100 SY 155 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)180 TON 156 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)8,100 SY 157 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 1,600 TON 158 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 10 TON 159 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #5 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #4 ADDITIVE BID ALTRENATE #3 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #2 SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 1 (ITEMS 068 THROUGH 118) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 5 (ITEMS 153 THROUGH 159) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 4 (ITEMS 146 THROUGH 152) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 3 (ITEMS 139 THROUGH 145) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 2 (ITEMS 119 THROUGH 138) 246 Ghilotti Avenue 225 3rd Street Oakland, CA 94607 TOTAL dba Teichert Construction 5200 Franklin Drive Suite 115 Pleasanton, CA 94588 A. Teichert & Son, Inc. UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc.Proven Management, Inc. UNIT PRICE $225.00 $101,250.00 $275.00 $123,750.00 $377.00 $169,650.00 $235.00 $75,200.00 $300.00 $96,000.00 $430.00 $137,600.00 $315.00 $36,225.00 $375.00 $43,125.00 $542.00 $62,330.00 $385.00 $103,950.00 $450.00 $121,500.00 $595.00 $160,650.00 $525.00 $141,750.00 $625.00 $168,750.00 $788.00 $212,760.00 $6,500.00 $32,500.00 $8,000.00 $40,000.00 $5,082.00 $25,410.00 $700.00 $100,800.00 $1,500.00 $216,000.00 $1,490.00 $214,560.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $41,867.00 $41,867.00 $12,900.00 $12,900.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $9,435.00 $9,435.00 $118,656.00 $118,656.00*$151,694.78 $151,694.78 *$47,177.00 $47,177.00 $2,096,256.00*$2,679,941.03 *$3,599,991.60 $3.00 $23,700.00 $3.00 $23,700.00 $19.00 $150,100.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $3,893.00 $3,893.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $3,953.00 $3,953.00 $11.00 $9,350.00 $4.00 $3,400.00 *$23.00 $19,550.00 $225.00 $69,750.00 $135.00 $41,850.00 $383.00 $118,730.00 $250.00 $52,500.00 $145.00 $30,450.00 $407.00 $85,470.00 $275.00 $115,500.00 $250.97 $105,407.40 $500.00 $210,000.00 $7,500.00 $67,500.00 $6,000.00 $54,000.00 $9,788.00 $88,092.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $872.00 $872.00 $15,000.00 $60,000.00 $5,500.00 $22,000.00 $18,338.00 $73,352.00 $6,400.00 $57,600.00 $11,000.00 $99,000.00 $4,029.00 $36,261.00 $50.00 $115,000.00 $30.00 $69,000.00 $43.00 $98,900.00 $125.00 $278,750.00 $320.00 $713,600.00 $143.00 $318,890.00 $8.00 $480.00 $5.00 $300.00 $106.00 $6,360.00 $275.00 $154,000.00 $100.39 $56,218.40 $445.00 $249,200.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 $130,000.00 $130,000.00 $53,106.00 $53,106.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 $6,110.00 $6,110.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $82,722.15 $82,722.15 $30,467.00 $30,467.00 $1,265,630.00 $1,675,647.95 $1,678,306.00 $120.00 $312,000.00 $60.00 $156,000.00 $12.35 $32,110.00 $3.00 $102,000.00 $8.00 $272,000.00 $3.25 $110,500.00 $165.00 $120,450.00 $180.00 $131,400.00 $217.00 $158,410.00 $19.00 $665,000.00 $20.00 $700,000.00 $30.00 $1,050,000.00 * $115.00 $770,500.00 $155.00 $1,038,500.00 $186.00 $1,246,200.00 $900.00 $42,300.00 $2,000.00 $94,000.00 *$1,400.00 $65,800.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $102,920.05 $102,920.05 $30,467.00 $30,467.00 $2,132,250.00 $2,494,820.05 $2,693,487.00 * $250.00 $212,500.00 $60.00 $51,000.00 $10.00 $8,500.00 $3.00 $79,650.00 $8.00 $212,400.00 $3.25 $86,287.50 $165.00 $94,050.00 $180.00 $102,600.00 $444.00 $253,080.00 $19.00 $504,450.00 $20.00 $531,000.00 $25.66 $681,273.00 $115.00 $609,500.00 $155.00 $821,500.00 $177.00 $938,100.00 $900.00 $31,500.00 $1,500.00 $52,500.00 $1,400.00 $49,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $106,260.00 $106,260.00 *$30,467.00 $30,467.00 $1,621,650.00 $1,877,260.00 *$2,046,707.50 $135.00 $256,500.00 $30.00 $57,000.00 $10.25 $19,475.00 $4.00 $32,400.00 $12.00 $97,200.00 $3.25 $26,325.00 $165.00 $29,700.00 $180.00 $32,400.00 $217.00 $39,060.00 $19.00 $153,900.00 $25.00 $202,500.00 $18.40 $149,040.00 $115.00 $184,000.00 $165.00 $264,000.00 $177.00 $283,200.00 $900.00 $9,000.00 $2,000.00 $20,000.00 $1,400.00 $14,000.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $40,386.00 $40,386.00 *$30,467.00 $30,467.00 $700,500.00 $713,486.00 *$561,567.00 Page 7 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS 160 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 2,600 CY 161 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)34,000 SY 162 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)1,000 TON 163 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)35,000 SY 164 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 6,700 TON 165 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 47 TON 166 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 167 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 850 CY 168 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)26,550 SY 169 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)900 TON 170 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)26,550 SY 171 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 5,300 TON 172 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 35 TON 173 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 174 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 1,900 CY 175 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)8,100 SY 176 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)240 TON 177 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)8,100 SY 178 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 1,600 TON 179 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 10 TON 180 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #9 181 SP-31 54" OUTFALL PIPE JOINT REPAIR 35 EACH 182 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 225 LF 183 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT & APPERTENANCES 2 EACH 184 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #10 185 SP-31 54" OUTFALL PIPE JOINT REPAIR 20 EACH 186 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 35 LF 187 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT 1 EACH 188 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS C&S ENGINEERS, INC. I CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT TABULATION OF BIDS RECEIVED JULY 26, 2018 SIGNED: ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #7 ADDITIVE BID ALTRENATE #8 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #6 SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 6 (ITEMS 160 THROUGH 166) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 7 (ITEMS 167 THROUGH 173) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 8 (ITEMS 174 THROUGH 180) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 9 (ITEMS 181 THROUGH 184) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 10 (ITEMS 185 THROUGH 188) *DENOTES MATH ERROR. CORRECTED AMOUNT SHOWN. 246 Ghilotti Avenue 225 3rd Street Oakland, CA 94607 TOTAL dba Teichert Construction 5200 Franklin Drive Suite 115 Pleasanton, CA 94588 A. Teichert & Son, Inc. UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc.Proven Management, Inc. UNIT PRICE $145.00 $377,000.00 $70.00 $182,000.00 $12.34 $32,084.00 $3.00 $102,000.00 $20.00 $680,000.00 $3.25 $110,500.00 $165.00 $165,000.00 $180.00 $180,000.00 $217.00 $217,000.00 $19.00 $665,000.00 $25.00 $875,000.00 $29.00 $1,015,000.00 $115.00 $770,500.00 $200.00 $1,340,000.00 $177.00 $1,185,900.00 $900.00 $42,300.00 $2,000.00 $94,000.00 *$1,400.00 $65,800.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $30,467.00 $30,467.00 $2,221,800.00 $3,451,000.00 $2,656,751.00 $250.00 $212,500.00 $105.00 $89,250.00 $34.11 $28,993.50 $3.00 $79,650.00 $20.00 $531,000.00 $3.24 $86,022.00 $165.00 $148,500.00 $180.00 $162,000.00 $216.00 $194,400.00 $19.00 $504,450.00 $25.00 $663,750.00 $28.50 $756,675.00 $115.00 $609,500.00 $140.00 $742,000.00 $177.00 $938,100.00 $900.00 $31,500.00 $1,850.00 $64,750.00 $1,400.00 $49,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $30,467.00 $30,467.00 $1,666,100.00 $2,352,750.00 $2,083,657.50 $135.00 $256,500.00 $42.00 $79,800.00 $27.56 $52,364.00 $3.00 $24,300.00 $22.00 $178,200.00 $20.58 $166,698.00 $165.00 $39,600.00 $180.00 $43,200.00 $234.25 $56,220.00 $19.00 $153,900.00 $20.00 $162,000.00 $38.20 $309,420.00 $115.00 $184,000.00 $175.00 $280,000.00 $194.00 $310,400.00 $900.00 $9,000.00 $1,850.00 $18,500.00 $2,454.00 $24,540.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $45,702.00 $45,702.00 *$30,467.00 $30,467.00 $697,300.00 $807,402.00 *$950,109.00 $15,000.00 $525,000.00 $9,000.00 $315,000.00 $7,575.00 $265,125.00 $175.00 $39,375.00 $95.00 $21,375.00 $261.00 $58,725.00 $9,000.00 $18,000.00 $7,000.00 $14,000.00 $24,390.00 $48,780.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $21,022.50 $21,022.50 *$22,357.80 $22,357.80 * $602,375.00 $371,397.50 *$394,987.80 * $15,000.00 $300,000.00 $9,000.00 $180,000.00 $7,239.00 $144,780.00 $175.00 $6,125.00 $150.00 $5,250.00 $261.00 $9,135.00 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $24,391.00 $24,391.00 $18,907.50 $18,907.50*$11,535.00 $11,535.00 *$10,698.36 $10,698.36 * $315,125.00 $334,032.50*$203,785.00 *$189,004.36 * * Math error - Bid Total for Alternate 1 was incorrect, causing Mobilization for Alternate 1 to be higher than 6%. Corrected amounts shown. *Math error - Mobilization for Alternate 10 was higher than 6% (this caused Bid Total for Alternate 10 to also be incorrect). Corrected amounts ahown. * Bid Totals not written/typed on bid forms. * Math error - Mobilization for Base Bid, and Alternates 1, 4, 5, 8 9 and 10 higher than 6% (mobilization error resulted in Bid Total errors). Corrected amounts shown. * Math error - Alternate 1, Bid Item 086, Total Price incorrect. Corrected amount shown. * Math error - Alternate 2, Bid Item 122, Total Price incorrect. Corrected amount shown. * Math error - Alternate 3, Bid Item 144, Total Price incorrect. Corrected amount shown. *Math error - Alternate 6, Bid Item 165, Total Price incorrect. Corrected amount shown. * Math error - Alternate 3, Bid Item 142, Total Price incorrect. This error resulted in incorrect Alternate 3 Bid Total. Corrected amounts shown. Math error - Mobilization highe than 6% on Alternates 9 and 10 (mobilzation error resulted in Bid Total error). Corrected amounts shown. Page 8 C&S ENGINEERS, INC. I CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT TABULATION OF BIDS RECEIVED JULY 26, 2018 SIGNED:DATE:30-Jul-18 1 of 1 TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD EGGLESTON, INTERIM PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: AUGUST 27, 2018 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3 - Approval of: 1) Contract Number C19171727 With DeSilva Gates Construction, LP in the Amount of $12,497,319; 2) Amendment Number 3 to Contract Number C15155208B With Mead & Hunt, Inc. in the Amount of $1,345,644; and 3) Amendment Number 6 to Contract Number C15155208A With C&S Engineers, Inc. in the Amount of $373,451 for Phase II of the Airport Apron Reconstruction Capital Improvements Program Project AP- 16000; Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Future Grant Agreements Offered by the California Department of Transportation for Airport Improvement Program Matching Grant Funds for Apron Reconstruction at the Palo Alto Airport, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Supporting Documents or Contracts Associated With the Application and Acceptance of Said Grant Funds; Approval of a Budget Amendment in the Airport Enterprise Fund; and Approval of Findings that the Proposed Project is Exempt From Environmental Review under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 15301 and 15302 and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Order 1050.1F Attachment A, DeSilva Gates Construction, LP Contract No. C19171727, was not attached in CMR 9439. Attachment G, Bid Tabulation, has been corrected to reflect that six bids, not five, were received on the bid closing date. _______________________ _________________________ Brad Eggleston James Keene Interim Public Works Director City Manager 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 1 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Contract No. C19171727 City of Palo Alto Apron Reconstruction Phase II Project Attachment A DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 2 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS…………………………………….…………..6 1.1 Recitals…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6 1.2 Definitions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6 SECTION 2 THE PROJECT………………………………………………………………………………………………………...6 SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS………………………………………………………………………………..7 3.1 List of Documents…………………………………………………………………………………………….........7 3.2 Order of Precedence……………………………………………………………………………………………......7 SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY…………………………………………………………………………………………..7 4.1 Contractor's Duties…………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM……………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 5.1 Contractor's Co-operation………………………………………………………………………………………..8 SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION…………………………………………………………………………………….......8 6.1 Time Is of Essence…………………………………………………………………………………………………….8 6.2 Commencement of Work…………………………………………………………………………………………8 6.3 Contract Time…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 6.4 Liquidated Damages…………………………………………………………………………………………………8 6.4.1 Other Remedies……………………………………………………………………………………………………..9 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time………………………………………………………………………………….9 SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR……………………………………………………………………….9 7.1 Contract Sum……………………………………………………………………………………………………………9 7.2 Full Compensation……………………………………………………………………………………………………9 SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE……………………………………………………………………………………………..9 8.1 Standard of Care…………………………………………………………………………………..…………………9 SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION…………………………………………………………………………………………..…10 9.1 Hold Harmless……………………………………………………………………………………………………….10 9.2 Survival…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10 SECTION 10 NON-DISCRIMINATION……..………………………………………………………………………………10 10.1 Municipal Code Requirement…………….………………………………..……………………………….10 SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS.…………………………………………………………………………………10 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 3 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 11.1 Evidence of Coverage…………………………………………………………………………………………..10 SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS…………………………………………………………….…11 12.1 Assignment………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 12.2 Assignment by Law.………………………………………………………………………………………………11 SECTION 13 NOTICES …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 13.1 Method of Notice …………………………………………………………………………………………………11 13.2 Notice Recipents ………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 13.3 Change of Address……………………………………………………………………………………………….12 SECTION 14 DEFAULT…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...12 14.1 Notice of Default………………………………………………………………………………………………….12 14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default…………………………………………………………………………………12 SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES…………………………………………………………………………..13 15.1 Remedies Upon Default……………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.1 Delete Certain Services…………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.2 Perform and Withhold……………………………………………………………………………………..13 15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract…………………………………………………………………13 15.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default………………………………………………13 15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.6 Additional Provisions……………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.2 Delays by Sureties……………………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.3 Damages to City…………………………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.3.1 For Contractor's Default…………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.3.2 Compensation for Losses…………………………………………………………………………………14 15.4 Suspension by City……………………………………………………………………………………………….14 15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience……………………………………………………………………………..14 15.4.2 Suspension for Cause………………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.5 Termination Without Cause…………………………………………………………………………………14 15.5.1 Compensation………………………………………………………………………………………………….15 15.5.2 Subcontractors………………………………………………………………………………………………..15 15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination………………………………………………………………...15 SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES……………………………………………………………16 16.1 Contractor’s Remedies……………………………………..………………………………..………………….16 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 4 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 16.1.1 For Work Stoppage……………………………………………………………………………………………16 16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment…………………………………………………………………………………….16 16.2 Damages to Contractor………………………………………………………………………………………..16 SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS………………………………………………………………………………….…16 17.1 Financial Management and City Access………………………………………………………………..16 17.2 Compliance with City Requests…………………………………………………………………………….17 SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES……………………………………………………………………………………..17 18.1 Status of Parties……………………………………………………………………………………………………17 SECTION 19 NUISANCE……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…17 19.1 Nuisance Prohibited……………………………………………………………………………………………..17 SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES…………………………………………………………………………………….17 20.1 Payment of Fees…………………………………………………………………………………………………..17 SECTION 21 WAIVER…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17 21.1 Waiver………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17 SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE; COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS……………………………….18 22.1 Governing Law…………………………………………………………………………………………………….18 22.2 Compliance with Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………18 22.2.1 Palo Alto Minimum Wage Ordinance…………….………………………………………………….18 SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT……………………………………………………………………………………18 23.1 Integration………………………………………………………………………………………………………….18 SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………..18 24.1 Survival of Provisions……………………………………………………………………………………………18 SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES………………………………………………………………………………………….18 SECTION 26 NON-APPROPRIATION……………………………………………………………………………………….19 26.1 Appropriation………………………………………………………………………………………………………19 SECTION 27 AUTHORITY……………………………………………………………………………………………………….19 27.1 Representation of Parties…………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS………………………………………………………………………………………………..19 28.1 Multiple Counterparts………………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY……………………………………………………………………………………………………19 29.1 Severability………………………………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES …………………………………………………..19 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 5 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 30.1 Amendments of Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………..19 SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION………………………………………………….….19 31.1 Workers Compensation…………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 32 DIR REGISTRATION AND OTHER SB 854 REQUIREMENTS………………………………..…20 32.1 General Notice to Contractor…………………………………………………………………………….20 32.2 Labor Code section 1771.1(a)…………………………………………………………………………….20 32.3 DIR Registration Required…………………………………………………………………………………20 32.4 Posting of Job Site Notices…………………………………………………………………………………20 32.5 Payroll Records…………………………………………………………………………………………………20 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 6 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on August 27, 2018 (“Execution Date”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and DE SILVA GATES CONSTRUCTION L.P. ("Contractor"), is made with reference to the following: R E C I T A L S: A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City. B. Contractor is a Limited Partnership duly organized and in good standing in the State of California , Contractor’s License Number 704195 and Department of Industrial Relations Registration Number 1000003628. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State of California and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set forth in this Construction Contract. C. On July 26, 2018, City issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB171727) to contractors for the Apron Reconstruction Phase II (“Project”). In response to the IFB, Contractor submitted a Bid. D. City and Contractor desire to enter into this Construction Contract for the Project, and other services as identified in the Contract Documents for the Project upon the following terms and conditions. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS. 1.1 Recitals. All of the recitals are incorporated herein by reference. 1.2 Definitions. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth in this Construction Contract and/or in the General Conditions. If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Construction Contract and in the General Conditions, the definitions in this Construction Contract shall prevail. SECTION 2 THE PROJECT. The Project is the Apron Reconstruction Phase II, located at 1925 Embarcadero Road, Palo Alto, CA. 94303 ("Project"). DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 7 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 3.1 List of Documents. The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as “Agreement” or “Bid Documents”) consist of the following documents which are on file with the Purchasing Division and are hereby incorporated by reference. 1) Change Orders 2) Field Orders 3) Contract 4) Bidding Addenda 5) Special Provisions 6) General Conditions 7) Project Plans and Drawings 8) Technical Specifications 9) Instructions to Bidders 10) Invitation for Bids 11) Contractor's Bid/Non-Collusion Declaration 12) Reports listed in the Contract Documents 13) Public Works Department’s Standard Drawings and Specifications (most current version at time of Bid) 14) Utilities Department’s Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards (most current version at time of Bid) 15) City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements 16) City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations 17) Notice Inviting Pre-Qualification Statements, Pre-Qualification Statement, and Pre- Qualification Checklist (if applicable) 18) Performance and Payment Bonds 3.2 Order of Precedence. For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best interests of the City. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event of a conflict between and DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 8 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT among the provisions of the Contract Documents, in which a provision is, or provisions are, required by Federal, State or Local law or regulation, the City shall apply the rules of preemption to determine which provision or provisions control. SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY. 4.1 Contractor’s Duties Contractor agrees to perform all of the Work required for the Project, as specified in the Contract Documents, all of which are fully incorporated herein. Contractor shall provide, furnish, and supply all things necessary and incidental for the timely performance and completion of the Work, including, but not limited to, provision of all necessary labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and utilities, unless otherwise specified in the Contract Documents. Contractor also agrees to use its best efforts to complete the Work in a professional and expeditious manner and to meet or exceed the performance standards required by the Contract Documents. SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM. 5.1 Contractor’s Co-operation. In addition to Contractor, City has retained, or may retain, consultants and contractors to provide professional and technical consultation for the design and construction of the Project. The Contract requires that Contractor operate efficiently, effectively and cooperatively with City as well as all other members of the Project Team and other contractors retained by City to construct other portions of the Project. SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION. 6.1 Time Is of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents. 6.2 Commencement of Work. Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. 6.3 Contract Time. Work hereunder shall begin on the date specified on the City’s Notice to Proceed and shall be completed not later than . within Two Hundred Thirty Calendar Days (230) for the base bid items, and Additive Alternate Bid #1,#2,#3,#4,#5,#9, and #10 after the commencement date specified in the City’s Notice to Proceed. By executing this Construction Contract, Contractor expressly waives any claim for delayed early completion. 6.4 Liquidated Damages. Pursuant to Government Code Section 53069.85, if Contractor fails to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time, including any approved extensions thereto, City may assess liquidated damages on a daily basis for each day of Unexcused Delay in achieving Substantial Completion, DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 9 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT based on the amount of Two Thousand dollars ($2,000) per day, or as otherwise specified in the Special Provisions. Liquidated damages may also be separately assessed for failure to meet milestones specified elsewhere in the Contract Documents, regardless of impact on the time for achieving Substantial Completion. The assessment of liquidated damages is not a penalty but considered to be a reasonable estimate of the amount of damages City will suffer by delay in completion of the Work. The City is entitled to setoff the amount of liquidated damages assessed against any payments otherwise due to Contractor, including, but not limited to, setoff against release of retention. If the total amount of liquidated damages assessed exceeds the amount of unreleased retention, City is entitled to recover the balance from Contractor or its sureties. Occupancy or use of the Project in whole or in part prior to Substantial Completion, shall not operate as a waiver of City’s right to assess liquidated damages. 6.4.1 Other Remedies. City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where City’s Losses are caused by any reason other than Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time. The Contract Time may only be adjusted for time extensions approved by City and memorialized in a Change Order approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR. 7.1 Contract Sum. Contractor shall be compensated for satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the Contract Documents the Contract Sum of Ten Million Eight Hundred Sixty Seven Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Five Dollars ($10,867,235). [This amount includes the Base Bid and Additive Alternates #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #9, and #10.] 7.2 Full Compensation. The Contract Sum shall be full compensation to Contractor for all Work provided by Contractor and, except as otherwise expressly permitted by the terms of the Contract Documents, shall cover all Losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the acts of the elements or any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until its Acceptance by City, all risks connected with the Work, and any and all expenses incurred due to suspension or discontinuance of the Work, except as expressly provided herein. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted for Change Orders approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE. 8.1 Standard of Care. Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, experienced and well-supervised personnel. All services performed in connection with this Construction Contract shall be performed in a manner consistent with the standard of care under California law applicable to those who specialize in providing such services for projects of the type, scope and complexity of the Project. DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 10 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION. 9.1 Hold Harmless. To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers (hereinafter individually referred to as an “Indemnitee” and collectively referred to as "Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City, from and against any and liability, loss, damage, claims, expenses (including, without limitation, attorney fees, expert witness fees, paralegal fees, and fees and costs of litigation or arbitration) (collectively, “Liability”) of every nature arising out of or in connection with the acts or omissions of Contractor, its employees, Subcontractors, representatives, or agents, in performing the Work or its failure to comply with any of its obligations under the Contract, except such Liability caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of an Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs City incurs to enforce this provision. Except as provided in Section 9.2 below, nothing in the Contract Documents shall be construed to give rise to any implied right of indemnity in favor of Contractor against City or any other Indemnitee. Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 9201, City shall timely notify Contractor upon receipt of any third-party claim relating to the Contract. 9.2 Survival. The provisions of Section 9 shall survive the termination of this Construction Contract. SECTION 10 NON-DISCRIMINATION. 10.1 Municipal Code Requirement. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, Contractor certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. Contractor acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and will comply with all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS. 11.1 Evidence of coverage. Within ten (10) business days following issuance of the Notice of Award, Contractor shall provide City with evidence that it has obtained insurance and shall submit Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions. DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 11 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS. 12.1 Assignment. City is entering into this Construction Contract in reliance upon the stated experience and qualifications of the Contractor and its Subcontractors set forth in Contractor’s Bid. Accordingly, Contractor shall not assign, hypothecate or transfer this Construction Contract or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any assignment, hypothecation or transfer without said consent shall be null and void, and shall be deemed a substantial breach of contract and grounds for default in addition to any other legal or equitable remedy available to the City. 12.2 Assignment by Law. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if the Contractor is a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy shall result in changing the control of Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract. Control means more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity. SECTION 13 NOTICES. 13.1 Method of Notice. All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Construction Contract shall be given in writing and shall be deemed served on the earlier of the following: (i) On the date delivered if delivered personally; (ii) On the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as hereinafter provided; (iii) On the date sent if sent by facsimile transmission; (iv) On the date sent if delivered by electronic mail; or (v) On the date it is accepted or rejected if sent by certified mail. 13.2 Notice to Recipients. All notices, demands or requests (including, without limitation, Change Order Requests and Claims) from Contractor to City shall include the Project name and the number of this Construction Contract and shall be addressed to City at: To City: City of Palo Alto City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Copy to: City of Palo Alto Public Works Administration, Airport Division 1925 Embarcadero Road Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: James Wadleigh AND Copy to: C&S Companies DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 12 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 8950 Cal Center Drive, Suite 102 Sacramento, CA 95826 Attn: Nicole Young, P.E. City of Palo Alto Utilities Engineering 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this Construction Contract shall be provided to the following: Palo Alto City Attorney’s Office 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, California 94303 All Claims shall be sent by registered mail or certified mail with return receipt requested. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to: DeSilva Gates Construction, L.P. 11555 Dublin Boulevard Dublin, CA 94568 Attn: Richard B. Gates 13.3 Change of Address. In advance of any change of address, Contractor shall notify City of the change of address in writing. Each party may, by written notice only, add, delete or replace any individuals to whom and addresses to which notice shall be provided. SECTION 14 DEFAULT. 14.1 Notice of Default. In the event that City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any provision of the Contract Documents, City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract, with a copy to Contractor’s performance bond surety. 14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under the Contract Documents within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) after receipt of written notice. However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) Days after receipt of such written notice. DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 13 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 15.1 Remedies Upon Default. If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth above in Section 14, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including, without limitation, the following: 15.1.1 Delete Certain Services. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, delete certain portions of the Work, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 15.1.2 Perform and Withhold. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, engage others to perform the Work or portion of the Work that has not been adequately performed by Contractor and withhold the cost thereof to City from future payments to Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor for damages if City directs Contractor to resume Work. 15.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default. City shall have the right to terminate this Construction Contract, in whole or in part, upon the failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default as required by Section 14. City’s election to terminate the Construction Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract. Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately, unless otherwise provided therein. 15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond. City may, with or without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond. 15.1.6 Additional Provisions. All of City’s rights and remedies under this Construction Contract are cumulative, and shall be in addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity. Designation in the Contract Documents of certain breaches as material shall not waive the City’s authority to designate other breaches as material nor limit City’s right to terminate the Construction Contract, or prevent the City from terminating the Agreement for breaches that are not material. City’s determination of whether there has been noncompliance with the Construction Contract so as to warrant exercise by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Construction Contract, shall be binding on all parties. No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and Losses suffered by City. 15.2 Delays by Sureties. Time being of the essence in the performance of the Work, if Contractor’s surety fails to arrange for completion of the Work in accordance with the Performance Bond, within seven (7) calendar days from the date of the notice of termination, Contractor’s surety shall be deemed to have waived its right to complete the Work under the Contract, and City may immediately make arrangements for the completion of the Work through use of its own forces, by hiring a replacement contractor, or by any other means that City determines advisable under the circumstances. Contractor and its surety shall be jointly and severally DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 14 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT liable for any additional cost incurred by City to complete the Work following termination. In addition, City shall have the right to use any materials, supplies, and equipment belonging to Contractor and located at the Worksite for the purposes of completing the remaining Work. 15.3 Damages to City. 15.3.1 For Contractor's Default. City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents. 15.3.2 Compensation for Losses. In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City shall be entitled to deduct the cost of such Losses from monies otherwise payable to Contractor. If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount payable, Contractor shall be liable to City for the difference and shall promptly remit same to City. 15.4 Suspension by City 15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience. City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing, to suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time. The order shall be specifically identified as a Suspension Order by City. Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the order and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the Work covered by the Suspension Order. During the Suspension or extension of the Suspension, if any, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or, by Change Order, delete the Work covered by the Suspension Order. If a Suspension Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume and continue with the Work. A Change Order will be issued to cover any adjustments of the Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension. A Suspension Order shall not be the exclusive method for City to stop the Work. 15.4.2 Suspension for Cause. In addition to all other remedies available to City, if Contractor fails to perform or correct work in accordance with the Contract Documents, City may immediately order the Work, or any portion thereof, suspended until the cause for the suspension has been eliminated to City’s satisfaction. Contractor shall not be entitled to an increase in Contract Time or Contract Price for a suspension occasioned by Contractor’s failure to comply with the Contract Documents. City’s right to suspend the Work shall not give rise to a duty to suspend the Work, and City’s failure to suspend the Work shall not constitute a defense to Contractor’s failure to comply with the requirements of the Contract Documents. 15.5 Termination Without Cause. City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or in whole upon written notice to Contractor. Upon receipt of such notice, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the notice and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs to close out and demobilize. The compensation allowed under this Paragraph 15.5 shall be the Contractor’s sole and exclusive compensation for such termination and Contractor waives any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind resulting from termination without cause. Termination pursuant to this provision does not relieve Contractor or its sureties from any of their obligations for Losses arising from or related to the Work performed by Contractor. DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 15 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 15.5.1 Compensation. Following such termination and within forty-five (45) Days after receipt of a billing from Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Paragraph 15.5.1, City shall pay the following to Contractor as Contractor’s sole compensation for performance of the Work : .1 For Work Performed. The amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion of the Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination, less sums previously paid to Contractor. .2 For Close-out Costs. Reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors: (i) Demobilizing and (ii) Administering the close-out of its participation in the Project (including, without limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including attorney or expert fees) for a period of no longer than thirty (30) Days after receipt of the notice of termination. .3 For Fabricated Items. Previously unpaid cost of any items delivered to the Project Site which were fabricated for subsequent incorporation in the Work. .4 Profit Allowance. An allowance for profit calculated as four percent (4%) of the sum of the above items, provided Contractor can prove a likelihood that it would have made a profit if the Construction Contract had not been terminated. 15.5.2 Subcontractors. Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this Construction Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are afforded to Contractor against City under this Section. 15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the notice directs otherwise, do the following: (i) Immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice; (ii) Place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities, except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work that is not discontinued; (iii) Provide to City a description in writing, no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes, payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine necessary in order to decide whether to accept assignment of or request Contractor to terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract; (iv) Promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and (v) Thereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in transit thereto. Upon termination, whether for cause or for convenience, the provisions of the Contract Documents remain in effect as to any Claim, indemnity obligation, warranties, guarantees, DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 16 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT submittals of as-built drawings, instructions, or manuals, or other such rights and obligations arising prior to the termination date. SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 16.1 Contractor’s Remedies. Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the following: 16.1.1 For Work Stoppage. The Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive Days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any Subcontractor, or any employee or agent of Contractor or any Subcontractor, due to issuance of an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable. This provision shall not apply to any work stoppage resulting from the City’s issuance of a suspension notice issued either for cause or for convenience. 16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment. If City does not make pay Contractor undisputed sums within ninety (90) Days after receipt of notice from Contractor, Contractor may terminate the Construction Contract (30) days following a second notice to City of Contractor’s intention to terminate the Construction Contract. 16.2 Damages to Contractor. In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided for in Paragraph 15.5.1 above. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind. SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS. 17.1 Financial Management and City Access. Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Construction Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices. City and City's accountants during normal business hours, may inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take-offs, cost reports, ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this Project. Contractor shall retain these documents for a period of three (3) years after the later of (i) Final Payment or (ii) final resolution of all Contract Disputes and other disputes, or (iii) for such longer period as may be required by law. DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 17 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 17.2 Compliance with City Requests. Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 17 shall be a condition precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents. City many enforce Contractor’s obligation to provide access to City of its business and other records referred to in Section 17.1 for inspection or copying by issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such court, without the necessity of oral testimony. SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES. 18.1 Status of parties. Each party is acting in its independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint ventures’ of the other party. City, its officers or employees shall have no control over the conduct of Contractor or its respective agents, employees, subconsultants, or subcontractors, except as herein set forth. SECTION 19 NUISANCE. 19.1 Nuisance Prohibited. Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection in the performance of services under this Construction Contract. SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES. 20.1 Payment of Fees. Except as otherwise provided in the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications, The Contractor shall provide, procure and pay for all licenses, permits, and fees, required by the City or other government jurisdictions or agencies necessary to carry out and complete the Work. Payment of all costs and expenses for such licenses, permits, and fees shall be included in one or more Bid items. No other compensation shall be paid to the Contractor for these items or for delays caused by non-City inspectors or conditions set forth in the licenses or permits issued by other agencies. SECTION 21 WAIVER. 21.1 Waiver. A waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character. DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 18 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE; COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. 22.1 Governing Law. This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California, and venue shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Santa Clara, and no other place. 22.2 Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal and California laws and city laws, including, without limitation, ordinances and resolutions, in the performance of work under this Construction Contract. 22.2.1 Palo Alto Minimum Wage Ordinance. Contractor shall comply with all requirements of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 4.62 (Citywide Minimum Wage), as it may be amended from time to time. In particular, for any employee otherwise entitled to the State minimum wage, who performs at least two (2) hours of work in a calendar week within the geographic boundaries of the City, Contractor shall pay such employees no less than the minimum wage set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 4.62.030 for each hour worked within the geographic boundaries of the City of Palo Alto. In addition, Contractor shall post notices regarding the Palo Alto Minimum Wage Ordinance in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code section 4.62.060. SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. 23.1 Integration. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT. 24.1 Survival of Provisions. The provisions of the Construction Contract which by their nature survive termination of the Construction Contract or Final Completion, including, without limitation, all warranties, indemnities, payment obligations, and City’s right to audit Contractor’s books and records, shall remain in full force and effect after Final Completion or any termination of the Construction Contract. SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES. This Project is not subject to prevailing wages. Contractor is not required to pay prevailing wages in the performance and implementation of the Project in accordance with SB 7, if the public works contract does not include a project of $25,000 or less, when the project is for construction work, or the contract does not include a project of $15,000 or less, when the project is for alteration, demolition, repair, or maintenance (collectively, ‘improvement’) work. Or Contractor is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and Section 16000 et seq. and Section 1773.1 of the California Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 19 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the contract for this Project from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). Copies of these rates may be obtained at the Purchasing Division’s office of the City of Palo Alto. Contractor shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to any staff or subcontractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of all sections, including, but not limited to, Sections 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1782, 1810, and 1813, of the Labor Code pertaining to prevailing wages. SECTION 26 NON-APPROPRIATION. 26.1 Appropriations. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that the City does not appropriate funds for the following fiscal year for this event, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Construction Contract are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 27 AUTHORITY. 27.1 Representation of Parties. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS 28.1 Multiple Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement. SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY. 29.1 Severability. In case a provision of this Construction Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected. SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES. 30.1 Amendments to Laws. With respect to any amendments to any statutes or regulations referenced in these Contract Documents, the reference is deemed to be the version in effect on the date that the Contract was awarded by City, unless otherwise required by law. SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION. 31.1 Workers Compensation. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1861, by signing this Contract, Contractor certifies as follows: DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 20 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT “I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work on this Contract.” SECTION 32 DIR REGISTRATION AND OTHER SB 854 REQUIREMENTS. 32.1 General Notice to Contractor. City requires Contractor and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of SB 854. 32.2 Labor Code section 1771.1(a) City provides notice to Contractor of the requirements of California Labor Code section 1771.1(a), which reads: “A contractor or subcontractor shall not be qualified to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, subject to the requirements of Section 4104 of the Public Contract Code, or engage in the performance of any contract for public work, as defined in this chapter, unless currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5. It is not a violation of this section for an unregistered contractor to submit a bid that is authorized by Section 7029.1 of the Business and Professions Code or Section 10164 or 20103.5 of the Public Contract Code, provided the contactor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 at the time the contract is awarded.” 32.3 DIR Registration Required. City will not accept a bid proposal from or enter into this Construction Contract with Contractor without proof that Contractor and its listed subcontractors are registered with the California Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) to perform public work, subject to limited exceptions. 32.4 Posting of Job Site Notices. City gives notice to Contractor and its listed subcontractors that Contractor is required to post all job site notices prescribed by law or regulation and Contractor is subject to SB 854-compliance monitoring and enforcement by DIR. 32.5 Payroll Records. City requires Contractor and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of Labor Code section 1776, including: (i) Keep accurate payroll records, showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by, respectively, Contractor and its listed subcontractors, in connection with the Project. (ii) The payroll records shall be verified as true and correct and shall be certified and made available for inspection at all reasonable hours at the principal office of Contractor and its listed subcontractors, respectively. DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 21 Rev. March 17, 2017 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (iii) At the request of City, acting by its project manager, Contractor and its listed subcontractors shall make the certified payroll records available for inspection or furnished upon request to the project manager within ten (10) days of receipt of City’s request. City requests Contractor and its listed subcontractors to submit the certified payroll records to the project manager at the end of each week during the Project. (iv) If the certified payroll records are not produced to the project manager within the 10-day period, then Contractor and its listed subcontractors shall be subject to a penalty of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker, and City shall withhold the sum total of penalties from the progress payment(s) then due and payable to Contractor. This provision supplements the provisions of Section 15 hereof. (v) Inform the project manager of the location of contractor’s and its listed subcontractors’ payroll records (street address, city and county) at the commencement of the Project, and also provide notice to the project manager within five (5) business days of any change of location of those payroll records. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contract to be executed the date and year first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO ____________________________ Purchasing Manager City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ City Attorney or designee APPROVED: ____________________________ Public Works Director CONTRACTOR Officer 1 By:___________________________ Name:________________________ Title:__________________________ Date: _________________________ Officer 2 By:____________________________ Name:_________________________ Title:___________________________ Date:____________________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II 5225 Hellyer Avenue, #220 FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 001 P-151 CLEARING AND GRUBBING 0.2 ACRE $5,000.00 $1,000.00 $100,000.00 $20,000.00 $100,000.00 $20,000.00 $200,000.00 $40,000.00 002 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1.0 LS $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 003 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 34,000 SY $2.00 $68,000.00 $2.50 $85,000.00 $1.20 $40,800.00 $1.20 $40,800.00 004 P-608 EMULSIFIED ASPHALT SEAL COAT 2,750 SY $11.00 $30,250.00 $8.00 $22,000.00 $10.00 $27,500.00 $10.00 $27,500.00 005 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $431,000.00 $431,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 006 P-620 MARKING REMOVAL 400 SF $10.00 $4,000.00 $25.00 $10,000.00 $37.50 $15,000.00 $37.00 $14,800.00 007 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED) 4,200 SF $5.00 $21,000.00 $10.00 $42,000.00 $12.00 $50,400.00 $12.00 $50,400.00 008 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (WHITE, REFLECTORIZED) 2,200 SF $5.00 $11,000.00 $10.00 $22,000.00 $12.00 $26,400.00 $12.00 $26,400.00 009 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (GREEN, NON-REFLECTORIZED)11,100 SF $5.00 $55,500.00 $7.00 $77,700.00 $5.00 $55,500.00 $7.40 $82,140.00 010 P-620 SURFACE PAINTED TAXILANE MARKINGS 11 EACH $700.00 $7,700.00 $2,000.00 $22,000.00 $2,475.00 $27,225.00 $778.00 $8,558.00 011 P-620 TIE-DOWN NUMBERING 56 EACH $50.00 $2,800.00 $100.00 $5,600.00 $112.00 $6,272.00 $111.00 $6,216.00 012 D-701 15" HDPE STORM DRAIN 225 LF $150.00 $33,750.00 $120.00 $27,000.00 $200.00 $45,000.00 $229.00 $51,525.00 013 D-751 ADJUST CATCH BASIN TO GRADE 7 EACH $4,000.00 $28,000.00 $2,000.00 $14,000.00 $4,000.00 $28,000.00 $2,812.00 $19,684.00 014 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 7 EACH $2,500.00 $17,500.00 $2,000.00 $14,000.00 $2,000.00 $14,000.00 $3,175.00 $22,225.00 015 D-751 48" MANHOLE 4 EACH $8,000.00 $32,000.00 $7,000.00 $28,000.00 $7,500.00 $30,000.00 $6,227.00 $24,908.00 016 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)1 EACH $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $4,685.00 $4,685.00 017 SP-3 VERTICAL FLOW CLARIFIER 1 EACH $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $143,000.00 $143,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 018 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 8 EACH $15,000.00 $120,000.00 $10,000.00 $80,000.00 $2,500.00 $20,000.00 $7,227.00 $57,816.00 019 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 100 LF $80.00 $8,000.00 $100.00 $10,000.00 $120.00 $12,000.00 $96.00 $9,600.00 020 SP-11 BOLLARD 2 EACH $800.00 $1,600.00 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $2,211.00 $4,422.00 021 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 2,300 LF $15.00 $34,500.00 $8.00 $18,400.00 $8.00 $18,400.00 $8.00 $18,400.00 022 SP-14 ADJUST UTILITY VAULT TO GRADE 2 EACH $4,000.00 $8,000.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $3,858.00 $7,716.00 023 SP-15 ADJUST JUNCTION BOX/HANDHOLE TO GRADE 6 EACH $3,000.00 $18,000.00 $5,000.00 $30,000.00 $1,300.00 $7,800.00 $2,378.00 $14,268.00 024 SP-16 REMOVE EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 207 EACH $250.00 $51,750.00 $100.00 $20,700.00 $75.00 $15,525.00 $70.00 $14,490.00 025 SP-17 MILLING 4,900 SY $20.00 $98,000.00 $10.00 $49,000.00 $8.00 $39,200.00 $7.00 $34,300.00 026 SP-23 POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY AND APPURTENANCES 1 EACH $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $65,091.00 $65,091.00 027 SP-24 6" SEWERLINE 470 LF $150.00 $70,500.00 $100.00 $47,000.00 $185.00 $86,950.00 $143.00 $67,210.00 028 SP-25 SEWER CLEAN OUT 1 EACH $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $800.00 $800.00 $1,900.00 $1,900.00 $570.00 $570.00 029 SP-26 10" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 1,600 LF $300.00 $480,000.00 $115.00 $184,000.00 $190.00 $304,000.00 $143.00 $228,800.00 030 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 130 LF $250.00 $32,500.00 $100.00 $13,000.00 $225.00 $29,250.00 $159.00 $20,670.00 031 SP-27 10" GATE VALVE 4 EACH $5,500.00 $22,000.00 $4,000.00 $16,000.00 $5,500.00 $22,000.00 $5,007.00 $20,028.00 032 SP-27 6" GATE VALVE 1 EACH $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $3,040.00 $3,040.00 033 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT & APPURTENANCES 1 EACH $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,564.00 $8,564.00 034 SP-29 DOUBLE DETECTOR CHECK VALVE 1 EACH $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $31,000.00 $31,000.00 $17,367.00 $17,367.00 035 T-906 HYDRO-SEEDING 500 SY $2.00 $1,000.00 $4.00 $2,000.00 $8.00 $4,000.00 $2.00 $1,000.00 036 L-100 REMOVAL OF EXISTING LIGHT POLE ASSEMBLY (POLE, FIXTURE, PULL BOXES AND FOUNDATION)5 EACH $6,000.00 $30,000.00 $8,000.00 $40,000.00 $7,000.00 $35,000.00 $7,774.00 $38,870.00 037 L-100 NEW 30-FOOT APRON AREA LIGHT POLE WITH MOUNTING APPARATUS AND MAINTENANCE HINGES 4 EACH $25,000.00 $100,000.00 $25,000.00 $100,000.00 $75,000.00 $300,000.00 $55,527.00 $222,108.00 038 L-100 NEW LED APRON AREA LIGHTING FIXTURE 8 EACH $7,000.00 $56,000.00 $10,000.00 $80,000.00 $8,000.00 $64,000.00 $8,884.00 $71,072.00 039 L-100 NEW LED OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE (DOUBLE-HEAD)4 EACH $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $2,221.00 $8,884.00 040 L-100 TRANSFORMER AND ENCLOSURE FOR OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE 4 EACH $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $888.00 $3,552.00 041 L-100 1" RIGID GALVANIZED STEEL CONDUIT 20 LF $150.00 $3,000.00 $150.00 $3,000.00 $125.00 $2,500.00 $133.00 $2,660.00 042 L-100 NO. 6 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 4,000 LF $4.00 $16,000.00 $5.00 $20,000.00 $4.25 $17,000.00 $5.00 $20,000.00 043 L-100 NO. 8 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 1,300 LF $2.50 $3,250.00 $5.00 $6,500.00 $3.00 $3,900.00 $4.00 $5,200.00 044 L-108 NO. 6 AWG, BARE COUNTERPOISE WIRE 13,000 LF $4.00 $52,000.00 $5.00 $65,000.00 $4.25 $55,250.00 $5.00 $65,000.00 045 L-110 2" CONCRETE-ENCASED SCHEDULE-40 PVC CONDUIT IN PAVEMENT 340 LF $40.00 $13,600.00 $40.00 $13,600.00 $35.00 $11,900.00 $39.00 $13,260.00 046 L-110 1" PVC CONCRETE ENCASED CONDUIT 650 LF $6.00 $3,900.00 $40.00 $26,000.00 $6.00 $3,900.00 $33.00 $21,450.00 047 L-110 2-2" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 380 LF $60.00 $22,800.00 $100.00 $38,000.00 $90.00 $34,200.00 $100.00 $38,000.00 048 L-110 4-4" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 150 LF $120.00 $18,000.00 $200.00 $30,000.00 $145.00 $21,750.00 $161.00 $24,150.00 049 L-100 36"X36" PULL BOX 9 EACH $7,000.00 $63,000.00 $15,000.00 $135,000.00 $13,000.00 $117,000.00 $14,437.00 $129,933.00 050 L-100 36"X60" PULL BOX 2 EACH $8,000.00 $16,000.00 $15,000.00 $30,000.00 $13,000.00 $26,000.00 $14,437.00 $28,874.00 051 L-100 36"X72" PULL BOX 1 EACH $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $14,437.00 $14,437.00 052 L-100 48"X48" PULL BOX 1 EACH $11,000.00 $11,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $14,437.00 $14,437.00 053 L-110 2-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 510 LF $70.00 $35,700.00 $200.00 $102,000.00 $185.00 $94,350.00 $205.00 $104,550.00 054 L-110 3-4" 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 490 LF $80.00 $39,200.00 $250.00 $122,500.00 $225.00 $110,250.00 $250.00 $122,500.00 BASE BID ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL ENGINEERS OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST C&S Engineers, Inc. 8950 Cal Center Drive, #102 Sacramento, CA 95826 Granite Rock CompanyDeSilva Gates Construction LP 11555 Dublin Blvd. Dublin, CA 94568 Granite Construction Company UNIT PRICE TOTAL San Jose, CA 95138 585 W Beach Street Watsonville, CA 95076 Page 1 Attachment G DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II 5225 Hellyer Avenue, #220 FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL ENGINEERS OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST C&S Engineers, Inc. 8950 Cal Center Drive, #102 Sacramento, CA 95826 Granite Rock CompanyDeSilva Gates Construction LP 11555 Dublin Blvd. Dublin, CA 94568 Granite Construction Company UNIT PRICE TOTAL San Jose, CA 95138 585 W Beach Street Watsonville, CA 95076 055 L-110 4-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 150 LF $90.00 $13,500.00 $250.00 $37,500.00 $235.00 $35,250.00 $261.00 $39,150.00 056 L-110 8-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 210 LF $150.00 $31,500.00 $400.00 $84,000.00 $345.00 $72,450.00 $383.00 $80,430.00 057 L-110 2-5" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED CONDUIT ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 190 LF $80.00 $15,200.00 $250.00 $47,500.00 $195.00 $37,050.00 $217.00 $41,230.00 058 L-110 3-5" PVC CONDUIT DUCT BANK 150 LF $100.00 $15,000.00 $250.00 $37,500.00 $215.00 $32,250.00 $239.00 $35,850.00 059 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, H20 TRAFFIC RATED 5 EACH $6,000.00 $30,000.00 $8,000.00 $40,000.00 $6,500.00 $32,500.00 $7,218.00 $36,090.00 060 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, AIRCRAFT-RATED, 36" BY 36" BY 30"3 EACH $13,000.00 $39,000.00 $15,000.00 $45,000.00 $15,000.00 $45,000.00 $14,437.00 $43,311.00 061 L-115 ELECTRICAL MANHOLE 1 EACH $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $57,758.00 $57,758.00 062 L-125 TAXIWAY EDGE LIGHTING BASE CAN 10 EACH $3,500.00 $35,000.00 $2,500.00 $25,000.00 $2,200.00 $22,000.00 $2,443.00 $24,430.00 063 L-126 INSTALL TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 168 EACH $900.00 $151,200.00 $1,000.00 $168,000.00 $1,100.00 $184,800.00 $1,200.00 $201,600.00 064 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 065 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $125,000.00 $125,000.00 066 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $62,680.00 $62,680.00 067 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $173,247.00 $173,247.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $210,000.00 $210,000.00 $160,000.00 $160,000.00 $3,058,447.00 $2,693,300.00 $3,818,922.00 $3,049,659.00 068 P-151 CLEARING AND GRUBBING 0.3 ACRE $5,000.00 $1,250.00 $100,000.00 $30,000.00 $100,000.00 $30,000.00 $11,956.00 $3,586.80 069 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 26,550 SY $2.00 $53,100.00 $2.50 $66,375.00 $1.20 $31,860.00 $1.00 $26,550.00 070 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1 LS $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $37,015.00 $37,015.00 071 T-906 HYDRO-SEEDING 650 SY $2.00 $1,300.00 $4.00 $2,600.00 $8.00 $5,200.00 $2.00 $1,300.00 072 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $3,124.00 $3,124.00 073 P-620 MARKING REMOVAL 120 SF $10.00 $1,200.00 $25.00 $3,000.00 $37.50 $4,500.00 $52.00 $6,240.00 074 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED) 3,100 SF $5.00 $15,500.00 $10.00 $31,000.00 $8.00 $24,800.00 $12.00 $37,200.00 075 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (WHITE, REFLECTORIZED) 2,350 SF $5.00 $11,750.00 $10.00 $23,500.00 $12.00 $28,200.00 $12.00 $28,200.00 076 P-620 SURFACE PAINTED TAXILANE MARKINGS 7 EACH $700.00 $4,900.00 $2,000.00 $14,000.00 $2,475.00 $17,325.00 $778.00 $5,446.00 077 P-620 TIE-DOWN NUMBERING 44 EACH $50.00 $2,200.00 $100.00 $4,400.00 $112.00 $4,928.00 $111.00 $4,884.00 078 D-701 15" HDPE STORM DRAIN 425 LF $150.00 $63,750.00 $120.00 $51,000.00 $235.00 $99,875.00 $334.00 $141,950.00 079 D-751 ADJUST CATCH BASIN TO GRADE 4 EACH $4,000.00 $16,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $2,816.00 $11,264.00 080 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)2 EACH $6,000.00 $12,000.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $6,000.00 $12,000.00 $4,684.00 $9,368.00 081 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 4 EACH $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,048.00 $12,192.00 082 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 4 EACH $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $10,000.00 $40,000.00 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $7,183.00 $28,732.00 083 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 125 LF $80.00 $10,000.00 $100.00 $12,500.00 $120.00 $15,000.00 $96.00 $12,000.00 084 SP-16 REMOVE EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 208 EACH $250.00 $52,000.00 $100.00 $20,800.00 $75.00 $15,600.00 $355.00 $73,840.00 085 SP-17 MILLING 4,650 SY $20.00 $93,000.00 $10.00 $46,500.00 $8.00 $37,200.00 $8.00 $37,200.00 086 SP-26 10" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 575 LF $300.00 $172,500.00 $115.00 $66,125.00 $190.00 $109,250.00 $113.00 $64,975.00 087 SP-27 10" GATE VALVE 1 EACH $5,500.00 $5,500.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $5,500.00 $5,500.00 $5,419.00 $5,419.00 088 SP-33 ABANDON EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 5 EACH $100.00 $500.00 $300.00 $1,500.00 $75.00 $375.00 $372.00 $1,860.00 089 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 975 LF $15.00 $14,625.00 $8.00 $7,800.00 $8.00 $7,800.00 $8.00 $7,800.00 090 SP-14 ADJUST UTILITY VAULT TO GRADE 3 EACH $4,000.00 $12,000.00 $5,000.00 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 $15,000.00 $3,176.00 $9,528.00 091 SP-15 ADJUST JUNCTION BOX/HANDHOLE TO GRADE 7 EACH $3,000.00 $21,000.00 $4,000.00 $28,000.00 $1,300.00 $9,100.00 $3,175.00 $22,225.00 092 L-100 REMOVAL OF EXISTING LIGHT POLE ASSEMBLY (POLE, FIXTURE, PULL BOXES AND FOUNDATION)11 EACH $6,000.00 $66,000.00 $8,000.00 $88,000.00 $7,000.00 $77,000.00 $7,774.00 $85,514.00 093 L-100 NEW 30-FOOT APRON AREA LIGHT POLE WITH MOUNTING APPARATUS AND MAINTENANCE HINGES 4 EACH $25,000.00 $100,000.00 $30,000.00 $120,000.00 $50,000.00 $200,000.00 $55,527.00 $222,108.00 094 L-100 NEW LED APRON AREA LIGHTING FIXTURE 7 EACH $7,000.00 $49,000.00 $10,000.00 $70,000.00 $8,000.00 $56,000.00 $8,884.00 $62,188.00 095 L-100 NEW LED OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE (DOUBLE-HEAD)4 EACH $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $2,221.00 $8,884.00 096 L-100 TRANSFORMER AND ENCLOSURE FOR OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE 4 EACH $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $888.00 $3,552.00 097 L-100 1" RIGID GALVANIZED STEEL CONDUIT 20 LF $150.00 $3,000.00 $150.00 $3,000.00 $125.00 $2,500.00 $133.00 $2,660.00 098 L-100 2" CONCRETE-ENCASED SCHEDULE-40 PVC CONDUIT IN PAVEMENT 1,100 LF $40.00 $44,000.00 $40.00 $44,000.00 $35.00 $38,500.00 $39.00 $42,900.00 099 L-100 NO. 6 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 5,000 LF $4.00 $20,000.00 $5.00 $25,000.00 $4.25 $21,250.00 $5.00 $25,000.00 100 L-100 NO. 8 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 1,600 LF $2.50 $4,000.00 $5.00 $8,000.00 $3.00 $4,800.00 $4.00 $6,400.00 101 L-100 36"X36" PULL BOX 11 EACH $7,000.00 $77,000.00 $15,000.00 $165,000.00 $15,000.00 $165,000.00 $14,437.00 $158,807.00 102 L-100 36"X60" PULL BOX 2 EACH $8,000.00 $16,000.00 $15,000.00 $30,000.00 $15,000.00 $30,000.00 $14,437.00 $28,874.00 103 L-100 36"X72" PULL BOX 1 EACH $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $14,437.00 $14,437.00 104 L-100 48"X48" PULL BOX 1 EACH $11,000.00 $11,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $14,437.00 $14,437.00 105 L-108 NO. 6 AWG, BARE COUNTERPOISE WIRE 1,100 LF $4.00 $4,400.00 $5.00 $5,500.00 $2.00 $2,200.00 $5.00 $5,500.00 106 L-110 '1" PVC CONCRETE ENCASED CONDUIT 1,100 LF $6.00 $6,600.00 $40.00 $44,000.00 $6.00 $6,600.00 $33.00 $36,300.00 107 L-110 2-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 700 LF $70.00 $49,000.00 $200.00 $140,000.00 $200.00 $140,000.00 $205.00 $143,500.00 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #1 SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE BASE BID (ITEMS 001 THROUGH 067) Page 2 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II 5225 Hellyer Avenue, #220 FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL ENGINEERS OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST C&S Engineers, Inc. 8950 Cal Center Drive, #102 Sacramento, CA 95826 Granite Rock CompanyDeSilva Gates Construction LP 11555 Dublin Blvd. Dublin, CA 94568 Granite Construction Company UNIT PRICE TOTAL San Jose, CA 95138 585 W Beach Street Watsonville, CA 95076 108 L-110 3-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 450 LF $80.00 $36,000.00 $250.00 $112,500.00 $225.00 $101,250.00 $250.00 $112,500.00 109 L-110 4-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 320 LF $90.00 $28,800.00 $250.00 $80,000.00 $235.00 $75,200.00 $261.00 $83,520.00 110 L-110 6-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 115 LF $120.00 $13,800.00 $350.00 $40,250.00 $315.00 $36,225.00 $350.00 $40,250.00 111 L-110 10-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 270 LF $200.00 $54,000.00 $400.00 $108,000.00 $385.00 $103,950.00 $428.00 $115,560.00 112 L-110 15-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 270 LF $250.00 $67,500.00 $550.00 $148,500.00 $525.00 $141,750.00 $583.00 $157,410.00 113 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, H20 TRAFFIC RATED 5 EACH $6,000.00 $30,000.00 $8,000.00 $40,000.00 $6,500.00 $32,500.00 $7,218.00 $36,090.00 114 L-126 INSTALL TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 144 EACH $900.00 $129,600.00 $1,000.00 $144,000.00 $1,100.00 $158,400.00 $1,228.00 $176,832.00 115 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 116 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $44,000.00 $44,000.00 $21,766.00 $21,766.00 117 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $12,900.00 $12,900.00 $12,900.00 $12,900.00 118 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $115,066.50 $115,066.50 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $110,000.00 $110,000.00 $2,032,841.50 $2,175,850.00 $2,210,538.00 $2,369,787.80 119 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 7,900 SY $2.00 $15,800.00 $2.50 $19,750.00 $1.00 $7,900.00 * $3.00 $23,700.00 120 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 * $10,000.00 $10,000.00 121 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 * $1,200.00 $1,200.00 122 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED) 850 SF $5.00 $4,250.00 $10.00 $8,500.00 $8.00 $6,800.00 * $10.00 $8,500.00 123 D-701 8" HDPE STORM DRAIN 310 LF $100.00 $31,000.00 $125.00 $38,750.00 $270.00 $83,700.00 $200.00 $62,000.00 124 D-701 12" HDPE STORM DRAIN 210 LF $150.00 $31,500.00 $125.00 $26,250.00 $240.00 $50,400.00 $190.00 $39,900.00 125 D-701 21" HDPE STORM DRAIN 420 LF $200.00 $84,000.00 $150.00 $63,000.00 $225.00 $94,500.00 $220.00 $92,400.00 126 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)9 EACH $6,000.00 $54,000.00 $5,000.00 $45,000.00 $6,000.00 $54,000.00 $4,500.00 $40,500.00 127 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 1 EACH $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $1,600.00 $1,600.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 128 D-751 48" MANHOLE 4 EACH $8,000.00 $32,000.00 $7,000.00 $28,000.00 $7,000.00 $28,000.00 $6,500.00 $26,000.00 129 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 9 EACH $3,000.00 $27,000.00 $10,000.00 $90,000.00 $2,500.00 $22,500.00 $6,000.00 $54,000.00 130 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 2300 LF $80.00 $184,000.00 $50.00 $115,000.00 $62.00 $142,600.00 $45.00 $103,500.00 131 SP-10 TRENCH DRAIN 2,230 LF $50.00 $111,500.00 $160.00 $356,800.00 $95.00 $211,850.00 $210.00 $468,300.00 132 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 60 LF $15.00 $900.00 $8.00 $480.00 $50.00 $3,000.00 $60.00 $3,600.00 133 SP-24 6" SEWERLINE 560 LF $150.00 $84,000.00 $125.00 $70,000.00 $200.00 $112,000.00 $125.00 $70,000.00 134 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 135 U-201 STORM DRAIN REMOVAL 1 LS $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 136 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 137 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 138 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $57,747.00 $57,747.00 $60,967.80 $60,967.80 * $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $69,306.00 $69,306.00 $1,020,197.00 $1,077,097.80 * $1,016,750.00 $1,224,406.00 139 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 2,600 CY $50.00 $130,000.00 $50.00 $130,000.00 $95.00 $247,000.00 $98.00 $254,800.00 140 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)34,000 SY $18.00 $612,000.00 $5.50 $187,000.00 $4.00 $136,000.00 $4.00 $136,000.00 141 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)730 TON $150.00 $109,500.00 $175.00 $127,750.00 $165.00 $120,450.00 $168.00 $122,640.00 142 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)35,000 SY $30.00 $1,050,000.00 $20.00 $700,000.00 $18.00 $630,000.00 $21.00 $735,000.00 143 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 6,700 TON $200.00 $1,340,000.00 $130.00 $871,000.00 $95.00 $636,500.00 $115.00 $770,500.00 144 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 47 TON $1,500.00 $70,500.00 $1,000.00 $47,000.00 $500.00 $23,500.00 $1,182.00 $55,554.00 145 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $198,720.00 $198,720.00 $123,765.00 $123,765.00 * $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $83,000.00 $83,000.00 $3,510,720.00 $2,186,515.00 * $1,843,450.00 $2,157,494.00 146 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 850 CY $50.00 $42,500.00 $50.00 $42,500.00 $145.00 $123,250.00 $164.00 $139,400.00 147 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)26,550 SY $18.00 $477,900.00 $5.50 $146,025.00 $4.00 $106,200.00 $3.00 $79,650.00 148 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)570 TON $150.00 $85,500.00 $175.00 $99,750.00 $165.00 $94,050.00 $168.00 $95,760.00 149 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)26,550 SY $30.00 $796,500.00 $20.00 $531,000.00 $18.00 $477,900.00 $20.00 $531,000.00 150 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 5,300 TON $200.00 $1,060,000.00 $130.00 $689,000.00 $95.00 $503,500.00 $115.00 $609,500.00 151 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 35 TON $1,500.00 $52,500.00 $1,000.00 $35,000.00 $500.00 $17,500.00 $1,135.00 $39,725.00 152 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $150,894.00 $150,894.00 $92,596.50 $92,596.50 * $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $70,000.00 $70,000.00 $2,665,794.00 $1,635,871.50 * $1,362,400.00 $1,565,035.00 153 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 1,900 CY $50.00 $95,000.00 $50.00 $95,000.00 $64.00 $121,600.00 $30.00 $57,000.00 154 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)8,100 SY $18.00 $145,800.00 $5.50 $44,550.00 $4.00 $32,400.00 $3.90 $31,590.00 155 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)180 TON $150.00 $27,000.00 $175.00 $31,500.00 $165.00 $29,700.00 $168.40 $30,312.00 156 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)8,100 SY $30.00 $243,000.00 $20.00 $162,000.00 $20.50 $166,050.00 $19.00 $153,900.00 157 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 1,600 TON $200.00 $320,000.00 $130.00 $208,000.00 $95.00 $152,000.00 $140.00 $224,000.00 158 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 10 TON $1,500.00 $15,000.00 $1,000.00 $10,000.00 $500.00 $5,000.00 $1,350.00 $13,500.00 159 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $50,748.00 $50,748.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $29,000.00 $29,000.00 $896,548.00 $581,050.00 $521,750.00 $539,302.00 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #5 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #4 ADDITIVE BID ALTRENATE #3 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #2 SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 4 (ITEMS 146 THROUGH 152) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 3 (ITEMS 139 THROUGH 145) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 2 (ITEMS 119 THROUGH 138) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 1 (ITEMS 068 THROUGH 118) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 5 (ITEMS 153 THROUGH 159) Page 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II 5225 Hellyer Avenue, #220 FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL ENGINEERS OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST C&S Engineers, Inc. 8950 Cal Center Drive, #102 Sacramento, CA 95826 Granite Rock CompanyDeSilva Gates Construction LP 11555 Dublin Blvd. Dublin, CA 94568 Granite Construction Company UNIT PRICE TOTAL San Jose, CA 95138 585 W Beach Street Watsonville, CA 95076 160 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 2,600 CY $50.00 $130,000.00 $50.00 $130,000.00 $93.00 $241,800.00 $83.50 $217,100.00 161 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)34,000 SY $6.00 $204,000.00 $6.00 $204,000.00 $4.00 $136,000.00 $4.30 $146,200.00 162 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)1,000 TON $100.00 $100,000.00 $175.00 $175,000.00 $165.00 $165,000.00 $168.50 $168,500.00 163 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)35,000 SY $20.00 $700,000.00 $20.00 $700,000.00 $18.25 $638,750.00 $20.00 $700,000.00 164 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 6,700 TON $200.00 $1,340,000.00 $130.00 $871,000.00 $95.00 $636,500.00 $162.00 $1,085,400.00 165 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 47 TON $1,500.00 $70,500.00 $1,000.00 $47,000.00 $500.00 $23,500.00 $1,200.00 $56,400.00 166 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $152,670.00 $152,670.00 $127,620.00 $127,620.00 * $55,000.00 $55,000.00 $142,309.00 $142,309.00 $2,697,170.00 $2,254,620.00 * $1,896,550.00 $2,515,909.00 167 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 850 CY $45.00 $38,250.00 $50.00 $42,500.00 $140.00 $119,000.00 $120.00 $102,000.00 168 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)26,550 SY $6.00 $159,300.00 $6.00 $159,300.00 $4.00 $106,200.00 $3.70 $98,235.00 169 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)900 TON $100.00 $90,000.00 $175.00 $157,500.00 $165.00 $148,500.00 $168.50 $151,650.00 170 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)26,550 SY $20.00 $531,000.00 $20.00 $531,000.00 $18.00 $477,900.00 $18.00 $477,900.00 171 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 5,300 TON $150.00 $795,000.00 $130.00 $689,000.00 $95.00 $503,500.00 $160.00 $848,000.00 172 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 35 TON $1,500.00 $52,500.00 $1,000.00 $35,000.00 $500.00 $17,500.00 $1,170.00 $40,950.00 173 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $99,963.00 $99,963.00 $96,858.00 $96,858.00 * $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $103,124.10 $103,124.10 * $1,766,013.00 $1,711,158.00 * $1,412,600.00 $1,821,859.10 * 174 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 1,900 CY $45.00 85,500.00$ $50.00 $95,000.00 $64.00 $121,600.00 $33.00 $62,700.00 175 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)8,100 SY $6.00 48,600.00$ $6.00 $48,600.00 $4.00 $32,400.00 $4.60 $37,260.00 176 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)240 TON $100.00 24,000.00$ $175.00 $42,000.00 $165.00 $39,600.00 $168.50 $40,440.00 177 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)8,100 SY $20.00 162,000.00$ $20.00 $162,000.00 $19.00 $153,900.00 $18.50 $149,850.00 178 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 1,600 TON $150.00 240,000.00$ $130.00 $208,000.00 $95.00 $152,000.00 $145.00 $232,000.00 179 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 10 TON $1,500.00 15,000.00$ $1,000.00 $10,000.00 $500.00 $5,000.00 $1,365.00 $13,650.00 180 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $34,506.00 34,506.00$ $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $31,506.00 $31,506.00 609,606.00$ $595,600.00 $519,500.00 $567,406.00 $32,154.00 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #9 181 SP-31 54" OUTFALL PIPE JOINT REPAIR 35 EACH $5,000.00 175,000.00$ $8,000.00 $280,000.00 $22,800.00 $798,000.00 $10,500.00 $367,500.00 182 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 225 LF $250.00 56,250.00$ $100.00 $22,500.00 $265.00 $59,625.00 $174.00 $39,150.00 183 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT & APPERTENANCES 2 EACH $10,000.00 20,000.00$ $7,500.00 $15,000.00 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 $12,000.00 $24,000.00 184 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $15,075.00 15,075.00$ $19,050.00 $19,050.00 *$20,000.00 $20,000.00 $23,500.00 $23,500.00 266,325.00$ $336,550.00 *$897,625.00 $454,150.00 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #10 $25,839.00 185 SP-31 54" OUTFALL PIPE JOINT REPAIR 20 EACH $5,000.00 100,000.00$ $8,000.00 $160,000.00 $22,800.00 $456,000.00 $10,500.00 $210,000.00 186 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 35 LF $250.00 8,750.00$ $100.00 $3,500.00 $250.00 $8,750.00 $350.00 $12,250.00 187 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT 1 EACH $10,000.00 10,000.00$ $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 188 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS $7,125.00 7,125.00$ $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $13,800.00 $13,800.00 125,875.00$ $181,000.00 $486,750.00 $245,050.00 TOTAL OF BASE BID, ALT 1, 3, & 4 TOTAL OF BASE BID, ALT 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 $13,184,547.50 $10,349,684.30 $10,773,810.00 $10,905,683.80 TOTAL OF BASE BID, ALT 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, & 10 13,576,747.50$ 10,867,234.30$ 12,158,185.00$ 11,604,883.80$ ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #7 ADDITIVE BID ALTRENATE #8 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #6 * Math error - Mobilization higher than 6% on Additive Bid Alternates 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 9 * Mobilization error changed Alternates 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 9 Bid Totals (corrected amounts for Mobilization and Alternate Totals shown on bid tab) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 6 (ITEMS 160 THROUGH 166) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 7 (ITEMS 167 THROUGH 173) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 8 (ITEMS 174 THROUGH 180) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 9 (ITEMS 181 THROUGH 184) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 10 (ITEMS 185 THROUGH 188) *DENOTES MATH ERROR. CORRECTED AMOUNT SHOWN.*Mobilization highter than 6% on Additive Bid Alternate 7 (corrected amount for Mobilization and Alternate totals shown on bid tab) Page 4 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 001 P-151 CLEARING AND GRUBBING 0.2 ACRE 002 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1.0 LS 003 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 34,000 SY 004 P-608 EMULSIFIED ASPHALT SEAL COAT 2,750 SY 005 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS 006 P-620 MARKING REMOVAL 400 SF 007 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED) 4,200 SF 008 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (WHITE, REFLECTORIZED) 2,200 SF 009 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (GREEN, NON-REFLECTORIZED)11,100 SF 010 P-620 SURFACE PAINTED TAXILANE MARKINGS 11 EACH 011 P-620 TIE-DOWN NUMBERING 56 EACH 012 D-701 15" HDPE STORM DRAIN 225 LF 013 D-751 ADJUST CATCH BASIN TO GRADE 7 EACH 014 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 7 EACH 015 D-751 48" MANHOLE 4 EACH 016 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)1 EACH 017 SP-3 VERTICAL FLOW CLARIFIER 1 EACH 018 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 8 EACH 019 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 100 LF 020 SP-11 BOLLARD 2 EACH 021 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 2,300 LF 022 SP-14 ADJUST UTILITY VAULT TO GRADE 2 EACH 023 SP-15 ADJUST JUNCTION BOX/HANDHOLE TO GRADE 6 EACH 024 SP-16 REMOVE EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 207 EACH 025 SP-17 MILLING 4,900 SY 026 SP-23 POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY AND APPURTENANCES 1 EACH 027 SP-24 6" SEWERLINE 470 LF 028 SP-25 SEWER CLEAN OUT 1 EACH 029 SP-26 10" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 1,600 LF 030 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 130 LF 031 SP-27 10" GATE VALVE 4 EACH 032 SP-27 6" GATE VALVE 1 EACH 033 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT & APPURTENANCES 1 EACH 034 SP-29 DOUBLE DETECTOR CHECK VALVE 1 EACH 035 T-906 HYDRO-SEEDING 500 SY 036 L-100 REMOVAL OF EXISTING LIGHT POLE ASSEMBLY (POLE, FIXTURE, PULL BOXES AND FOUNDATION)5 EACH 037 L-100 NEW 30-FOOT APRON AREA LIGHT POLE WITH MOUNTING APPARATUS AND MAINTENANCE HINGES 4 EACH 038 L-100 NEW LED APRON AREA LIGHTING FIXTURE 8 EACH 039 L-100 NEW LED OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE (DOUBLE-HEAD)4 EACH 040 L-100 TRANSFORMER AND ENCLOSURE FOR OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE 4 EACH 041 L-100 1" RIGID GALVANIZED STEEL CONDUIT 20 LF 042 L-100 NO. 6 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 4,000 LF 043 L-100 NO. 8 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 1,300 LF 044 L-108 NO. 6 AWG, BARE COUNTERPOISE WIRE 13,000 LF 045 L-110 2" CONCRETE-ENCASED SCHEDULE-40 PVC CONDUIT IN PAVEMENT 340 LF 046 L-110 1" PVC CONCRETE ENCASED CONDUIT 650 LF 047 L-110 2-2" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 380 LF 048 L-110 4-4" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 150 LF 049 L-100 36"X36" PULL BOX 9 EACH 050 L-100 36"X60" PULL BOX 2 EACH 051 L-100 36"X72" PULL BOX 1 EACH 052 L-100 48"X48" PULL BOX 1 EACH 053 L-110 2-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 510 LF 054 L-110 3-4" 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 490 LF BASE BID ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS 246 Ghilotti Avenue $25,000.00 $5,000.00 $235,000.00 $47,000.00 $42,500.00 $8,500.00 $78,000.00 $78,000.00 $125,000.00 $125,000.00 $32,400.00 $32,400.00 $2.00 $68,000.00 $3.00 $102,000.00 $10.50 $357,000.00 $7.50 $20,625.00 $3.00 $8,250.00 $40.60 $111,650.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $39,800.00 $39,800.00 $30.00 $12,000.00 $6.00 $2,400.00 $4.00 $1,600.00 $11.00 $46,200.00 $20.00 $84,000.00 $9.75 $40,950.00 $11.00 $24,200.00 $20.00 $44,000.00 $9.75 $21,450.00 $8.00 $88,800.00 $15.00 $166,500.00 $9.75 $108,225.00 $525.00 $5,775.00 $4,200.00 $46,200.00 $776.00 $8,536.00 $100.00 $5,600.00 $185.00 $10,360.00 $194.00 $10,864.00 $250.00 $56,250.00 $160.00 $36,000.00 $700.00 $157,500.00 $4,500.00 $31,500.00 $1,800.00 $12,600.00 $1,200.00 $8,400.00 $1,500.00 $10,500.00 $1,800.00 $12,600.00 $1,400.00 $9,800.00 $15,000.00 $60,000.00 $10,000.00 $40,000.00 $30,046.00 $120,184.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $5,600.00 $5,600.00 $16,024.00 $16,024.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 $339,500.00 $339,500.00 $6,400.00 $51,200.00 $12,000.00 $96,000.00 $6,578.00 $52,624.00 $50.00 $5,000.00 $68.00 $6,800.00 $150.00 $15,000.00 $1,100.00 $2,200.00 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $1,586.00 $3,172.00 $8.00 $18,400.00 $6.00 $13,800.00 $23.80 $54,740.00 $4,500.00 $9,000.00 $6,000.00 $12,000.00 $7,575.00 $15,150.00 $850.00 $5,100.00 $6,000.00 $36,000.00 $3,787.00 $22,722.00 $100.00 $20,700.00 $250.00 $51,750.00 $203.00 $42,021.00 $6.00 $29,400.00 $4.00 $19,600.00 $3.00 $14,700.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $66,137.00 $66,137.00 $275.00 $129,250.00 $185.00 $86,950.00 $701.00 $329,470.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,600.00 $1,600.00 $1,002.00 $1,002.00 $175.00 $280,000.00 $260.00 $416,000.00 $401.00 $641,600.00 $150.00 $19,500.00 $175.00 $22,750.00 $300.00 $39,000.00 $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $4,000.00 $16,000.00 $6,009.00 $24,036.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,004.00 $3,004.00 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $11,000.00 $11,000.00 $40,062.00 $40,062.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $30,046.00 $30,046.00 $3.00 $1,500.00 $3.00 $1,500.00 $16.00 $8,000.00 $7,000.00 $35,000.00 $7,000.00 $35,000.00 $5,215.00 $26,075.00 $50,000.00 $200,000.00 $30,000.00 $120,000.00 $22,156.00 $88,624.00 $8,000.00 $64,000.00 $10,000.00 $80,000.00 $36,300.00 $290,400.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $5,532.00 $22,128.00 $800.00 $3,200.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $9,953.00 $39,812.00 $120.00 $2,400.00 $140.00 $2,800.00 $43.00 $860.00 $4.25 $17,000.00 $0.45 $1,800.00 $5.90 $23,600.00 $4.00 $5,200.00 $4.25 $5,525.00 $6.40 $8,320.00 $4.25 $55,250.00 $4.50 $58,500.00 $6.20 $80,600.00 $35.00 $11,900.00 $42.00 $14,280.00 $44.00 $14,960.00 $30.00 $19,500.00 $35.00 $22,750.00 $44.00 $28,600.00 $90.00 $34,200.00 $105.00 $39,900.00 $88.00 $33,440.00 $145.00 $21,750.00 $200.00 $30,000.00 $175.00 $26,250.00 $13,000.00 $117,000.00 $16,000.00 $144,000.00 $45,356.00 $408,204.00 $13,000.00 $26,000.00 $16,000.00 $32,000.00 $46,500.00 $93,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $46,347.00 $46,347.00 $185.00 $94,350.00 $215.00 $109,650.00 $357.00 $182,070.00 $225.00 $110,250.00 $275.00 $134,750.00 $402.00 $196,980.00 Oakland, CA 94607 TOTAL A. Teichert & Son, Inc. dba Teichert Construction UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc. Proven Management, Inc. UNIT PRICE 5200 Franklin Drive Suite 115 Pleasanton, CA 94588 225 3rd Street Page 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS 055 L-110 4-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 150 LF 056 L-110 8-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 210 LF 057 L-110 2-5" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED CONDUIT ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 190 LF 058 L-110 3-5" PVC CONDUIT DUCT BANK 150 LF 059 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, H20 TRAFFIC RATED 5 EACH 060 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, AIRCRAFT-RATED, 36" BY 36" BY 30"3 EACH 061 L-115 ELECTRICAL MANHOLE 1 EACH 062 L-125 TAXIWAY EDGE LIGHTING BASE CAN 10 EACH 063 L-126 INSTALL TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 168 EACH 064 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS 065 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS 066 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS 067 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 068 P-151 CLEARING AND GRUBBING 0.3 ACRE 069 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 26,550 SY 070 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1 LS 071 T-906 HYDRO-SEEDING 650 SY 072 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS 073 P-620 MARKING REMOVAL 120 SF 074 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED) 3,100 SF 075 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (WHITE, REFLECTORIZED) 2,350 SF 076 P-620 SURFACE PAINTED TAXILANE MARKINGS 7 EACH 077 P-620 TIE-DOWN NUMBERING 44 EACH 078 D-701 15" HDPE STORM DRAIN 425 LF 079 D-751 ADJUST CATCH BASIN TO GRADE 4 EACH 080 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)2 EACH 081 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 4 EACH 082 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 4 EACH 083 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 125 LF 084 SP-16 REMOVE EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 208 EACH 085 SP-17 MILLING 4,650 SY 086 SP-26 10" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 575 LF 087 SP-27 10" GATE VALVE 1 EACH 088 SP-33 ABANDON EXISTING TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 5 EACH 089 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 975 LF 090 SP-14 ADJUST UTILITY VAULT TO GRADE 3 EACH 091 SP-15 ADJUST JUNCTION BOX/HANDHOLE TO GRADE 7 EACH 092 L-100 REMOVAL OF EXISTING LIGHT POLE ASSEMBLY (POLE, FIXTURE, PULL BOXES AND FOUNDATION)11 EACH 093 L-100 NEW 30-FOOT APRON AREA LIGHT POLE WITH MOUNTING APPARATUS AND MAINTENANCE HINGES 4 EACH 094 L-100 NEW LED APRON AREA LIGHTING FIXTURE 7 EACH 095 L-100 NEW LED OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE (DOUBLE-HEAD)4 EACH 096 L-100 TRANSFORMER AND ENCLOSURE FOR OBSTRUCTION LIGHTING FIXTURE 4 EACH 097 L-100 1" RIGID GALVANIZED STEEL CONDUIT 20 LF 098 L-100 2" CONCRETE-ENCASED SCHEDULE-40 PVC CONDUIT IN PAVEMENT 1,100 LF 099 L-100 NO. 6 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 5,000 LF 100 L-100 NO. 8 AWG, 600V, TYPE THWN CABLE 1,600 LF 101 L-100 36"X36" PULL BOX 11 EACH 102 L-100 36"X60" PULL BOX 2 EACH 103 L-100 36"X72" PULL BOX 1 EACH 104 L-100 48"X48" PULL BOX 1 EACH 105 L-108 NO. 6 AWG, BARE COUNTERPOISE WIRE 1,100 LF 106 L-110 '1" PVC CONCRETE ENCASED CONDUIT 1,100 LF 107 L-110 2-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 700 LF ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #1 SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE BASE BID (ITEMS 001 THROUGH 067) 246 Ghilotti Avenue Oakland, CA 94607 TOTAL A. Teichert & Son, Inc. dba Teichert Construction UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc. Proven Management, Inc. UNIT PRICE 5200 Franklin Drive Suite 115 Pleasanton, CA 94588 225 3rd Street $235.00 $35,250.00 $300.00 $45,000.00 $506.00 $75,900.00 $345.00 $72,450.00 $400.00 $84,000.00 $650.00 $136,500.00 $195.00 $37,050.00 $230.00 $43,700.00 $385.00 $73,150.00 $215.00 $32,250.00 $250.00 $37,500.00 $460.00 $69,000.00 $6,500.00 $32,500.00 $8,000.00 $40,000.00 $12,446.00 $62,230.00 $13,000.00 $39,000.00 $25,000.00 $75,000.00 $46,825.00 $140,475.00 $52,009.00 $52,009.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $48,154.00 $48,154.00 $2,200.00 $22,000.00 $2,600.00 $26,000.00 $5,100.00 $51,000.00 $700.00 $117,600.00 $1,500.00 $252,000.00 $1,609.00 $270,312.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $498,000.00 $498,000.00 $515,087.50 $515,087.50 $141,000.00 $141,000.00 $77,580.00 $77,580.00 $88,000.00 $88,000.00 $76,117.00 $76,117.00 $180,000.00 $180,000.00 $238,470.15 $238,470.15 * $203,000.00 $203,000.00 $3,362,389.00 $4,212,972.65 * $5,891,977.00 $25,000.00 $7,500.00 $75,000.00 $22,500.00 $41,382.00 $12,414.60 $2.00 $53,100.00 $2.00 $53,100.00 $4.54 $120,537.00 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $3.00 $1,950.00 $2.25 $1,462.50 $16.00 $10,400.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $12,163.00 $12,163.00 $40.00 $4,800.00 $6.00 $720.00 $28.00 $3,360.00 $11.00 $34,100.00 $20.00 $62,000.00 $9.45 $29,295.00 $11.00 $25,850.00 $20.00 $47,000.00 $9.40 $22,090.00 $525.00 $3,675.00 $4,200.00 $29,400.00 $755.00 $5,285.00 $100.00 $4,400.00 $185.00 $8,140.00 $189.00 $8,316.00 $250.00 $106,250.00 $175.00 $74,375.00 $660.00 $280,500.00 $4,500.00 $18,000.00 $1,800.00 $7,200.00 $1,887.00 $7,548.00 $7,500.00 $15,000.00 $5,600.00 $11,200.00 $15,097.00 $30,194.00 $1,500.00 $6,000.00 $1,800.00 $7,200.00 $1,321.00 $5,284.00 $6,400.00 $25,600.00 $15,000.00 $60,000.00 $6,198.00 $24,792.00 $50.00 $6,250.00 $60.00 $7,500.00 $141.00 $17,625.00 $100.00 $20,800.00 $200.00 $41,600.00 $191.00 $39,728.00 $6.00 $27,900.00 $4.00 $18,600.00 $2.00 $9,300.00 $175.00 $100,625.00 $2.65 $1,523.75 * $377.00 $216,775.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $7,550.00 $7,550.00 $500.00 $2,500.00 $400.00 $2,000.00 $1,141.00 $5,705.00 $8.00 $7,800.00 $6.00 $5,850.00 $30.00 $29,250.00 $4,500.00 $13,500.00 $5,200.00 $15,600.00 $10,700.00 $32,100.00 $1,500.00 $10,500.00 $4,200.00 $29,400.00 $4,078.00 $28,546.00 $7,000.00 $77,000.00 $10,000.00 $110,000.00 $8,977.00 $98,747.00 $50,000.00 $200,000.00 $30,000.00 $120,000.00 $20,873.00 $83,492.00 $8,000.00 $56,000.00 $10,000.00 $70,000.00 $34,198.00 $239,386.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 $4,500.00 $18,000.00 $800.00 $3,200.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $8,854.00 $35,416.00 $120.00 $2,400.00 $140.00 $2,800.00 $41.00 $820.00 $35.00 $38,500.00 $42.00 $46,200.00 $41.00 $45,100.00 $4.25 $21,250.00 $4.50 $22,500.00 $5.50 $27,500.00 $4.00 $6,400.00 $4.25 $6,800.00 $6.00 $9,600.00 $13,000.00 $143,000.00 $18,000.00 $198,000.00 $42,729.00 $470,019.00 $13,000.00 $26,000.00 $18,000.00 $36,000.00 $43,788.00 $87,576.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $61,185.00 $61,185.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $43,664.00 $43,664.00 $4.25 $4,675.00 $4.50 $4,950.00 $5.90 $6,490.00 $30.00 $33,000.00 $35.00 $38,500.00 $41.00 $45,100.00 $185.00 $129,500.00 $215.00 $150,500.00 $331.00 $231,700.00 Page 6 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS 108 L-110 3-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 450 LF 109 L-110 4-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 320 LF 110 L-110 6-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 115 LF 111 L-110 10-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 270 LF 112 L-110 15-4" & 1" PVC CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK 270 LF 113 L-115 ELECTRICAL PULL BOX, H20 TRAFFIC RATED 5 EACH 114 L-126 INSTALL TIE-DOWN ANCHORS 144 EACH 115 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS 116 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS 117 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS 118 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 119 P-160 PULVERIZED ASPHALT 7,900 SY 120 P-156 COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION, EROSION, AND SILTATION CONTROL 1 LS 121 P-612 FIELD OFFICE 1 LS 122 P-620 PAINTSTRIPING (YELLOW, REFLECTORIZED) 850 SF 123 D-701 8" HDPE STORM DRAIN 310 LF 124 D-701 12" HDPE STORM DRAIN 210 LF 125 D-701 21" HDPE STORM DRAIN 420 LF 126 D-751 CATCH BASIN (CALTRANS D73, G1)9 EACH 127 D-751 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 1 EACH 128 D-751 48" MANHOLE 4 EACH 129 SP-4 CATCH BASIN FILTRATION SYSTEM 9 EACH 130 SP-9 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB 2300 LF 131 SP-10 TRENCH DRAIN 2,230 LF 132 SP-13 JOINT SEALING 60 LF 133 SP-24 6" SEWERLINE 560 LF 134 U-200 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS 135 U-201 STORM DRAIN REMOVAL 1 LS 136 M-100 MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 LS 137 M-150 PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 LS 138 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 139 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 2,600 CY 140 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)34,000 SY 141 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)730 TON 142 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)35,000 SY 143 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 6,700 TON 144 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 47 TON 145 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 146 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 850 CY 147 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)26,550 SY 148 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)570 TON 149 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)26,550 SY 150 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 5,300 TON 151 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 35 TON 152 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 153 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 1,900 CY 154 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (12" THICK)8,100 SY 155 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (4% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)180 TON 156 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)8,100 SY 157 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 1,600 TON 158 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 10 TON 159 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #5 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #4 ADDITIVE BID ALTRENATE #3 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #2 SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 4 (ITEMS 146 THROUGH 152) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 3 (ITEMS 139 THROUGH 145) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 2 (ITEMS 119 THROUGH 138) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 1 (ITEMS 068 THROUGH 118) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 5 (ITEMS 153 THROUGH 159) 246 Ghilotti Avenue Oakland, CA 94607 TOTAL A. Teichert & Son, Inc. dba Teichert Construction UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc. Proven Management, Inc. UNIT PRICE 5200 Franklin Drive Suite 115 Pleasanton, CA 94588 225 3rd Street $225.00 $101,250.00 $275.00 $123,750.00 $377.00 $169,650.00 $235.00 $75,200.00 $300.00 $96,000.00 $430.00 $137,600.00 $315.00 $36,225.00 $375.00 $43,125.00 $542.00 $62,330.00 $385.00 $103,950.00 $450.00 $121,500.00 $595.00 $160,650.00 $525.00 $141,750.00 $625.00 $168,750.00 $788.00 $212,760.00 $6,500.00 $32,500.00 $8,000.00 $40,000.00 $5,082.00 $25,410.00 $700.00 $100,800.00 $1,500.00 $216,000.00 $1,490.00 $214,560.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $41,867.00 $41,867.00 $12,900.00 $12,900.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $9,435.00 $9,435.00 $118,656.00 $118,656.00 $151,694.78 $151,694.78 * $47,177.00 $47,177.00 $2,096,256.00 $2,679,941.03 * $3,599,991.60 $3.00 $23,700.00 $3.00 $23,700.00 $19.00 $150,100.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $3,893.00 $3,893.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $3,953.00 $3,953.00 $11.00 $9,350.00 $4.00 $3,400.00 * $23.00 $19,550.00 $225.00 $69,750.00 $135.00 $41,850.00 $383.00 $118,730.00 $250.00 $52,500.00 $145.00 $30,450.00 $407.00 $85,470.00 $275.00 $115,500.00 $250.97 $105,407.40 $500.00 $210,000.00 $7,500.00 $67,500.00 $6,000.00 $54,000.00 $9,788.00 $88,092.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $872.00 $872.00 $15,000.00 $60,000.00 $5,500.00 $22,000.00 $18,338.00 $73,352.00 $6,400.00 $57,600.00 $11,000.00 $99,000.00 $4,029.00 $36,261.00 $50.00 $115,000.00 $30.00 $69,000.00 $43.00 $98,900.00 $125.00 $278,750.00 $320.00 $713,600.00 $143.00 $318,890.00 $8.00 $480.00 $5.00 $300.00 $106.00 $6,360.00 $275.00 $154,000.00 $100.39 $56,218.40 $445.00 $249,200.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 $130,000.00 $130,000.00 $53,106.00 $53,106.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 $6,110.00 $6,110.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $82,722.15 $82,722.15 $30,467.00 $30,467.00 $1,265,630.00 $1,675,647.95 $1,678,306.00 $120.00 $312,000.00 $60.00 $156,000.00 $12.35 $32,110.00 $3.00 $102,000.00 $8.00 $272,000.00 $3.25 $110,500.00 $165.00 $120,450.00 $180.00 $131,400.00 $217.00 $158,410.00 $19.00 $665,000.00 $20.00 $700,000.00 $30.00 $1,050,000.00 $115.00 $770,500.00 $155.00 $1,038,500.00 $186.00 $1,246,200.00 $900.00 $42,300.00 $2,000.00 $94,000.00 * $1,400.00 $65,800.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $102,920.05 $102,920.05 $30,467.00 $30,467.00 $2,132,250.00 $2,494,820.05 $2,693,487.00 $250.00 $212,500.00 $60.00 $51,000.00 $10.00 $8,500.00 $3.00 $79,650.00 $8.00 $212,400.00 $3.25 $86,287.50 $165.00 $94,050.00 $180.00 $102,600.00 $444.00 $253,080.00 $19.00 $504,450.00 $20.00 $531,000.00 $25.66 $681,273.00 $115.00 $609,500.00 $155.00 $821,500.00 $177.00 $938,100.00 $900.00 $31,500.00 $1,500.00 $52,500.00 $1,400.00 $49,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $106,260.00 $106,260.00 * $30,467.00 $30,467.00 $1,621,650.00 $1,877,260.00 * $2,046,707.50 $135.00 $256,500.00 $30.00 $57,000.00 $10.25 $19,475.00 $4.00 $32,400.00 $12.00 $97,200.00 $3.25 $26,325.00 $165.00 $29,700.00 $180.00 $32,400.00 $217.00 $39,060.00 $19.00 $153,900.00 $25.00 $202,500.00 $18.40 $149,040.00 $115.00 $184,000.00 $165.00 $264,000.00 $177.00 $283,200.00 $900.00 $9,000.00 $2,000.00 $20,000.00 $1,400.00 $14,000.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $40,386.00 $40,386.00 * $30,467.00 $30,467.00 $700,500.00 $713,486.00 * $561,567.00 Page 7 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 PALO ALTO AIRPORT APRON RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, PHASE II FAA AIP PROJECT NO. 3-06-0182-010-2015 IFB NO. 171727 ITEM NO. FAA SPEC NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS 160 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 2,600 CY 161 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)34,000 SY 162 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)1,000 TON 163 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)35,000 SY 164 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 6,700 TON 165 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 47 TON 166 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 167 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 850 CY 168 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)26,550 SY 169 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)900 TON 170 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)26,550 SY 171 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 5,300 TON 172 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 35 TON 173 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS 174 P-152 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 1,900 CY 175 P-160 CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADE (18" THICK)8,100 SY 176 P-160 PORTLAND CEMENT (5% CEMENT CONTENT FOR CTS)240 TON 177 P-208 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (6" THICK)8,100 SY 178 P-403 HMA SURFACE COURSE 1,600 TON 179 P-602 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT 10 TON 180 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #9 181 SP-31 54" OUTFALL PIPE JOINT REPAIR 35 EACH 182 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 225 LF 183 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT & APPERTENANCES 2 EACH 184 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #10 185 SP-31 54" OUTFALL PIPE JOINT REPAIR 20 EACH 186 SP-26 6" WELDED HDPE WATERLINE 35 LF 187 SP-28 FIRE HYDRANT 1 EACH 188 GP-105 MOBILIZATION (6% MAXIMUM)1 LS TOTAL OF BASE BID, ALT 1, 3, & 4 TOTAL OF BASE BID, ALT 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 TOTAL OF BASE BID, ALT 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, & 10 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #7 ADDITIVE BID ALTRENATE #8 ADDITIVE BID ALTERNATE #6 SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 6 (ITEMS 160 THROUGH 166) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 7 (ITEMS 167 THROUGH 173) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 8 (ITEMS 174 THROUGH 180) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 9 (ITEMS 181 THROUGH 184) SUBTOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID 10 (ITEMS 185 THROUGH 188) *DENOTES MATH ERROR. CORRECTED AMOUNT SHOWN. 246 Ghilotti Avenue Oakland, CA 94607 TOTAL A. Teichert & Son, Inc. dba Teichert Construction UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc. Proven Management, Inc. UNIT PRICE 5200 Franklin Drive Suite 115 Pleasanton, CA 94588 225 3rd Street $145.00 $377,000.00 $70.00 $182,000.00 $12.34 $32,084.00 $3.00 $102,000.00 $20.00 $680,000.00 $3.25 $110,500.00 $165.00 $165,000.00 $180.00 $180,000.00 $217.00 $217,000.00 $19.00 $665,000.00 $25.00 $875,000.00 $29.00 $1,015,000.00 $115.00 $770,500.00 $200.00 $1,340,000.00 $177.00 $1,185,900.00 $900.00 $42,300.00 $2,000.00 $94,000.00 * $1,400.00 $65,800.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $30,467.00 $30,467.00 $2,221,800.00 $3,451,000.00 $2,656,751.00 $250.00 $212,500.00 $105.00 $89,250.00 $34.11 $28,993.50 $3.00 $79,650.00 $20.00 $531,000.00 $3.24 $86,022.00 $165.00 $148,500.00 $180.00 $162,000.00 $216.00 $194,400.00 $19.00 $504,450.00 $25.00 $663,750.00 $28.50 $756,675.00 $115.00 $609,500.00 $140.00 $742,000.00 $177.00 $938,100.00 $900.00 $31,500.00 $1,850.00 $64,750.00 $1,400.00 $49,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $30,467.00 $30,467.00 $1,666,100.00 $2,352,750.00 $2,083,657.50 $135.00 $256,500.00 $42.00 $79,800.00 $27.56 $52,364.00 $3.00 $24,300.00 $22.00 $178,200.00 $20.58 $166,698.00 $165.00 $39,600.00 $180.00 $43,200.00 $234.25 $56,220.00 $19.00 $153,900.00 $20.00 $162,000.00 $38.20 $309,420.00 $115.00 $184,000.00 $175.00 $280,000.00 $194.00 $310,400.00 $900.00 $9,000.00 $1,850.00 $18,500.00 $2,454.00 $24,540.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $45,702.00 $45,702.00 *$30,467.00 $30,467.00 $697,300.00 $807,402.00 * $950,109.00 $15,000.00 $525,000.00 $9,000.00 $315,000.00 $7,575.00 $265,125.00 $175.00 $39,375.00 $95.00 $21,375.00 $261.00 $58,725.00 $9,000.00 $18,000.00 $7,000.00 $14,000.00 $24,390.00 $48,780.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $21,022.50 $21,022.50 *$22,357.80 $22,357.80 $602,375.00 $371,397.50 * $394,987.80 $34,942.50 $15,000.00 $300,000.00 $9,000.00 $180,000.00 $7,239.00 $144,780.00 $175.00 $6,125.00 $150.00 $5,250.00 $261.00 $9,135.00 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $24,391.00 $24,391.00 $18,907.50 $18,907.50 $11,535.00 $11,535.00 *$10,698.36 $10,698.36 $315,125.00 $334,032.50 $203,785.00 * $189,004.36 $11,178,675.00 $13,654,127.68 $16,472,036.10 12,115,082.50$ 14,229,310.18$ 17,056,028.26$ C&S ENGINEERS, INC. I CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT TABULATION OF BIDS RECEIVED JULY 26, 2018 SIGNED: DATE: 17-Aug-18 * Math error - Bid Total for Alternate 1 was incorrect, causing Mobilization for Alternate 1 to be higher than 6%. Corrected amounts shown. *Math error - Mobilization for Alternate 10 was higher than 6% (this caused Bid Total for Alternate 10 to also be incorrect). Corrected amounts ahown. * Bid Totals not written/typed on bid forms. * Math error - Mobilization for Base Bid, and Alternates 1, 4, 5, 8 9 and 10 higher than 6% (mobilization error resulted in Bid Total errors). Corrected amounts shown. * Math error - Alternate 1, Bid Item 086, Total Price incorrect. Corrected amount shown. * Math error - Alternate 2, Bid Item 122, Total Price incorrect. Corrected amount shown. * Math error - Alternate 3, Bid Item 144, Total Price incorrect. Corrected amount shown. *Math error - Alternate 6, Bid Item 165, Total Price incorrect. Corrected amount shown. * Math error - Alternate 3, Bid Item 142, Total Price incorrect. This error resulted in incorrect Alternate 3 Bid Total. Corrected amounts shown. Math error - Mobilization highe than 6% on Alternates 9 and 10 (mobilzation error resulted in Bid Total error). Corrected amounts shown. Page 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: 61782FB6-3147-4470-8792-2B4656A69C07 Certificate Of Completion Envelope Id: 61782FB63147447087922B4656A69C07 Status: Completed Subject: Please DocuSign: At place memo CMR 9439 August 27 2018.pdf Source Envelope: Document Pages: 30 Signatures: 2 Envelope Originator: Certificate Pages: 5 Initials: 0 Loretta Olmos AutoNav: Enabled EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled Time Zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto , CA 94301 loretta.olmos@cityofpaloalto.org IP Address: 12.220.157.20 Record Tracking Status: Original 8/17/2018 2:03:45 PM Holder: Loretta Olmos loretta.olmos@cityofpaloalto.org Location: DocuSign Security Appliance Status: Connected Pool: City of Palo Alto Storage Appliance Status: Connected Pool: City of Palo Alto Location: DocuSign Signer Events Signature Timestamp Brad Eggleston brad.eggleston@cityofpaloalto.org Assistant Director Public Works City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style Using IP Address: 73.92.204.84 Signed using mobile Sent: 8/17/2018 2:15:06 PM Viewed: 8/17/2018 2:29:10 PM Signed: 8/17/2018 2:30:52 PM 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) Signature Adoption: Uploaded Signature Image Using IP Address: 174.215.3.65 Signed using mobile Sent: 8/17/2018 2:30:54 PM Viewed: 8/20/2018 9:31:21 AM Signed: 8/20/2018 9:31:30 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 Loretta Olmos loretta.olmos@cityofpaloalto.org Administrative Associate City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 8/20/2018 9:31:32 AM Resent: 8/20/2018 9:31:38 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp Not Offered via DocuSign Andrew Swanson andrew.swanson@cityofpaloalto.org Manager Airport City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 8/20/2018 9:31:33 AM Viewed: 8/20/2018 10:26:33 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Lisa Navarret lisa.navarret@cityofpaloalto.org Management Analyst City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 8/20/2018 9:31:34 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign James Wadleigh james.wadleigh@cityofpaloalto.org Manager of Airport Operations City of Palo Alto | Department of Public Works | Airport Division Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 8/20/2018 9:31:35 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Saira Cardoza saira.cardoza@cityofpaloalto.org Contracts Administrator City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 8/20/2018 9:31:36 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Notary Events Signature Timestamp Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps Envelope Sent Hashed/Encrypted 8/20/2018 9:31:36 AM Certified Delivered Security Checked 8/20/2018 9:31:36 AM Signing Complete Security Checked 8/20/2018 9:31:36 AM Completed Security Checked 8/20/2018 9:31:36 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 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK August 27, 2018 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Vote to Endorse the Slate of Candidates for the Peninsula Division’s Executive Committee for 2018-19 and Direct the City Clerk to Forward to Seth Miller, the Regional Public Affairs Manager for the Peninsula Division, League of California Cities the Completed Ballot for the City of Palo Alto RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should formally vote to endorse the slate of candidates for the Peninsula Division’s Executive Committee for 2018-19 and direct the City Clerk to forward to Seth Miller, the Regional Public Affairs Manager for the Peninsula Division, League of California Cities the completed ballot for the City of Palo Alto. BACKGROUND: The election for the Executive Committee for the Peninsula Division of the League of California Cities will be held on Friday, September 14, 2018 at the Division’s annual election luncheon during the League of California Cities Annual Conference in Long Beach, CA. The Peninsula Division Nominating Committee’s Division President and Saratoga Council Member Emily Lo, and Division Past President and Redwood City Council Member Alicia Aguirre, submit the following candidates for the Peninsula Division’s Executive Committee for the 2018-19 Ballot. Each city is entitled to one vote for each office on the ballot. President: Larry Moody, Council Member, City of East Palo Alto Vice President: Cory Wolbach, Council Member, City of Palo Alto Treasurer: Shelly Masur, Council Member, Redwood City Secretary: Marico Sayoc, Council Member, City of Los Gatos Board of Director (Two Year Term) Alicia Aguirre , Council Member, Redwood City Legislative Action Committee, Santa Clara County Page 2 Nancy Smith, Council Member, City of Sunnyvale Legislative Action Committee, San Mateo County Charles Stone, Council Member, City of Belmont Board Director Alicia Aguirre, Council Member, Redwood City Past President Emily Lo, Council Member, City of Saratoga Santa Clara County Representative Charles “Chappie” Jones, Council Member, City of San Jose San Mateo County Representative Emily Beach, Council Member, City of Burlingame The ballots will be opened and tabulated at the annual election luncheon. The new officers will be introduced at that time. Attached please find the biographies submitted for these candidates. ATTACHMENTS: • Attachment A: Peninsula League Ballot (PDF) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 3 PENINSULA DIVISION MEMBER CITIES ATHERTON BELMONT BRISBANE BURUNGAME CAMPBELL COLMA CUPERTINO DALY CITY EAST PALO ALTO FosTER Orr GILRov HALF MooN BAY HILLSBOROUGH Los ALTOS LOS ALTOS HILLS LOS GATOS MENLo PARK MILLBRAE MILPITAS MONTE SERENO MORGAN HILL MOUNTAIN VIEW PACIFICA PALO ALTO PORTOLA VALLEY REDWOOD CITY SAN BRUNo SAN CARLos SAN FRANCISCO SAN JOSE SAN MATEO SANTA CLARA SARATOGA SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SUNNYVALE WOODSIDE DMSION OFFICERS PRESIDENT EMILYLO, SARATOGA VICE PRESIDENT LARRY MOODY EAST PALO ALTO TREASURER CHARLES STONE BELMONT SECRETARY SHELLYMASUi REDWOOD CITY DIRECTOR LIZ KNISS PALO ALTO AT LARGE EMILY BEACH BURLINGAME MARCO SAYOC LOS GATOS LEGISLATIVE ACTION COMMITTEE CORY WOLBACH PALO ALTO STAFF LWSON SETH MILLER REGIONAL MANAGER EMAIL: $MRLERgocAcm-r.S August 8, 2018 Mayor Liz Kniss 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Mayor Liz Kniss, 1018AUG Ii+ AM9:O2 f,. CEIYEO CITY ► ANAGER'S OFFICE LEAGUE® CITIES pD The Peninsula Division Nominating Committee — Emily Lo, Division Presidenad Fi- Councilmember from Saratoga and Alicia Aguirre, Division Past President and Councilmember from Redwood City — submit the enclosed the 2018-19 Peninsula Division Executive Committee Officers Ballot for you to complete. Each city is entitled to one vote for each office on the ballot. As the enclosed ballot reveals, the Officer positions for year's election are all uncontested, but your vote matters so please submit your completed form right away. The formal swearing -in of the Executive Committee of the Peninsula Division of the League of California Cities will take place on Friday, September 14th, 2018 at the Division's Annual Election Breakfast during the League of California Cities' Annual Conference in Long Beach and you are welcome to attend! Ballots should be mailed back to Seth Miller in the enclosed envelope by Friday, September 7`s or can be delivered in person at the Annual Peninsula Division Breakfast on Thursday, September 14`s. All ballots will be opened and tabulated at the Annual Election Breakfast meeting in Long Beach and the new officers will be introduced on September 14, 2018. If you have any questions regarding the election, I can be reached by email at SMillerPcacities.org or by phone at (415) 595-8629. Thank you for your consideration and participation. Sincerely, Seth Miller Public Affairs Manger Peninsula Division, League of California Cities oLEA2UE® CITIES PENINSULA DIVISION MEMBER CITIES ATHERTON BELMONT BRISBANE BURUNGAME CAMPBELL COLMA CUPERTINO DALY CITY EAST PALO ALTO FOSTER CITY GILROY HALF MOON BAY HILLSBOROUGH Los ALros Los ALTOS HILLS Los GATOS MENLO PARK MILLBRAE MILPITAS MONTE SERENO MORGAN HILL MOUNTAIN VIEW PACIFICA PALO ALTO PORTOLA VALLEY REDWOOD CITY SAN BRUNO SAN CARLOS SAN FRANCISCO SAN JOSE SAN MATEO SANTA CLARA SARATOGA SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SUNNYVALE WOODSIDE DIVISION OFFICERS PRESIDENT EMILY LO, SARATOGA VICE PRESIDENT LARRY MOODY EAST PALO ALTO SECRETARY CHARLES STONE BELMONT TREASURER SHELLY MASUR REDWOOD CITY DIRECTOR Liz KNISS PALO ALTO AT LARGE EMILY BEACH BURUNGAME MARICO SAYOC LOS GATOS LEGISLATIVE ACTION COMMITTEE CORY WOLBACH PALO ALTO STAFF LIAISON SETH MILLER REGIONAL MANAGER EMAIL: SMILLEROCACmES Peninsula Division 2018-19 Executive Committee Officers Ballot City of Palo Alto: Please return to the Peninsula Division c/o Seth Miller, 450 Taraval Street, PMB #236, San Francisco, CA 94116 by September 8 or deliver in person at the Annual Election Breakfast on September 14th at the League Annual Conference in Long Beach. President Larry Moody, Councilmember, East Palo Alto Yes Vice President Cory Wolbach, Councilmember, Palo Alto Yes_ Treasurer Shelly Masur, Councilmember, Redwood City Yes_ Secretary Marico Sayoc, Councilmember, Los Gatos Yes_ Board Director (Two Year Term) Alicia Aguirre, Councilmember, Redwood City Yes San Mateo County Representative Emily Beach, Councilmember, Burlingame Yes_ Santa Clara County Representative Charles "Chappie" Jones, Councilmember, San Jose Yes_ Legislative Action Committee, Santa Clara Nancy Smith, Councilmember, Sunnyvale Yes_ Legislative Action Committee, San Mateo Charles Stone, Councilmember, Belmont Yes Board Director Alicia Aguirre, Councilmember, Redwood City Yes_ Past President Emily Lo, Councilmember, Saratoga Yes Application for the Position of: PRESIDENT Larry Moody, Councilmember, East Palo Alto Statement of Intent to Serve It is my privilege to serve the thirty-six cities that make-up the Peninsula Division of the League of California Cities. My wife Lisa and our four sons have benefited greatly from the vibrant diversity of our community. As President, I welcome member cities from throughout the Division to join me in working together to improve the quality of life for all residents. Thank you for your support! Bio Larry Moody was appointed by the City of East Palo Alto to the Board of Directors of the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency in April of 2016. Mr. Moody was elected to the City Council in 2012 and was appointed as Vice -Mayor in 2015. He serves on the Council Ad Hoc Committees for Education, Housing, and Infrastructure, and is actively involved with the League of California Cities where he serves on the Community Services Policy Committee, and was a member of the Housing Community and Economic Development. Mr. Moody is currently serving on the Peninsula League Executive Committee, and the San Mateo County Task Force on Jobs and Housing. Mr. Moody was a member of the Ravenswood City School Board from 2006 - 2010. Mr. Moody is married with four adult sons. He is a Veteran of the United States Air Force. Application for the Position of: VICE-PRESIDENT Cory Wolbach, Councilmember, Palo Alto Statement of Intent to Serve I would be honored to serve as Vice -President of the League of CA Cities Peninsula Division. Over the past year, I have served as chair of the Peninsula Division Legislative Action Committee (LAC) and testified on behalf of the League and the Peninsula Division in Sacramento on housing legislation and lead District Meetings with legislators from San Francisco, San Mateo and San Jose. For the past two years, I have also served on the League's Public Safety Committee. I helped establish the Peninsula Division LAC and hope we can become an increasingly effective mechanism for promoting Peninsula values and protecting Peninsula interests moving forward. Bio Cory was elected to the Palo Alto City Council in 2014 and has introduced legislative initiatives regarding neighborhood engagement & town halls; secondary dwelling units; surveillance technology transparency; minimum wage; support for Youth Community Services; protecting an inclusive and diverse community; updating zoning to encourage affordable and transit -oriented housing; and renter protections. As a consultant, he has worked with the San Mateo County Transit District on community outreach efforts. As a former staff member for State Senator Jerry Hill, Cory worked with Peninsula cities, school districts, and community groups. He earned a B.A. in Political Science/International Relations from University of California San Diego. Cory grew up in Palo Alto and has also lived in Menlo Park, Mountain View and San Jose. PENISULA DIVISION OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ELECTION PACKET: AUGUST 7, 2018, PAGE 1 Application for the Position of: San Mateo Representative Emily Beach, Councilmember, Burlingame Statement of Intent to Serve Thank you for the opportunity to serve this past year as the San Mateo At -Large Board Member of the Peninsula Division Executive Committee. I admire and appreciate the League's advocacy work and I recognize how important it is for Councilmembers to participate in Sacramento's legislative process by advocating collectively through the League of California Cities. I've found my time on the Executive Board both meaningful and educational. With your support, I hope to continue my service on the Peninsula Division's Executive Board in 2019. Bio Emily Beach was elected to Burlingame City Council in 2015. She believes local government must be effective, responsive, and sensible — and its representatives must consider every decision's long-term impact. Her top priorities include quality city services, transparency, community engagement, and fiscal responsibility. Emily's professional experience spans nonprofit, public, and private sectors. After graduating from the University of Notre Dame on a ROTC scholarship, she served as a U.S. Army officer in Saudi Arabia, South Korea, and Texas. Emily has also worked as a business executive in Silicon Valley before re -inventing herself as a stay- at-home mom and active community volunteer. Emily lives in Burlingame with her husband and two children, both of whom attend Burlingame public schools. The Beach Family enjoys biking together, camping, hiking, visiting national parks, and following college football. Emily is an accomplished musician and enjoys playing guitar, performing, and songwriting in her free time. Application for the Position of: Santa Clara Representative Charles "Chappie" Jones, Councilmember, San Jose Statement of Intent to Serve Bio Councilmember Jones (a.k.a. Chappie) was elected to the San Jose City Council in November of 2014. He represents City Council District 1, the region of West San Jose (west of Hwy. 17 & 880) that borders the cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Santa Clara and Saratoga. Prior to his election, Chappie worked in the private sector where he held sales management positions with Apple, AT&T and Cornerstone Consulting and Technology. Chappie has a Bachelor's Degree in Economics from UC Davis and a MBA from the Haas School of Business. Chappie has been married for over 20 years to Kelli Jones, a high tech sales and marketing consultant. Together they have two grown children and live in the Murdock neighborhood of District 1. PENISULA DIVISION OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ELECTION PACKET: AUGUST 7, 2018, PAGE 3 Application for the Position of: Director of the Board Alicia Aguirre, Councilmember, Redwood City Statement of Intent to Serve I have served on the Redwood City Council since January 2005. Since then I have been involved and participated with the League in various capacities. I have attended Lobby Days with my colleagues from the Peninsula. I attend the League's Annual Conference every year. I am also the past President of the Latino Caucus of the League. The Peninsula Division is a very important and influential organization that brings together Mayors and Council Members together to address the issues and concerns of particular importance to this region. I would be honored to serve as the Director of the Board of the Peninsula Division of the League. Bio Alicia is a former Mayor of the City of Redwood City and a serving member of the City Council. She is the first Latina/o Mayor in the history of Redwood City. She was first appointed in January, 2005 and was elected in November, 2005, 2007, 2011, and 2015. She also served as a Trustee and the President of the Redwood City Elementary School Board. As an active community member, she has served on numerous community boards in San Mateo County and the State of California. Application for the Position of: Past President Emily Lo, Mayor, Saratoga Statement of Intent to Serve I have had the honor to serve as the President of the Peninsula Division of League of Cities for the past year. I will continue to support the League (and its members) in legislative advocacy through education, outreach, collaboration and civic engagement as Past President throughout the duration of my term on the Saratoga City Council. Bio I have served as Chair of Santa Clara County Library JPA, Board Member of Santa Clara County Cities Association, Santa Clara County Water District Commissioner, as well as member of the League's Community Services Policy Committee. On the local level, I serve on the Board of Trustee of Hakone Foundation, and was President of Saratoga Chamber of Commerce prior to serving on the City Council. PENISULA DIVISION OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ELECTION PACKET: AUGUST 7, 2018, PAGE 5 City of Palo Alto (ID # 9237) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 8/27/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary T itle: Acceptance of the 2018 Zero Waste Plan Title: Acceptance of the 2018 Zero Waste Plan; Direction to Staff to Develop a Proposed Contract Extension to the Current Refuse Hauling and Processing Contract with GreenWaste of Palo Alto to Implement the New Zero Waste Plan; and Direction to Staff to Prepare a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Related Refuse Services From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendations Staff recommends that Council: 1)Accept the 2018 Zero Waste Plan (Attachment A); 2)Direct staff to develop a contract amendment to add scope and extend the term of the current contract with GreenWaste of Palo Alto, Inc. (GreenWaste)for collection of all refuse containers, processing recyclable and compostable materials (contents of blue and green containers),and implementation of key Zero Waste Plan initiatives;and 3)Direct staff to prepare and issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for garbage (contents of black containers)processing and disposal services that would begin in 2021. Executive Summary Staff is requesting that Council: 1) Accept the attached 2018 Zero Waste Plan; 2) Direct Staff to negotiate and prepare an amendment to the GreenWaste contract to implement key new programs and replace older waste collection vehicles; and City of Palo Alto Page 2 3) Direct Staff to prepare and issue an RFP for garbage (black bin)processing and disposal services to replace the City’s current 30 year agreements after they expire in 2021. The proposed 2018 Zero Waste Plan contains new programs and initiatives needed to meet the City’s sustainability and zero waste goals as well as new California state law.Council acceptance of the 2018 Zero Waste Plan will not constitute approval of individual initiatives within the plan. Initiatives with significant budgetary or other impacts will be brought to Council for separate approval, or as part of a future annual budget process. The Contract Amendment to be developed and negotiated with Greenwaste would implement new short term programs such as deconstruction and source separation of construction related waste,and an expanded clean-up day program focusing on salvage and reuse of materials.In addition to these scope additions, a 5-year contract extension beyond the current termination date of 2021 is recommended to continue existing services and ensure continuity of these new programs and allow for more favorable timing for a new procurement process for services.The new programs would cost approximately $1.2 million per year and begin by July 2019. However, these costs will be offset by excess reserves and increasing revenues.No rate increases for the immediate future (other than potential annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) related increases)are anticipated. An RFP for garbage (black bin)processing and disposal services is recommended as a first step to replace the City’s 30 year garbage processing and disposal agreements with the Sunnyvale Materials Recovery and Transfer (SMaRT) Station and Waste Management, Inc., after the contracts terminate in 2021 ensuring that Palo Alto will be receiving the best value and the best services. Background In 2005, as part of the Zero Waste Resolution and Strategic Plan the City adopted a goal of 90% of waste generated to be diverted from landfills by 2021. In 2007, Council accepted a Zero Waste Operational Plan that assisted in achieving that goal by presenting new policies, programs, and initiatives. Many of these have been successfully implemented, and as a result Palo Alto’s waste diversion rate rose from 63% in 2007 to 82% in 2016. City of Palo Alto Page 3 In 2016,a new Sustainability/Climate Action Plan Framework was adopted by Council,setting a new goal of 95% of waste generated being diverted from landfills by 2030. To assist in meeting this new sustainability goal, the City hired a consultant (CMR 8321) to help update the City’s Zero Waste Plan and a Waste Characterization Study was performed to analyze the composition of the City’s waste stream (the types and percentages of materials in the garbage). The results enabled staff to identify key opportunities for waste reduction, recovery, and reuse, create new zero waste initiatives and gather feedback from community stakeholders at public meetings and via an online survey. Generally,attendees and respondents provided positive feedback and agreed with the need for new initiatives. Staff worked with key community members to modify initiatives in the draft 2018 Zero Waste Plan distributed as an informational report to Council on April 16, 2018. Each initiative was analyzed to determine key metrics such as diversion potential, costs, and greenhouse gas emissions impacts. The City currently has three significant refuse management agreements all ending in 2021:1) GreenWaste -all refuse collection and materials recovery from blue and green containers,2)Sunnyvale Materials Recovery and Transfer Station (SMaRT) -garbage materials recovery facility for the contents of black containers, and 3) Waste Management, Inc.-landfill disposal of residual garbage.The following is a simple diagram of these agreements and their refuse management function. Curbside Collection (GreenWaste) Garbage Processing (SMaRT) Recyclables and Compost Processing (GreenWaste) Construction Waste Processing (GreenWaste) Landfill Disposal (Waste Mgmt.Inc.) City of Palo Alto Page 4 Discussion Recommendation #1:Accept the 2018 Zero Waste Plan (Attachment A) Staff recommends that Council accept the 2018 Zero Waste Plan as many of the initiatives included will be needed in order for the City to achieve its Sustainability/Zero Waste goals. As was the case in 2007, Council acceptance of the 2018 Zero Waste Plan does not constitute final approval of every initiative within the Plan, rather, Council approval will be sought before implementing initiatives that would require CEQA review or have significant budgetary or other impacts. The following diagram summarizes the new key elements of the Plan: City of Palo Alto Page 5 2018 Zero Waste Plan -Summary of New Initiatives Recommendation #2:GreenWaste Amendment and Extension Staff recommends that a contract amendment for GreenWaste be developed and considered for approval as soon as is practical in order to implement key elements of the 2018 Zero Waste Plan.Since the current GreenWaste contract ends in 2021, staff also recommends a short-term extension of five years through 2026 for the following reasons: 1)The City is receiving good value from GreenWaste for collection services according to an April 2018 benchmarking cost analysis by the City’s consultants (Table 1 below).Collection-related services make up approximately 75% of the fee paid to GreenWaste. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Table 1-Collection Costs Benchmarked City Cost Per Ton Cost Per account Cost Per Resident Palo Alto $136 $513 $175 San Francisco $282 $1,271 $243 Menlo Park $135 $545 $159 Redwood City $143 $467 $119 Milpitas $109 $455 $119 SBWMA $156 $486 $131 Santa Cruz $172 $331 $115 Average $195 $615 $169 2)At least ten neighboring communities’ waste contracts will end in (or within a year of)2021 when the City’s current GreenWaste contract ends. With so many cities seeking new waste services at the same time,there is a very significant risk that Palo Alto could receive a very limited number of proposals (or no proposals)as waste contractors spend their time seeking contracts for cities larger than Palo Alto.This limited competition would almost certainly mean higher fees.Further, recyclables and compostable processing capacity could be committed to other municipal contracts thereby “squeezing” Palo Alto out of the local market. The City might then have to transport its recyclable and compostable material to more distant processing facilities resulting in higher fees and greenhouse gas generation. Nearby Refuse Contracts ending within 12 months of 2021 ·San Jose ·Sunnyvale ·Mountain View ·Santa Clara ·Cupertino ·Menlo Park ·Los Altos ·Morgan Hill ·Gilroy 3)Other reasons to amend and extend the contract with GreenWaste include: a.Ensuring continuity of implementation between existing and new City of Palo Alto Page 7 2018 Zero Waste Plan program initiatives; b.Replacing aging collection vehicles and taking advantage of current equipment not yet fully depreciated. Some collection vehicles would be fully electric, further helping the City meet its sustainability goals; c.Saving staff time and an estimated additional $200k in consultant fees in developing, evaluating and selecting a new waste contractor through a complex RFP process for the collection and processing of refuse; d.Minimizing customer impact of transitioning to a new contractor at the same time as new programs and services begin;and e.Ensuring that the City and the community continue to benefit from GreenWaste’s high level of service. Recommendation #3:RFP for Garbage Processing and Disposal Services Staff recommends that Council directs Staff to prepare and issue an RFP for a 5- year garbage processing and disposal contract that would become the successor to the City’s current 30-year contract with the cities of Sunnyvale and Mountain View for the use of the Sunnyvale Materials Recovery and Transfer (SMaRT) Station and companion Waste Management contract for residual garbage disposal at the Kirby Canyon Landfill in San Jose.The reasons for this recommendation are as follows: 1)To ensure the City is receiving the best pricing and service level - the current contracts with Sunnyvale/Mountain View and Waste Management were developed nearly 30 years ago and it would be beneficial to test the market; 2)Sunnyvale (SMaRT Station owner) intends to rebuild the aging station with the cost being shared among municipal partners, but the planning process is just now beginning.Given the fast pace of change in the refuse business, it is not desirable for Palo Alto to be financially tied to one facility for a long term contract; especially one for which neither a design nor a cost estimate has yet to be prepared.Further, it has become rare for mid-sized municipalities to own such facilities. The private sector owns most such facilities and is better able to react to changing markets and conditions. 3)To limit the City resources expended - an RFP restricted to processing and City of Palo Alto Page 8 disposal of garbage (black containers)is much simpler to develop and evaluate than a full RFP including collection and recycling/compost processing, requiring less staff and consultant time. Timeline If directed, staff will negotiate and prepare a contract amendment with GreenWaste and return to Council for approval in approximately four months (December 2018). Following Council approval of a contract amendment, GreenWaste would order needed replacement vehicles and prepare for implementation of key short term initiatives such as the deconstruction program that could begin January 1, 2020. An RFP for garbage processing and disposal services could be prepared and issued within three months and the procurement process completed in approximately eight months (April 2019). A secondary goal with both contract recommendations would be to synchronize all the waste related agreements to end in 2026 and potentially combine the entire scope of work into one single waste provider agreement to capture efficiencies and reduce overhead costs. It is anticipated that the 2026 date should not be impacted by a large number of local cities vying for competing waste contracts or processing facility capacity. Conceptual Schedule Task/Milestone Date Council to: ·Accept the 2018 Zero Waste Plan ·Direct Staff to Develop Contract Amendment/Extension with GreenWaste ·Direct Staff to Develop RFP for Garbage Processing and Disposal Services August 27, 2018 Council Approval of GreenWaste Contract Amendment/Extension December 2018 RFP for Garbage Processing and Disposal Services Issued December 2018 City of Palo Alto Page 9 GreenWaste -Order New Collection Vehicles and other infrastructure January 2019 Council Approval of New Deconstruction Ordinance March 2019 Council Award -New Garbage Processing and Disposal Contract April 2019 New Deconstruction Programs Begin January 2020 End SMaRT Agreement-Begin Taking Garbage to New Service Provider Late 2021 All Contracts Terminate July 2026 Resource Impact Impacts to implement these three recommendations will be minimal in the short term: 1)Accept the attached 2018 Zero Waste Plan –There are no costs associated with acceptance of the Plan.In the future,Staff will bring each individual initiative with significant budget or other impacts to Council for separate approval, or as part of a future Budget (for example,the Deconstruction Ordinance is planned for Council review in March 2019); 2)Amend the GreenWaste Agreement –There are no significant costs associated with the preparation of the Amendment itself,as it will be primarily developed by Public Works and City Attorney staff. One-time and ongoing implementation costs will be incurred once an agreement is in place (currently anticipated to return to Council in December 2018). Ongoing costs to the City are summarized in Table 2 below, and one-time costs are summarized in Table 3: Table 2-Ongoing Costs to the City Ongoing Programs Annual Cost Increase Deconstruction and Source Separation ·Additional GreenWaste Personnel (1 Driver, ½ Admin., ½ Env. Outreach Coord.) ·Processing surcharge for overweight boxes Subtotal $250,000 $270,000 $520,000 City of Palo Alto Page 10 Expanded Cleanup Day Program ·Additional GreenWaste Personnel (1 Driver) ·Expanded outreach and noticing Subtotal $137,000 $50,000 $187,000 Recyclables Cleanup Efforts ·Additional GreenWaste Personnel (1 Driver) ·Additional sorting of contaminated recyclables (approximately 15% of all recyclables collected) ·Enforcement Support Subtotal $137,000 $234,000 $ 60,000 $431,000 Other ·Supply compost to residents (6 months per year) ·Additional funding of new carts Subtotal $10,000 $10,000 $20,000 Total Estimated Annual Cost (not including CPI adjustments)$1,158,000 FY19 GreenWaste Budgeted Compensation Increase of GreenWaste Compensation FY19 Refuse Fund Budgeted Expenses Increase of Overall Refuse Fund expense $16,253,000 7.1% $29,745,000 3.9% The Refuse Fund has been realizing more revenue than expenses (due mostly to the commercial sector)in the last few years and this trend is expected to continue at least through the current fiscal year. Staff is not expecting to propose rate increases other than potential CPI increases for the next several years; however, an annual analysis of refuse related revenues will be done to ensure the revenues will continue to cover expenses.If revenues continue to grow, rate decreases will also be considered.The graph below assumes a modest revenue growth in the current and next two fiscal years. One-Time Costs to the City Staff proposes funding the one-time expenses with the fund’s rate stabilization reserve (RSR), and currently anticipates returning to Council in December 2018 for appropriation of funds as part of the amendment to the GreenWaste agreement. The Refuse Fund has reduced operating expenses and long-term liablilities, building excess reserves in the last few years because Palo Alto: City of Palo Alto Page 11 ·closed the landfill and composting facility; ·completed the landfill capping in a cost-effective manner; ·completed depreciation schedule payments to GreenWaste for contract start-up and (most) vehicle procurement; ·educed payments to SMaRT due to bond payments ending for long term capital financing of infrastructure; ·received higher than budgeted commercial sector revenues due to flourishing economic activity; ·received higher than budgeted construction-related revenue due to more construction projects in Palo Alto; and ·outsourced regular street sweeping operations. Table 3- One-Time Costs to the City One-Time Costs One-Time Cost Impacts New Vehicles $7,800,000 New Boxes, bins, carts and misc. to support new programs $350,000 New Billing Program $125,000 Total $8,275,000 Reserve Status ·Refuse Fund RSR (FY19 Operating Budget) ·Less One-Time Expenses Remaining Rate Stabilization Reserves Refuse Fund RSR Guidelines (10%-20% of sales) $12,485,000 $8,275,000 $4,210,000 $3-$6 Million City of Palo Alto Page 12 3)Prepare and issue an RFP for garbage processing and disposal services – Consultant fees to prepare the RFP and assist the City with evaluation will be approximately $85,000. This amount is available in a Consultant Contact with Abbe & Associates already approved by Council on August 28, 2017 (CMR 8321). Policy Implications The Council has previously adopted the Zero Waste goals of 90% diversion by 2021, and 95% diversion by 2030. Therefore, the 2018 Zero Waste Plan presented with this staff report does not represent a change in City policy. The GreenWaste contract Amendment and the referenced RFP will implement that Plan, and do not constitute a change in policy. Environmental Review Plans are subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) if they establish mandatory policies or implementation actions that may have a significant environmental impact. The proposed 2018 Zero Waste Plan would not City of Palo Alto Page 13 establish such policies or actions and is therefore not a project under CEQA. Individual initiatives which would require CEQA review or budget approval will be brought to Council when needed. Similarly, the recommended actions with respect to the Greenwaste contract amendment and RFP are not projects under CEQA. CEQA review of any contract amendment with Greenwaste or future contracts arising out of the RFP would be completed prior to Council consideration of those items for approval. Attachments: ·Attachment A Palo Alto 2018 Zero Waste Plan CITY OF PALO ALTO Zero Waste Plan August 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 1 ZERO WASTE GUIDING PRINCIPLES ............................................................................................ 2 ADAPTING TO CHANGING MARKET DEMANDS .......................................................................... 3 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 4 CURRENT ZERO WASTE PROGRAMS ........................................................................................... 5 TARGETED MATERIALS AND GENERATORS ................................................................................ 6 Material Composition ......................................................................................................................... 7 Single-Family Residential Material “Capture Rates” ........................................................................... 9 RESEARCH AND PUBLIC INPUT ................................................................................................. 10 NEW ZERO WASTE INITIATIVES ................................................................................................ 11 Short-Term Programs (2018-2019) .................................................................................................... 11 Medium-Term Programs (2020-2026) ............................................................................................... 18 Long-Term Programs (2027-2030) ..................................................................................................... 23 COSTS AND KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS .......................................................................... 26 DIVERSION ESTIMATES AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTION POTENTIAL ............. 29 ATTACHMENT 1 CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS ........................................................... 1-1 ATTACHMENT 2 WORKSHOP AND SURVEY RESULTS .............................................................. 2-1 ATTACHMENT 3 ASSUMPTIONS AND CALCULATIONS ............................................................ 3-1 ZERO WASTE PLAN 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2018 Zero Waste Plan updates the first such Plan for Palo Alto which was adopted in 2007. The new Plan contains new and revised provisions designed to meet aggressive goals adopted by the Palo Alto City Council in 2016 as part of its Sustainability/Climate Action Plan (SCAP). Specifically, the Council adopted a goal of 95% diversion of materials from landfills by 2030, and 80 % reduction of greenhouse gases by the same year. Additionally, other goals were adopted for water use reduction and environment protection. All of these goals require even more effort by the City of Palo Alto staff and the larger community to reduce the use of materials, to reuse them, and to recycle and compost residuals. The new Plan was also prepared to provide a basis for new and revised contracts the City must have for residuals management. Current contracts with GreenWaste, the Sunnyvale Materials Recovery Station (SMaRT), and Waste Management (Kirby Canyon Landfill) all expire in the Fall of 2021. New and/or revised contracts for hauling, processing, recycling, composting and landfill disposal must all reflect the aggressive goals adopted by the Palo Alto Council. In order to meet the environmental goals by 2030, and have new and revised contractor support contracts in place by 2021, it was necessary to begin a planning process in 2016 and finalize the new Zero Waste Plan in 2018. It was also necessary to re-examine what Palo Alto currently sends to Landfills in order to target the right materials in the Plan. It was found that two of the largest components were food-related materials, and demolition and construction related materials. Therefore, important new and revised Plan provisions deal with these materials. Enforcement of commercial composting and recycling requirements is strengthened, as is source separation and deconstruction in the construction industry. A third and difficult component of landfilled materials are diapers, other personal care products, and pet waste. These will be further explored under the Plan to find workable solutions. The Plan is divided into Short Term, Mid Term and Long Term actions. For the most part, this is because of resource constraints. But it is also because good solutions may not be apparent yet, or because the residual is a smaller component of the total. Asian markets for US recyclables are in flux. At the same time, plastics from around the world are building up in oceans and in wildlife. As part of the Plan, the City will examine better ways to reduce plastics use and manage their residuals. A Foodware Packaging Reduction Plan will be prepared in concert with the City's other environmental protection programs in 2019. Targeted plastics will include food and drink containers and other types of packaging. The City will continue to use a blend of local action and regional, state and national collaboration to establish new program components. Local initiatives in Palo Alto are being taken when it is efficient, helps pilot new ideas and lights the way for others. Enforcement of recycling and composting in the commercial and construction sectors are key examples where Palo Alto is taking new local action under its 2018 Zero Waste Plan. 2 ZERO WASTE GUIDING PRINCIPLES Zero Waste is a holistic approach to managing the flow of resources through society in a closed loop system (circular economy) rather than a linear one. While Zero Waste includes the traditional hierarchy of reducing, reusing and recycling, it is much more. Zero Waste principles provide guidance on how resources are managed, from product design through ultimate disposal. Zero Waste is about designing products and packaging to minimize waste, creating incentives to encourage clean and sustainable products and processes, fostering both producer and consumer responsibility, investing in resource recovery facilities, strengthening local economies, and building community collaboration. This Zero Waste Plan uses the following guiding principles: § Follow the waste management hierarchy of reduce, reuse, recycle/compost, prioritizing waste prevention first, and then reuse (including salvage and repair) before recycle/compost. § Manage discards as resources, not waste. Preserve materials for continued use and recognize that all products are made from and with natural resources and manage them accordingly. § Create and support rules and policies that further the Zero Waste hierarchy of rethink, reduce, reuse, recycle/compost; and redesign systems, processes, or products to reduce the volume and toxicity of waste and materials. § Support Producer Responsibility to hold manufacturers responsible for the full lifecycle of their products, giving them incentive to create less toxic, more durable, reusable, repairable, and recyclable/compostable products, packaging, and processes. § Create and support programs in every sector of the community to shift away from waste generation toward waste prevention, reuse, and recycling/composting. § Create and keep materials and products for use as high on the hierarchy as possible and in the useful loop as long as possible. Keep materials from being “downcycled,” where the number of future uses or options are limited (e.g., composting recyclable paper). § Minimize all discharges to land, water or air that may be a threat to planetary, human, animal or plant health, including climate changing gases. § Empower the community to live a Zero Waste lifestyle, build collaborative efforts to further Zero Waste, and to continue to call for Zero Waste progress. § Utilize existing infrastructure and assets in the development of new programs (e.g., waste collection vehicles, mail services, food storage). § Foster and pilot programs and systems that are adaptable, flexible, nimble, scalable, and resilient. ZERO WASTE PLAN 3 ADAPTING TO CHANGING MARKET DEMANDS The following hierarchy of contingencies has been created to help Palo Alto adapt to future market fluctuations for recyclable and compostable materials. If markets change to such an extent that currently recyclable or compostable items are no longer accepted, the following measures will be taken: 1. Increase allocation of resources and focus on initiatives that further waste reduction and reuse, so that fewer materials will be generated for recycling and composting. 2. Improve processing so recycle and compost streams are cleaner, to improve marketability. 3. Enhance enforcement of customer sorting; and keep non-complying customers waste separate for special processing until compliance is achieved. 4. Embrace the concept that recycling/composting is better than landfilling; even as these expenses increase. 5. Conversion (e.g., gasification, pyrolysis, chemical process) for nonmarketable materials; maintain ability to move in and out as markets change. This is a less preferred option than recycling the materials. Sorting Station at GreenWaste Material Recovery Facility 4 BACKGROUND The City of Palo Alto is a leader in Zero Waste. In 2005, the City adopted a Zero Waste goal of 90% diversion of waste from landfills by 2021. The City’s Zero Waste Operational Plan, adopted in 2007, identified a number of initiatives that will help Palo Alto reach its Zero Waste goal. The City has implemented the major initiatives identified in the plan, including: § A Zero Waste collection contract § Universal roll-out of recycling and composting to all customers § Regional organics processing § Construction debris diversion requirements § Regional construction debris processing § Use of emerging technology The City’s diversion rate has increased from 62% in 2007 to 82% in 2016. “Diversion” includes all waste prevention, reuse, recycling and composting activities that “divert” materials from landfills. In November 2016, the City Council approved the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan Framework, Principles & Guidelines (SCAP) which identified a new goal of 95% by 2030. This Zero Waste Plan identifies the new and expanded policies, programs and infrastructure that will be needed to reach this goal. ZERO WASTE PLAN 5 CURRENT ZERO WASTE PROGRAMS The City contracts with GreenWaste of Palo Alto, Inc. (GreenWaste) to provide comprehensive recycling and organics collection to all residential and commercial customers in Palo Alto. The City and GreenWaste provide technical assistance to multifamily complexes, schools, and commercial buildings pursuant to the City’s mandatory recycling and composting ordinance. Recyclable materials are processed at the GreenWaste Material Recovery Facility where commodities are segregated and sold to domestic and international markets. Organic materials are processed at the Zero Waste Energy Development Corporation anaerobic digestion facility which produces renewable energy to operate the facility. Excess energy produced at the facility is sold to the power grid. The materials leftover from the digestion process are further composted at the Z-Best compost facility. The City also partners with the cities of Mountain View and Sunnyvale on the Sunnyvale Materials Recovery and Transfer Station (SMaRT Station). The SMaRT Station processes mixed garbage from Palo Alto and recovers recyclable and compostable materials that would have otherwise gone to landfill. The City has innovative outreach and education programs, including Zero Waste Block Leaders and Champions and Green Teams at most Palo Alto schools. The Zero Waste programs are supported by the City’s Zero Waste policies, which include: a tiered rate system to incentivize creating less garbage, plastic bag and Styrofoam bans, construction debris recycling and deconstruction incentives, Zero Waste requirements at special events, and the City’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy. Attachment 1 includes a comprehensive list of the City’s current Zero Waste programs. Waste Station Monitors at Barron Park Elementary Color-coded Compost, Landfill and Recycle Bins 6 TARGETED MATERIALS AND GENERATORS Materials are generated from many different sources, including households, businesses, institutions (like hospitals and schools), and construction sites. In 2016, 44% of landfilled materials were from construction projects and 56% were from all other sources. Construction projects have a high recycling rate. In 2016, they achieved 72% diversion. However, there is so much construction activity that the 28% of construction materials that are being landfilled still account for 44% of the total amount of waste landfilled by Palo Alto. These materials include: composite materials (things stuck to other things), mixed residue and fines (materials too small to recover for recycling), and non-recyclable items (including painted or treated wood, rubber, non-recyclable plastics). Zanker Materials Processing Facility Construction debris 44%Non-construction garbage 56% Total Tons of Landfilled Materials, 2016 ZERO WASTE PLAN 7 Material Composition To plan for 95% diversion, the City conducted a waste characterization study profiling each of the City’s non-construction garbage generator sectors, including residential, commercial, industrial and institutional generators. In 2017, 27,165 tons of materials were disposed in landfills from these non-construction sources. The results of the waste characterization study show that 67% of what is currently thrown away could have been recycled or composted through the City’s current programs. Recyclable 32% Compostable 35% Not currently recyclable 32% Citywide Non-Construction Garbage Composition, 2017 (Curbside Collected Garbage) 27,165 tons 8 The waste characterization study also identified the individual material types that were more prevalent in the garbage. The following material types account for 52% of what is thrown away by Palo Alto generators. 1. Edible food scraps (food that could have been eaten, but was thrown away) – 13% 2. Inedible food scraps (pits, peels, cores, shells, etc.) – 9% 3. Untreated medical waste (we need to work with our hospitals to address) – 8% 4. Paper tissues & towels (we need to put these in the green cart) – 8% 5. Clean paper (we need to put this in the blue cart) – 7% 6. Diapers (we need a disruptive solution) – 7% Edible food scraps, 13% Inedible food scraps, 9% Paper tissues & towels, 8% Clean paper, 7% Untreated medical waste, 8%Diapers, 7% All other materials 48% Top Six Most Prevalent Material Types in the Garbage ZERO WASTE PLAN 9 Single-Family Residential Material “Capture Rates” A capture rate indicates what proportion of a material type is being placed in the correct container. Capture rates for the single-family residential sector were able to be included in the waste characterization study because waste samples were taken from the residential garbage, recycle and compost containers. This was only done for the single-family residential sector due to cost considerations. Even though the garbage contains materials that could have been recycled or composted, overall residents in Palo Alto are doing a good job of sorting materials correctly. Single-family generators are “capturing” 86% of recyclable materials and 83% of compostable materials. Some materials types, such as plastics, food and compostable paper have lower capture rates. 86%83% 99%93%93% 62% 98% 46% 30% All r e c y c l a b l e s All c o m p o s t a b l e s Card b o a r d Rec y c l a b l e p a p e r Glas s Plas t i c Yard d e b r i s Foo d Com p o s t a b l e p a p e r Single-Family Material Capture Rates, 2017 10 RESEARCH AND PUBLIC INPUT To identify solutions for achieving 95% diversion, the City conducted research and presented the results at two citywide workshops. Over 100 different ideas were researched and vetted using the U.S. EPA Managing and Transforming Waste Streams Tool. Workshop participants received information about new policies, programs and infrastructure projects that could be undertaken by the City to address materials generated by residential, commercial, construction, and self-haul generators. Participants then broke up into small groups for longer discussions about each of the alternatives. Additional ideas were recorded and each person identified their high priority items for implementation by the City. Feedback was also gathered from the community through an online survey that asked for opinions on specific initiatives, but also allowed for participants to add their own ideas. Results from the workshops and survey are included in Attachment 2. This input was used to develop the final list of Zero Waste initiatives for implementation in the: § Short-term (2018-2019) § Medium-term (2020-2026) § Long-term (2027-2030) ZERO WASTE PLAN 11 NEW ZERO WASTE INITIATIVES Forty-eight Zero Waste initiatives were identified for implementation in the short-term 2018- 2019, medium-term 2020-2026, and long-term 2027-2030. Under these time frames, the initiatives are listed in order of landfill diversion potential and include efforts focused on waste prevention, reuse, and recycling/composting using a variety of tactics such as changing local and state policies, new or expanded programs, and infrastructure development. For each initiative, the following impacts have been identified and estimated: § Potential landfill diversion tons - annual § Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction potential in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) - annual § Staffing based on full-time equivalent (FTE) levels of existing staff – one time or ongoing effort § Additional metrics for success § Key performance indicators (KPIs) Some initiatives require hauler, contractor, or consultant support. Costs have been included for those initiatives. The assumptions and calculations for the diversion and greenhouse gas emissions reductions are included in Attachment 3. Short-Term Programs (2018-2019) The following 20 initiatives were chosen for short-term implementation. These initiatives focus on materials that make up a large percentage of our waste stream (e.g., construction and demolition), are natural outgrowths of programs we already have (e.g., mandatory ordinance enforcement), and/or improve our focus higher up the waste hierarchy to waste reduction and reuse (e.g., waste generation metric and goal, residential food waste reduction). 1. Require Deconstruction and Source Separation of Construction Materials – Explore the development of an ordinance to require deconstruction and source separation for the purposes of 1) increasing salvage/reuse to highest extent possible, 2) increasing the amount and quality of recyclable materials for all construction and demolition projects. Demolishing entire buildings and combining the materials in a single box would no longer be allowed. Consider provisions that encourage or require recovery for reuse as much as practical. Consider provisions that require Adaptive reuse refers to the process of reusing an old site or building for a purpose other than which it was built or designed for. The Art Center is a local example. 12 commercial buildings to make materials available for salvage for a period of time and to publicly advertise salvage opportunities (e.g., dates, times, materials available). Explore incentives to encourage remodeling and adaptive reuse of buildings, including easier permitting and financial incentives. Also consider adding a new metric and KPI for deconstruction. Diversion Potential 3,330 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 8,580 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.2 FTE one time Costs: Ongoing annual costs of $460,000 to add full time driver, half-time administrative support, and additional processing for GreenWaste, as well as $20,000 consultant support to monitor customers for compliance Additional Metrics for Success: Council adoption of municipal code amendment requiring deconstruction and source separation of construction materials KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 2. Direct Mixed Construction Materials to High Diversion Construction Materials Recycling Facilities – Explore the development of an ordinance to require that all mixed construction and deconstruction materials be delivered to a certified high diversion recycling facility and investigate the feasibility of developing and implementing an automated data management system. Diversion Potential 2,320 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 7,850 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Cost: $30,000 one time for consultant support Additional Metrics for Success: Council adoption of municipal code amendment requiring all mixed construction and deconstruction materials be delivered to certified facilities KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 3. Mandatory Ordinance Enforcement for Commercial – Expand and improve outreach and enforcement of sorting requirements for commercial customers (including multifamily customers). Diversion Potential 2,070 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 4,400 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.75 FTE ongoing Costs: $60,000 annually for half-time GreenWaste Environmental Outreach Coordinator Additional Metrics for Success: • Create enforcement procedure • Implement enforcement procedure KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction ZERO WASTE PLAN 13 4. Construction Project Recycling Technical Assistance – Provide technical assistance and outreach to contractors and permittees about the City’s ordinance requirements and provide referrals to local reuse, recycling and deconstruction service providers. Diversion Potential 1,900 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 4,890 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Costs: $300,000 over a 3 year period for consultant support, $60,000 per year for half-time GreenWaste Environmental Outreach Coordinator Additional Metrics for Success: • Develop outreach and technical assistance program and materials for construction and deconstruction contractors • Implement outreach and technical assistance program KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 5. Statewide Packaging and Product Design – Advocate for statewide packaging and product design policies that encourage items to be repairable, reusable, fully recyclable/compostable, and less-toxic. This includes membership in statewide organizations (California Product Stewardship Council, Californians Against Waste) and submitting testimony to legislative and regulatory proceedings. Diversion Potential 790 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 1,500 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE ongoing Costs: $10,000 annually for memberships Additional Metrics for Success: • Continue membership in CPSC and support of CAW • Support legislation that furthers Zero Waste • Support and participate in CalRecycle’s packaging requirements policy creation KPIs: Generation reduction, GHG reduction 6. Collect Additional Items for Landfill Diversion (e.g., diapers, aseptic containers, pet waste) – Identify strategies to divert hard to recycle or compost items. Diversion Potential 620 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 570 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Costs: TBD ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: Additional items collected for recycling and/or composting KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 14 7. Plastics Conversion - Develop pilots to convert non-recyclable plastics and multi-layered products to useful chemicals or products. Diversion Potential 590 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 950 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Cost: TBD ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: Participate in a plastics and multi- layered products conversion pilot KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 8. Textile Collection for Reuse & Recycling – Research and implement a program for residents and businesses to divert textiles for reuse and recycling. Investigate feasibility of adding bagged or boxed textiles to the curbside collection program. Diversion Potential 460 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 3,330 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Costs: TBD ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: Textile collection program added to curbside collection program KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 9. Waste Reduction for Diapers – Explore incentives and requirements for reusable and/or compostable diapers. Diversion Potential 450 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 390 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE ongoing Costs: $20,000 one time for consultant support Additional Metrics for Success: • Determine the type of diaper(s) to incentivize • Establish an incentive program for reusable and/or diapers KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 10. Increase Collection of Reusable Items in the Clean Up Day Program – Enhance the reusable items component of the by-appointment Clean Up Days for both resident and businesses. Consider adding an additional clean-up day and collecting on a neighborhood wide basis. Consider partnering with a non-profit(s). Diversion Potential 390 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 1,730 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Costs: $187,000 annually to add one full-time driver and to expand outreach and noticing Additional Metrics for Success: Enhance the reuse element of the Clean Up Day program and include a partnership with at least one local reuse non-profit KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction Diapers comprise 16% of all residential discards (7% citywide) ZERO WASTE PLAN 15 11. Outreach and Technical Assistance for Self-Haul – Develop outreach and technical assistance to customers that self-haul materials generated within Palo Alto. Diversion Potential 380 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 980 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Costs: $30,000 per year for 3 years for consultant support Additional Metrics for Success: • Develop outreach and technical assistance program and materials for self-haul customers • Implement outreach and technical assistance program KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 12. Residential Food Waste Reduction – Expand outreach and education programs to reduce wasted food. Learn the barriers and benefits for Palo Alto residents so outreach addresses those that lead to measurable change. Diversion Potential 310 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 270 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE ongoing Costs: $20,000 one time for consultant support Additional Metrics for Success: • Conduct food waste reduction barriers and benefits research • Create an engagement program based on that research KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 13. Foodware Packaging Reduction Plan – Develop a Foodware Packaging Reduction Plan to reduce the amount of single-use, disposable foodware packaging generated in Palo Alto, encourage reusable foodware items, and to ensure that the single-use disposable items that are generated are recycled or composted. As a first phase of implementation, explore the development of an ordinance to require some single-use items (e.g., cutlery, straws, stirrers) to be compostable in Palo Alto’s program and provided only upon request. Diversion Potential 290 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 470 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.1 FTE one time KPIs: Generation reduction, landfill reduction, GHG reduction 16 14. Add a Waste Generation Metric(s) and Goal(s) to the Current Landfill Diversion Goals – Explore metrics to adopt that focus on reducing the creation of waste. Establish targets for reducing discarded materials (garbage, recycle, and compost). Include metrics that address climate/carbon impacts and footprints. Diversion Potential 290 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 470 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Costs: $10,000 one time for consultant support Additional Metrics for Success: Waste reduction metric and targets adopted by Council KPIs: Generation reduction, GHG reduction 15. Wood to Biochar – Explore the production and application of biomass power-generation technology from tree trimming operations and the residual biochar application on public lands within the City. Diversion Potential 240 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 470 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Cost: TBD ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: Determine the cost effectiveness and feasibility of wood to biochar for Palo Alto KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 16. Color Tinted Clear Bags – Explore the development of an ordinance to require all commercial customers who use bags to use color-tinted clear plastic bags (blue tint for recycle, green tint for compost, clear for garbage) and compostable bags for compost to consolidate materials by material type for better monitoring and enforcement of waste sorting. Diversion Potential 230 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 430 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Municipal code amendment requiring color tinted clear bags adopted by Council KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 17. Commercial Food Donations – Building on the 2015 Food Rescue Services, Barriers, and Recommendations in Santa Clara County, continue participation in County’s Silicon Valley Food Rescue working group to create a sustainable food rescue system in Santa Clara County, where all surplus edible food goes to food insecure people. Consider policies and programs applicable GreenWaste’s all-electric collection truck contributes to the City’s greenhouse gas reduction goals. Biochar is charcoal used as a soil amendment. Biochar is a stable solid, rich in carbon, and can endure in soil for thousands of years. Like most charcoal, biochar is made from biomass via pyrolysis. Biochar application to soil is being evaluated as an approach to carbon sequestration. ZERO WASTE PLAN 17 in Palo Alto according to the findings from the county working group. Integrate with food waste prevention efforts. Diversion Potential 160 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 140 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: • Continue involvement in Silicon Valley Food Rescue • Pilot A La Carte food truck in Palo Alto KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 18. Encourage Residential Application of Compost – Explore the feasibility of making compost available to residents for no charge to encourage its use. Diversion Potential 30 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 30 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Cost: $10,000 on going Additional Metrics for Success: • Increase markets for organic materials • Achieve co-benefits carbon sequestration KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 19. Sustainable Repair Café Function - Work with Repair Café leaders and other repair community stakeholders to explore ways to create a permanent, sustainable Repair Café function. Diversion Potential 150 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 770 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Increase number of repaired items per year and increase use of repair and reuse services over buying new items KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 20. Improve Recycling Collection and Processing – Explore the feasibility of adding an additional collection route to improve processing of contaminated recyclables to reduce rejection of the materials in the market. Provide more and better sorting of marginally contaminated recyclables at the processing facility to ensure the marketability of the materials. Diversion Potential 380 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 770 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Costs: $371,000 ongoing for an additional driver and enhanced sorting for GreenWaste Additional Metrics for Success: Increase quality of recycled feedstocks and reduce rejection of contaminated loads KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction Silicon Valley legend Dan Kottke helped out at the fourth Palo Alto Repair Café. Dan is known as 'Apple employee number one' and was a major contributor to the Apple I, Apple II and the first Macintosh computers. 18 Medium-Term Programs (2020-2026) The following 18 initiatives were chosen for medium-term implementation. These initiatives focus on continuing to increase waste prevention and reuse/repair efforts within the community, but also planning for improved material processing. 21. Improve Municipal Solid Waste (MSW), Recyclable Materials, and Compostable Materials Processing - Use Request for Proposal process to pursue more effective material recovery facilities for MSW when SMaRT agreement ends in 2021. At a minimum, ensure that residues after processing are further composted or digested to minimize landfilling. Diversion Potential 2,820 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 5,240 MTCO2e Staff Levels (RFP development not included) 0.1 FTE one time Additional Metrics of Success: Council approval of a new contract for more effective MSW processing KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 22. Mandatory Ordinance Enforcement for Residential - Expand residential outreach efforts (e.g., pilot providing posters on carts or inside lids). Explore providing periodic auditing of residential collection containers and provide outreach and education to residents to ensure that they are aware of the mandatory recycling program and how to comply with more outreach provided to residents who require more assistance (as indicated by audit results). Explore options for shared containers. Diversion Potential 1,380 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 2,320 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.2 FTE ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: • Increase participation in residential recycling and composting program • Decrease contamination in the recycle, compost and landfill containers KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 23. Commercial Waste Prevention Technical Assistance - Expand commercial technical assistance program to include waste prevention and reuse. Provide tools to identify and redesign wasteful practices, products and packaging, make business case for Zero Waste, and purchase more environmentally preferred products (e.g., the current ReThink Disposable program). Diversion Potential 890 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 1,890 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: Reduce generation of products and packing at Palo Alto businesses and institutions KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction ZERO WASTE PLAN 19 24. Business Outreach (presentations, door-to-door outreach, Zero Waste Champions) - Expand outreach and technical assistance to industrial, commercial and institutional generators addressing recycling and/or composting logistics and increasing employee participation. Conduct focus group on how to make recycling and composting more intuitive. Diversion Potential 890 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 1,890 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: • Increase participation in recycling and composting programs • Promote Zero Waste culture at Palo Alto businesses and institutions KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 25. Plastic Recovery Facility - Participate in the development of a regional plastic recovery facility for hard to recycle plastics with recycling service providers, business generators, and other communities throughout the Bay Area. Diversion Potential 590 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 950 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Determination of the feasibility of a regional plastic recovery facility KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 26. Foodware Packaging Reduction – Continue implementation of the Foodware Packaging Reduction Plan. Explore modification of the foodware ordinance to require: 1) use of reusables (dishes, cups, utensils) for on-site dining; 2) a reusable takeout packaging option; 3) a charge for disposable takeout foodware (e.g., cups, clamshells); and 4) all disposable foodware be free of certain highly toxic chemicals known to migrate into food and beverages and be compostable in the City’s waste management programs. Diversion Potential 420 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 780 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.1 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Council adoption of modified foodware ordinance to further reduce foodware packaging KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 27. Commercial Food Waste Prevention - Explore expansion of outreach to grocery stores, restaurants, school cafeterias and other food generators on opportunities and practices to prevent food waste. Work with Santa Clara County, local business, and regional industry associations to hold Waste Less Food panels. Incentivize food waste reduction tools such as Lean Path, etc. 10 downtown restaurants are participating in the City’s Go Box pilot. 20 Diversion Potential 420 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 370 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.05 FTE ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: Reduce generation of wasted food KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 28. Improve Green Purchasing - Finalize the update to the City’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy and operating procedures. Include plans for staff education and policy awareness. Contract staff support contingent on budget approval. Diversion Potential 380 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 1,300 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.04 FTE one time Costs: $120,000 for contract staff support Additional Metrics for Success: Updated Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy adopted KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, Toxics reduction, GHG reduction 29. Issue Waste Reduction Grants - Explore the feasibility of providing grants to non- governmental organizations (NGOs), schools, businesses and/or individuals to assist the community to implement innovative reduction, reuse, recycling and composting programs and to help foster the culture change needed to achieve Zero Waste. NGOs outside of the city that provide services within the city should be eligible for grants (e.g., gleaners). Diversion Potential 290 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 470 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE ongoing Costs: $10,000 annual grant program Additional Metrics of Success: Implementation of grants program supporting local NGOs in waste prevention and recycling KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, Toxics reduction, GHG reduction 30. Incentives for Reuse, Rental, Repair Industry - Explore the feasibility of providing incentives for reuse, rental and repair through contract incentives, material exchanges, wood reuse, and direct assistance. Diversion Potential 290 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 470 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics of Success: Development of repair and reuse culture in Palo Alto KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 31. Bans or Fees – Identify additional toxic, hard to recover products, or packaging for regulation (through bans, takebacks, fees, incentives or other regulation). Targeted materials could include expanded polystyrene foam products that are not included in the current ban (such as meat trays and egg cartons), delivery service packaging (such as cold packs and non- ZERO WASTE PLAN 21 recyclable plastics), Mylar packaging (such as chip bags and juice pouches), or other hard to recover products or packaging. Diversion Potential 260 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 300 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Council adoption of new ordinances addressing hard-to-recycle products or packaging KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 32. Residential Food Donations - Expand Palo Alto’s current residential food sharing network (gleaning, donations). Integrate with food waste prevention efforts. Diversion Potential 200 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 180 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: • Increase donations and gleaning • Promote sharing economy KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 33. Retailer Take-Backs – Explore the development of an ordinance to require retailers to takeback key products and packaging that they sell to improve convenience for consumers or to collect materials that are not acceptable in the curbside recycling program (e.g., batteries, pharmaceuticals, compact fluorescent bulbs). Research should include: options for extended producer responsibility for manufacturers and distributers with pickup points at retail sites (such as in the Alameda County pharmaceutical takeback ordinance); and “milk run” pickups from retail sites by the City’s contractor or household hazardous waste program (such as the in the San Luis Obispo Integrated Waste Agency takeback program). Coordinate with neighboring cities to adopt ordinances at same time, and/or to take effect once all neighboring cities adopt. Diversion Potential 190 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 320 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Council adoption of take-back ordinances addressing hard-to-recycle products or packaging KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 34. No Green or Brown Colored Non-Compostable Produce Bags – Explore the development of an ordinance to prohibit the sale or distribution of green or brown-tinted produce bags that are not compostable. Clear bags and produce bagged outside of City (e.g., potatoes packed in brown bags to reduce oxidation) would be permissible. Diversion Potential 120 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 110 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Council adoption of new ordinance addressing non-compostable bags KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 22 35. Residential Outreach to Encourage Zero Waste Lifestyle - Expand outreach and education programs to promote adoption of a “Zero Waste lifestyle.” Promote online resources and best practices for reducing waste. Conduct focus group on how to make recycling and composting more intuitive. Diversion Potential 80 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 110 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: • Expand adoption of Zero Waste Lifestyle • Promote Zero Waste culture with Palo Alto residents KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 36. Free Collection of Small Quantities of Construction Debris from Residents - Explore providing a reuse and recycling opportunity for small quantities of building materials that are generated through home improvement projects. Investigate feasibility of collecting small amounts of mixed construction debris in a special container. Diversion Potential 20 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 0 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Small quantities of reusable and recyclable building materials added to on-call collection program KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 37. Promote Access to Goods Over Ownership - Explore how to promote services that provide short term rentals of reusable goods such as tools, sports equipment, party equipment (tables, chairs, serving utensils), as well as sharing websites. Explore a membership-based program that promotes community resource sharing while leveraging communal purchasing power (e.g., a Tool Library delivers affordable tool-lending services to individuals, businesses, and civic or community organizations). Diversion Potential 10 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 80 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics of Success: Further enhancement of a reduce and reuse culture in Palo Alto KPIs: Generation reduction, GHG reduction 38. Reusable Filling Stations at Stores and Zero Waste Supermarkets - Explore the promotion of purchasing items in bulk bins and bulk packages at local stores, the expansion of bulk bin sales at local stores, and Zero Waste supermarkets (everything is sold in bulk). Diversion Potential 10 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 10 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics of Success: Increase in locations for bulk purchasing in Palo Alto KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction ZERO WASTE PLAN 23 Long-Term Programs (2027-2030) The final 10 initiatives were chosen for long-term implementation. These initiatives include more collaborative efforts. 39. Every Other Week Garbage Collection – Explore every other week garbage collection service options for both residential and commercial customers. Diversion Potential 4,310 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 6,980 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.1 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: • Achieve greater collection efficiencies • Increase participation in recycling and compost • Decrease contamination of recycling and compost in the trash KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 40. Building Materials Reuse Center - Investigate the feasibility of creating a Building Materials Reuse Center in the region for the sale of salvaged building materials. The building materials would be available for sale to the public and the Center would provide an outlet for resale from deconstruction. Diversion Potential 670 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 2,840 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.05 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Local resource for reused building materials KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 41. Require Items to be Reusable, Compostable, or Recyclable - Explore the development of an ordinance to require all products and packaging sold in Palo Alto to be reusable, compostable, or recyclable, in that order of priority. Diversion Potential 470 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 880 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.05 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Council adoption of ordinance requiring reusable, compostable or recyclable products KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 42. Market Development (local, regional, state, national) - Explore more active promotion of local businesses that repair, refurbish, market, and sell used, recycled content or compost products (through on-line resource guides, outreach and advertising); and local flea market. Since 2016, 25% of the City’s whole house demolition projects have been deconstructed instead of demolished. 24 Consider expanding promotion of garage sales for sale of reusable items and swaps for household goods (e.g., clothing, toys). Diversion Potential 290 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 470 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: • Promotion and visibility of repair and reuse organizations within the region • Increased use of recycled content and compost products. KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 43. Recycling, Reuse & Repair Directory - Explore adding reuse and repair locations to RecycleWhere and/or developing a supplemental web-based directory specific to reuse and repair. This new directory could also include Zero Waste vendors and caterers. Diversion Potential 290 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 470 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Comprehensive resource about how to recycle, reuse or repair anything in Palo Alto KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 44. Zero Waste Research Initiative - Work collaboratively with industry, government and educational institutions to find new solutions for items that are hard to reuse, recycle or compost in Palo Alto, connecting with the latest developments, innovation and innovative funding (including venture capital). Work with Stanford University on research, development, and policies to support innovations. Diversion Potential 290 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 470 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.04 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: • Engagement with regional partners • Adoption by local educational institutions KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, Toxics reduction, GHG reduction 45. Reuse Exchange - Explore and develop a program that encourages businesses to institutionalize internal reuse – reuse closets for office supplies or tools, surplus sales to other businesses, remnants, surplus goods and equipment, donating goods to non-profits and, finally, giving items away. Diversion Potential 230 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 940 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.04 FTE ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: • Adoption of practice by local businesses and institutions • Transition to sharing economy KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction ZERO WASTE PLAN 25 46. Promote Zero Waste Credits in CalGreen Building Code (reuse, recycling, composting, and recycled products) - Participate in Green Building Advisory Group. Provide information on Palo Alto Zero Waste policies and programs for construction and demolition and advocate for statewide requirements that support Zero Waste in CalGreen Building Code. Diversion Potential 190 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 490 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.02 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Universal adoption of Zero Waste programs in construction and deconstruction KPIs: Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 47. Businesses Recognition - Assess city and non-city recognition and certification programs active in Palo Alto (e.g., certified Green business, certified Zero Waste facilities, Business Environmental Network). Explore ways to bolster programs. Hold opportunities and challenges meet-ups with representatives. Develop on-going cooperation agreements. Work with Chamber of Commerce and Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association, regarding (re)integrating green priorities and projects into each group’s mission and vision as per the Economic Development Policy. Engage with large janitorial contractors to support “back of house” recognition. Develop draft multi-year Green Business Recognition Strategy. Hold quarterly meet-ups for businesses interested in going green including all interested parties. Diversion Potential 30 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 60 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.04 FTE ongoing Additional Metrics for Success: • Increase exposure of Zero Waste businesses • Promotion of Zero Waste culture KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 48. Palo Alto Businesses Product & Packaging Redesign - Launch/participate in a regional initiative to encourage businesses to use reusable, recycled content and eco-friendly materials in the design and redesign of new and existing products and packaging; collaborate with local economic development staff to provide assistance and incentives. Support the San Jose Recycled Market Development Zone and encourage Palo Alto businesses to buy recycled content products from them. Diversion Potential 30 tons GHG Emissions Reduction Potential 60 MTCO2e Staff Levels 0.1 FTE one time Additional Metrics for Success: Local leadership in product and packaging redesign KPIs: Generation reduction, Landfill reduction, GHG reduction 26 COSTS AND KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Zero Waste Initiatives Projected Diversion Projected GHG Reduction Estimated Costs FTE = Full Time Equivalent $ = Hauler/Contractor/ Consultant Support KPIs GR = Generation Reduction LR = Landfill Reduction TR = Toxics Reduction GHG = GHG Reduction (Tons) (MTCO2e) FTE $ GR LR TR GHG Short-Term (2018-2019) 1. Require Deconstruction and Source Separation of Construction Debris 3,330 8,580 0.21 $480K · · 2. Direct Mixed Construction Debris to High Diversion Construction Debris Recycling Facilities 2,320 7,850 0.21 $30K1 · · 3. Mandatory Ordinance Enforcement for Commercial 2,070 4,400 0.75 $60K · · 4. Construction Debris Recycling Technical Assistance 1,900 4,890 0.021 $300K1 $60K · · 5. Statewide Packaging and Product Design 790 1,500 0.02 $10K · · 6. Collect Additional Items for Landfill Diversion 620 570 0.021 TBD · · 7. Plastics Conversion 590 950 0.021 — · · 8. Textile Collection for Reuse & Recycling 460 3,330 0.21 TBD · · 9. Waste Reduction for Diapers 450 390 0.021 $20K1 · · · 10. Increase Collection of Reusable Items in the Clean Up Day Program 390 1,730 0.021 $187K · · 11. Outreach and Technical Assistance for Self-Haul 380 980 0.021 $90K1 · · 12. Residential Food Waste Reduction 310 270 0.021 $20K1 · · · 13. Plastics Reduction Plan 290 470 0.11 — · · · 14. Add a Waste Generation Metric and Goal to the Current Landfill Diversion Goals 290 470 0.021 $10K1 · · 15. Wood to Biochar 240 470 0.021 TBD · · 16. Color Tinted Clear Bags 230 430 0.021 — · · 17. Commercial Food Donations 160 140 0.02 — · · 18. Encourage Residential Application of Compost 30 30 0.021 $10K · · 19. Sustainable Repair Café Function 150 770 0.02 — · · · 20. Improve Recycling Collection and Processing 380 770 0.021 $371K · · Subtotal 15,380 38,990 1.75 $1.65M 1One time staff support or one time costs ZERO WASTE PLAN 27 Zero Waste Initiatives Projected Diversion Projected GHG Reduction Estimated Costs FTE = Full Time Equivalent $ = Hauler/Contractor/ Consultant Support KPIs GR = Generation Reduction LR = Landfill Reduction TR = Toxics Reduction GHG = GHG Reduction (Tons) (MTCO2e) FTE $ GR LR TR GHG Medium-Term (2020-2026) 21. Improve Municipal Solid Waste (MSW), Recyclable Materials, and Compostable Materials Processing 2,820 5,240 0.11 $2 · · 22. Mandatory Ordinance Enforcement for Residential 1,380 2,320 0.2 · · 23. Commercial Waste Prevention Technical Assistance 890 1,890 0.02 · · · 24. Business Outreach 890 1,890 0.02 · · · · 25. Plastic Recovery Facility 590 950 0.021 · · 26. Foodware Packaging 420 780 0.11 · · · 27. Commercial Food Waste Prevention 420 370 0.05 · · · 28. Improve Green Purchasing 380 1,300 0.041 $120K · · · · 29. Issue Waste Reduction Grants 290 470 0.02 $10K · · · · 30. Incentives for Reuse, Rental, Repair Industry 290 470 0.021 · · · 31. Bans or Fees 260 300 0.021 · · · 32. Residential Food Donations 200 180 0.021 · · 33. Retailer Take-Backs 190 320 0.021 · · 34. No Green or Brown Colored Non-Compostable Produce Bags 120 110 0.021 · · 35. Residential Outreach to Encourage Zero Waste Lifestyle 80 110 0.02 · · · 36. Free Collection of Small Quantities of Construction Debris from Residents 20 0 0.021 · · 37. Promote Access to Goods Over Ownership 10 80 0.021 · · 38. Reusable Filling Stations at Stores and Zero Waste Supermarkets 10 10 0.021 · · · Subtotal 9,260 16,790 0.75 $130K 1One time staff support or one time costs 2Most medium- and long-term costs are to be determined 28 Zero Waste Initiatives Projected Diversion Projected GHG Reduction Estimated Costs FTE = Full Time Equivalent $ = Hauler/Contractor/ Consultant Support KPIs GR = Generation Reduction LR = Landfill Reduction TR = Toxics Reduction GHG = GHG Reduction (Tons) (MTCO2e) FTE $ GR LR TR GHG Long-Term (2027-2030) 39. Every Other Week Garbage Collection 4,310 6,980 0.11 $2 · · · 40. Building Materials Reuse Center 670 2,840 0.051 · · 41. Require Items to be Reusable, Compostable, or Recyclable 470 880 0.051 · · 42. Market Development 290 470 0.02 · · 43. Recycling, Reuse & Repair Directory 290 470 0.021 · · · 44. Zero Waste Research Initiative 290 470 0.041 · · · · 45. Reuse Exchange 230 940 0.04 · · · 46. Promote Zero Waste Credits in CalGreen Building Code 190 490 0.021 · · 47. Businesses Recognition 30 60 0.04 · · · 48. Palo Alto Businesses Product & Packaging Redesign 30 60 0.11 · · · Subtotal 6,800 13,660 0.48 Total 31,440 69,440 2.98 $1.78M 1One time staff support or one time costs 2Most medium- and long-term costs are to be determined ZERO WASTE PLAN 29 DIVERSION ESTIMATES AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTION POTENTIAL Implementing the Zero Waste initiatives identified in this plan update will help the City achieve its 95% goal. Using conservative estimates for capture rates by material type, the short-, medium-, and long-term Zero Waste initiatives would result in an additional 31,000 tons per year diverted from landfill. The assumptions and calculations are included in Attachment 3. 30 Waste prevention, recycling and composting activities also reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Using the U.S. EPA Waste Reduction Model (WARM), the Zero Waste initiatives to be undertaken in the short-, medium- and long-term are estimated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 69,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. The calculations and projections using WARM are included in Attachment 3. This will contribute to the City’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal of 80% below 1990 levels by 2030. 1-1 ATTACHMENT 1 CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS Policies § Rate Structure Incentive (pay as you throw) § Service Provider Incentives and Requirements § Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy § Product policies (e.g., polystyrene and plastic bag bans) § Construction and Demolition Recycling Requirements § Zero Waste Requirements for Special Events § Recycling and Composting Ordinance (recycling and composting are required) § Zero Waste goal § Zero Waste included in Climate Action Plan Programs § Universal Recycle and Compost Collection § Anaerobic Digestion of Compostable Material § Municipal Solid Waste Processing after source separation § Mixed Construction and Demolition Processing § Commercial Technical Assistance § Zero Waste Block Leaders and Champions § Support for Repair Café and Share Faires § Home Composting workshops and free compost bins as incentive § Outreach and Education − What Goes Where annual outreach − New resident/customer welcome information − General program outreach – workshops, shred events, Repair Café dates, etc. − Food waste reduction annual outreach − Give an experience annual outreach – holiday waste reduction − Monthly Zero Waste tip − Zero Waste eNewsletter − Community Based Social Marketing efforts Most of the Zero Waste Block Leaders host “party packs” (reusable plates, cups, napkins, and cutlery) that neighbors can borrow to reduce waste from parties and picnics. 2-1 ATTACHMENT 2 WORKSHOP AND SURVEY RESULTS Poster versions of the following matrix were presented at the workshops on January 25th and 27th. Participants in the workshops used “dot voting” to indicate their preferred policies and programs. The votes are indicated on the matrix using orange dots for the January 25th workshop and blue dots for the January 27th workshop. Comments from the workshop participants were added to the matrix and are highlighted in different colors: January 25th workshop in orange, January 27th in blue. The City also conducted an online survey using Survey Monkey. General comments from the survey were documented and matched up with the initiatives and included in the matrix. Comments from the survey respondents are highlighted in green. Notes in the matrix indicate whether each comment was incorporated into the initiative descriptions or otherwise addressed. The initiatives were updated and renumbered for presentation in the plan based on whether they were recommended for implementation in the short-, medium-, or long-term. Some of the initiatives presented at the workshop were combined or renamed and the descriptions were updated for inclusion in the plan. 2-2 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term Community-Wide Policies Any way to incorporate diversity into Zero Waste? Comment noted and is listed as a possible future project as part of this initiative. Integrate sustainability priorities into all City projects Comment noted and is listed as a possible future project as part of this initiative. Lead by example Comment noted and included 3.CW8. Improve green purchasing. 19.CW1. Bans or Fees Ban or limit sales of toxic or hard to recover products and product packaging by ordinance. Ban additional uses of expanded polystyrene foam (EPS). Adopt point-of-sale fees for products that are toxic, hard to reuse, recycle or compost and/or certain disposable items to incentivize customer reuse. Explore with express delivery services how to reduce packaging, takeback packaging and use reusables more. Flexible plastic pouches, Mylar packaging, cold packs, composite film plastic, hard- to-recycle products (e.g. disposable diapers) and packaging (e.g. EPS blocks). Staff time • • Short – research which products and packaging to target Medium – adopt Ordinances after develop Plan for each ban. Work with Amazon and other mail delivery vendors to reduce packaging waste (try reusables) Comment noted and is listed as a possible future project as part of this initiative. How to address Mylar packaging? Comment noted and product is on our list of items to possibly address. Ban additional Styrofoam products Short term– research additional Styrofoam products Need additional motivation to further reduce and reuse Included in #19 Support fees on disposable hot and cold beverage cups at local shops, on straws and disposable utensils, and on disposable takeout containers Included in #19 Support reusable, compostable or recyclable packaging alternatives including through consumer pressure Included #19 Support bans to reduce wasting Included in #19 Increase disposal fees Included in #19 36.CW2. Require items to be reusable, recyclable or compostable Require all products and packaging sold in Palo Alto be reusable, recyclable or compostable by ordinance. Non-reusable, non-recyclable, non-compostable products and packaging Staff time •• Long 2-3 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term 20.CW3. Reusables for takeout beverages and packaging; not single-use packaging Require reusables for takeout beverages and packaging in foodware ordinance. Only allow single-use items (e.g. cutlery, straws, sauce packets) to be provided “on request.” Enforce “front of house” sorting at restaurants and businesses. Foodware packaging, including paper and plastic Staff time Medium All disposables (cutlery, straws, sauce packets) provided “on request” (still need to allow compostables) Comment noted and will be considered for incorporate into #20 as part of the broader requirement Require “front of house” sorting at restaurants and businesses and provide customized posters Already required in Palo Alto Require reusable coffee cups – like in London Included in #20 Support incentive policies and programs encouraging reusables over disposables Included in #20 1.CW4. Color tinted clear bags Require all residents and businesses who use bags to use color-tinted clear plastic bags (blue tint for recycle, green tint for compost, clear for garbage) to consolidate materials by ordinance for better monitoring of materials. Recyclable and compostable materials Staff time • Short Require customers to bag garbage and compostables Not recommended to include in plan 21.CW5. No green or brown colored non-compostable produce bags Ban the sale or distribution of green or brown- tinted empty produce bags that are not compostable by ordinance. Clear bags and produce bagged outside of City (e.g., potatoes packed in brown bags to reduce oxidation) would be permissible. Film plastic, plus organics Staff time Medium Give free compostable bags to community Not recommended Require compostable produce bags Not recommended Should not apply to produce bagged outside of city (e.g., potatoes packed in brown bags to reduce oxidation) Included in #21 2.CW6. Statewide packaging and product design Advocate for statewide packaging policies including membership in statewide organizations (California Product Stewardship Council, Californians Against Waste) and submitting testimony to legislative and regulatory proceedings. Hard-to-recycle products and packaging Staff time + membershi ps $10k max •••••••••• ••••• Short 2-4 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term Reduce packaging Included in #2 22.CW7. Retailer take-backs (voluntary, mandatory) Ask retailers to takeback products and packaging that they sell to improve convenience for consumers or to collect materials that are not acceptable in the curbside recycling program (e.g., batteries, pharmaceuticals, compact fluorescent bulbs). Research which items retailers should be required to takeback by ordinance. Coordinate with neighboring cities to adopt ordinances at same time, and/or to take effect once all neighboring cities adopt. Universal waste, non- recyclable products and packaging Staff time •• • Short – Ask retailers to takeback targeted products and/or packaging that they sell. Medium – Require retailers to takeback targeted products and/or packaging that they sell. Don’t hurt local businesses. People will go to other cities to buy. Comment noted 3.CW8. Improve green purchasing Finalize Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy update and train all City staff regarding that Policy. Develop standard operating procedures and education campaign and include in employee performance review targets. Reusable materials, recycled- content, recyclable and compostable products, and compost products Staff time •• • Short 9. Product & packaging fees Adopt point-of-sale fees for products that are toxic, hard to reuse, recycle or compost and/or certain disposable items to incentivize customer reuse. Hard-to-recycle and recyclable and compostable products and packaging examples? Packaging such as Styrofoam blocks Staff time Include in 1 4.CW9. Change from a diversion goal to a generation goal Research additional metrics that focus first on eliminating and reducing consumption and wasteful practices, then reusing products and packaging, and then recycle or compost remaining discarded materials. Include metrics that address climate/carbon impacts and footprints. All Staff time + consultant assistance $10k max •••••••••• • •••• Short Climate/carbon metric/footprint Metric valuing reduce, reuse over disposal Include in #4 Time urgency: due to climate change, we need to do more/faster Made #4 a short-term item 2-5 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term Community-Wide Programs 23.CW10. Issue waste reduction grants Research the feasibility of providing grants to non-governmental organizations (NGOs), schools, businesses and/or individuals to assist the community to implement innovative reduction, reuse, recycling and composting programs and to help foster the culture change needed to achieve Zero Waste. NGOs outside of the city that provide services within the city should be eligible for grants (e.g., gleaners). All Staff time • •• Medium NGOs outside of the city that provide services within the city should be eligible for grants (e.g., gleaners) Will include in #23 24.CW11. Incentives for reuse, rental, repair industry Work with Chamber of Commerce to develop and promote repair businesses. Offer more repair cafes. Research the feasibility of providing incentives for reuse and repair through contract incentives, material exchanges, wood reuse, and direct assistance. Reusable materials Staff time • •• Medium Develop and promote repair businesses (work with chamber) Include in #24 More repair cafes (we are swamped) Include in #24 37.CW12. Market Development (local, regional, state, national) Research and promote network of local businesses that repair, refurbish, market, and sell used, recycled content or compost products (through on-line resource guides, outreach and advertising). Promote local flea markets and garage sales for sale of reusable items and swaps for household goods (e.g., clothing, toys). Used, recycled-content and compost products • Long 38.CW13. Recycling, reuse & repair directory Research adding reuse and repair locations to RecycleWhere and/or to develop a supplemental web-based directory specific to reuse and repair. This new directory could also include Zero Waste vendors and caterers. Reusable and repairable materials Staff time • • Long Provide on-line resource library for Zero Waste vendors, caterers Linked to #38. Will research at the same time. 2-6 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term 39.CW14. Zero Waste Research Initiative Work collaboratively with industry, government and educational institutions to find new solutions for items that are hard to reuse, recycle or compost in Palo Alto, connecting with the latest developments, innovation and innovative funding (including venture capital). Work with Stanford University on research, development, and policies to support innovations. This is not necessarily a facility, business or organization. Particularly focus on hard to recycle materials (such as diapers, dirty film plastics, Mylar and composites), toxic items, medical wastes, value- added products, building products, transportation products and products that could be used by Parks & Recreation Long Work with Stanford on 1) research and 2) development and then 3) develop policies Included in #39 Want way to recycle or donate non-recyclable and non-compostable packaging, (including Single-service, Styrofoam, Mylar and Aseptics), textiles, shoes wood, pet waste, diapers, repairables, composites, and pressure treated wood Included in #39 25.CW15. Apply compost to public lands/parks Identify areas on public lands and parks where compost could be applied to sequester carbon to assist in combating climate change. Compostable materials, including food scraps and plant debris • • Medium 26.CW16. Promote access to goods over ownership Research how to promote services that provide short-term rentals of reusable goods such as tools, sports equipment, party equipment (tables, chairs, serving utensils), as well as sharing websites. Explore a membership-based program that promotes community resource sharing while leveraging communal purchasing power (e.g., a Tool Library delivers affordable tool-lending services to individuals, businesses, and civic or community organizations). Reusable materials •• ••••• Medium Cultural Problem – Problem of affluence Comment noted This is an interdisciplinary problem – may need to talk to psychologists to figure out how to get people to reduce waste. Or business development to figure out incentives. Comment noted Need help to do culture change Comment noted Require Zero Waste events for any event requiring a permit (corporate picnics, etc.) Currently require 2-7 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term Palo Alto permitted events require compliance with a sustainability checklist (see Stanford event policy) Comment noted, will check Stanford’s list Want lending libraries for Tools, Appliances, and Toys Included in #26 Improve education materials, website and RecycleWhere tool Included in #26 27.CW17. Reusable filling stations (bulk bins) at stores and ZW supermarkets Research the promotion of purchasing items in bulk bins and bulk packages at local stores. Promote the expansion of bulk bin sales at local stores. Promote local and online resources for Zero Waste lifestyles and Zero packaging. Promote Zero Waste supermarkets. Packaging, including film, containers and bottles Staff time • Medium Zero Waste supermarket – everything sold in bulk Include in #27 Need more bulk filling stations at stores (bring your own container and fill with the item you want to purchase – grains, flour, nuts, herbs, shampoo, soap, etc.) Included in #27 5.CW18. Textile collection for reuse & recycling Research ways for residents and businesses to divert textiles for reuse and recycling. Investigate feasibility of adding bagged or boxed textiles to the collection program. Map regional opportunities. Textiles and leather Staff time + Service Provider Proposal Short Support textiles collection (71% of respondents) Included in #5 Oppose textiles collection (33% of respondents) – don’t want another bin, don’t want increased costs, only have them infrequently. Comments noted and will be considered in future program design. Want adult and children’s clothing and shoe exchange Comment noted and will be considered in future program design 6.CW19. Collect additional items (e.g., aseptic, pet waste) Research and identify strategies to divert hard to recycle or compost items. Aseptic Packaging, Sanitary Products, Diapers and Animal Feces and Litter Staff time + Service Provider Proposal Short Support pet waste and/or diapers, and aseptics collection program (71%) Included in #6 Oppose pet waste and/or diapers collection program (33% of respondents) – don’t want another bin, don’t want increased costs, don’t have these items. Comments noted and will be considered in future program design. 2-8 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term Community-Wide Facilities 7.CW20. Plastics Conversion Develop pilots to convert non-recyclable plastics to useful chemicals or products. Non-recyclable plastics, including film, composites and Mylar Staff time Short 8.CW21. Wood to biochar Research feasibility to produce biochar to apply on public lands within the City using local tree trimmings. Wood, including engineered wood Staff time Short 28.CW22. Plastic Recovery Facility (PRF) Participate in the development of a regional PRF with recycling service providers, business generators, and other communities throughout the Bay Area. Hard-to-recycle plastics, including film packaging and rigid plastic products Staff time • •• Medium Explore new facilities regionally Comment noted Comment noted Collect all plastic and let the professionals sort 29.CW23. Improve MSW processing after source separation to increase diversion Use RFP process to pursue more effective material recovery facilities when SMaRT agreement ends in 2021. At a minimum, ensure that residues after processing are further composted or digested to minimize landfilling. Recyclable and compostable materials remaining in the trash Staff time ••••••••• Medium Reinstate Recycle Center Not recommended Regional Repair Café Building Not recommended Space for Lucille Packard Children’s Hospital Sale - a great community service Not recommended Offer SMaRT-type drop off programs locally (could be located at Cubberley High School site) Not recommended Provide local shredding events Not recommended Add shredding event to 1st Saturday HHW events Not recommended Residential Policies 2-9 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term 30.R1. Mandatory ordinance enforcement Don’t mandate, educate first. Pilot providing posters on carts or inside lids. Research providing periodic auditing of residential collection containers and provide outreach and education to residents to ensure that they are aware of the mandatory recycling program and how to comply. Ensure that all customers are audited once per year with more outreach provided to residents who require more assistance. Direct residents to nice looking compost pails. Research options for shared containers. Recyclable and compostable materials Staff time • Short – Posters Medium – Shared containers Don’t Mandate – educate • Included in #30 Direct residents to nice looking compost pails Comment noted Poster on carts or inside lids – (add language: pilot this in the short term) Included in #30 Research options for shared containers – (add language) Included in #30 Residential Programs 9.R2. Food waste prevention Research expanding outreach and outreach programs to reduce wasting food at home and choose less wasteful packaging. Learn the barriers and benefits for Palo Alto residents so outreach addresses those and leads to measurable change. Food Staff time + contracto r $20k ••• •••• Short Encourage people to choose less wasteful packaging (don’t buy onions cut in half and wrapped in plastic – cut your own onion) Comment noted 31.R3. Food donations (food bank, soup kitchen, gleaning) Expand Palo Alto’s current residential food sharing network (gleaning, donations). Prepare outreach plan and outreach materials. Integrate with Food Waste prevention efforts. Food Staff time •••• •••• Medium Donate end-rolls from toilet paper (custodians replace before fully empty) Comment noted 2-10 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term 40.R4. Every other week trash collection [Move to citywide] Offer with reduced fee if not picked up each week (or higher fee if picked up weekly). Follow Strategy SW-2.2 of the 2016 Sustainability and Climate Action Plan: “As the City moves closer to Zero Waste, more of the waste materials collected should be recoverable (recyclable or compostable), evaluate eliminating separate collection of garbage, and moving to a two- cart collection scheme. Moving toward every other week trash collection is an appropriate next step.” All recyclable and compostable materials TBD based on Service Provider Proposal •• ••••• Medium Every other week collection with reduced fee if not picked up each week (or higher fee if picked up weekly) Linked to #40 Fees are going up. How do we reduce waste and costs? Comment noted 10R5. Collect reusables ahead of cleanup trucks [Move to citywide] Research the addition of reusables to the by- appointment Clean Up Days for both resident and businesses and allow non-profits to take turns collecting those goods the day before the GreenWaste collection trucks arrive. Update website and promotional materials and promote via media releases and across social media channels. Reusable materials Staff time + TBD based on Service Provider Proposal •••••••••• • •• Short 11.R6. Incentives for reusable and/or compostable diapers Waste reduction for diapers [Move to citywide] Research incentives and requirements for reusable and/or compostable diapers. Diapers Staff time + consultan t time $20,000 per year •••••• •••••• Short Social norming – just try it! Comment notes The green bin gets pretty nasty when you share with other residents – how about periodic cleaning by collector? Cart and bin cleaning is offered as a service by GreenWaste. Free service not recommended due to costs. Mandate only small garbage cart (e.g., 16 or 20 gallons) Not recommended Special programs to assist multifamily • Comment noted Enforcement and outreach for multifamily Included in #11 2-11 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term Require drivers to get out of the collection truck to pick up batteries Doing this now Support reusable diaper service program subsidy Included in #11 Commercial Programs 12.C1. Mandatory ordinance enforcement Expand and improve outreach and enforcement of sorting requirements for commercial customers (including multifamily customers). Recyclable and compostable materials Staff time + ½ GW EOC - $59,500 • • Short 32.C2. Food waste prevention Research and expand outreach to grocery stores, restaurants, school cafeterias and other food generators on opportunities and practices to prevent food waste. Work with local business and regional industry associations to hold Waste Less Food panels. Incentivize food waste reduction tools such as Lean Path, etc. Food Staff time • •• Medium 18.C3. Food donations (food bank, soup kitchen, gleaning) Building on the 2015 Food Rescue Services, Barriers, and Recommendations in Santa Clara County, continue participation in County’s Silicon Valley Food Rescue working group to create a sustainable food rescue system in Santa Clara County, where all surplus edible food goes to food insecure people. Consider policies and programs applicable in Palo Alto according to the findings from the county working group. Integrate with food waste prevention efforts. Food Staff time ••••••• ••• Short 34. Less than every week trash/residual collection [Moved to citywide] Strategy SW-2.2 of the 2016 Sustainability and Climate Action Plan states: As the City moves closer to Zero Waste, more of the waste materials collected should be recoverable (recyclable or compostable), evaluate eliminating separate collection of garbage, and moving to a two- cart collection scheme. Moving toward every other week trash collection is an appropriate step in that direction. All TBD – Service Provider Proposal •• ••• Medium Combine this with the residential one. 2-12 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term 33.C4. Waste Prevention Technical Assistance Expand commercial technical assistance program (including ReThink Disposable) to include waste prevention and reuse. Provide tools to identify and redesign wasteful practices, products and packaging, incentive policies and programs encouraging reusables over disposables, how to recycle and compost, how to right-size collection, reusable shipping containers and packaging requirements/program, digital delivery of all official communications, identify where materials go, make business case for Zero Waste, and purchase more environmentally preferred products. Conduct focus group on how to make recycling more intuitive. All Staff time ••• • Medium Focus group on how to make recycling more intuitive Comment noted Technical assistance to document diversion & cost savings Included in #33 Technical assistance to make the business case for Zero Waste Included in #33 Easy to find list of what goes where – app or better website Comment noted Support Reusable shipping packaging requirements/program Included in #33 Promote reusable shipping containers. Included in #33 Digital delivery Included in #33 34.C5. Business outreach (presentations, door-to-door outreach, Zero Waste Champions) Expand outreach and technical assistance to industrial, commercial and institutional generators addressing recycling and/or composting logistics and increasing employee participation. All Staff time •• Medium 41.C6. Reuse exchange Research and develop a clever and convenient program that encourages and rewards businesses for institutionalizing internal reuse – reuse closets for office supplies or tools, surplus sales to other businesses, remnants, surplus goods and equipment, donating goods to non- profits, and, finally, giving items away. Reusable materials Staff time •• • Long Want business reuse exchange Included in #41 2-13 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term 38. Reuse collection [Moved to citywide] Add reusables to the by-appointment Clean Up Days and allow non-profits to take turns collecting those goods the day before the GreenWaste collection trucks arrive. Update website and promotional materials and promote via media releases and across social media channels. Reusable materials TBD – Service Provider Proposal ••••••• Short Combine with the residential initiative 42.C7. Help Businesses apply for recognition (certified Green business, certified Zero Waste facilities, Business Environmental Network) Business recognition Assess city and non-city recognition and certification programs active in Palo Alto. Hold opportunities and challenges meet-ups with representatives. Develop on-going cooperation agreements. Work with Chamber of Commerce and Palo Alto Downtown (PAD), regarding (re)integrating green priorities and projects into each group’s mission and vision as per the Economic Development Policy. Engage with large janitorial contractors to support “back of house” recognition. Develop draft multi-year Green Business Recognition Strategy. Hold quarterly meet-ups for businesses interested in going green including all interested parties. All Staff time ••• • Long Janitorial or “back of house” recognition Included in #42 Engagement with large janitorial contractors (JLL, ISS) Included in #42 43.C8. Palo Alto businesses product & and packaging redesign Launch/participate in a regional initiative to encourage businesses to use reusable, recycled content and eco-friendly materials in the design and redesign of new and existing products and packaging; collaborate with local economic development staff to provide assistance and incentives. Support the San Jose Recycled Market Development Zone (RMDZ) and encourage Palo Alto businesses to buy recycled content products from them. Products and packaging Staff time ••• Long 2-14 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term 41. Incentives/subsidies for reusable diapers [Moved to citywide] Provide incentives/subsidies to day care centers, hospitals and nursing homes for transitioning to reusable diapers. Phil asked to incorporate all diaper items into one initiative Diapers Scalable $10,000 per year ••••• •••• Short Combine with the residential initiative Self-Haul Programs 13.SH1. Outreach and technical assistance Research outreach and technical assistance to self-haulers, including householders and business owners with service exemptions and service providers that self-haul materials generated within Palo Alto. Address requirements, how-to guides (e.g. how to sort recycle, compost and garbage properly). Municipal solid waste, construction debris, reusable and recyclable materials from periodic cleanouts and construction Staff time, outreach materials $5,000 per year •••••• Short C&D Policies 14.CD1. Require deconstruction and source separation of selected materials Require deconstruction and source separation for all construction and demolition projects by ordinance. Demolishing entire buildings would no longer be allowed. Require source-separation at construction and demolition sites for easily recyclable materials. Research incentives to encourage remodeling and adaptive reuse of buildings, including easier permitting and financial incentives. Reusable building materials, including lumber, fixtures, furniture and appliances, sheetrock, carpet, asphalt composition shingles, ceiling tile, wood, metal, concrete, asphalt, brick, and stucco. Staff time •••••••••• •••••••• Short Support ordinance (87% of respondents) Included in #14 Oppose ordinance (19% of respondents) – too costly, can hurt small businesses, create an incentive instead of a fine, already too many regulations for building in Palo Alto Comments noted Adaptive Reuse of Buildings ••••• Included in # 14 Expand requirements for demo permits • Not recommended Create incentives for contractors and property owners having to spend extra time and costs Comment noted Require deconstruction and source separation for all projects Included in #14 2-15 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term 15.CD2. Direct mixed C&D materials to high diversion C&D recycling facilities Require that all mixed C&D materials be delivered to a certified high diversion facility by ordinance Building materials and C&D debris, including wood, gypsum, paper, plastic, glass, carpet, and roofing materials Staff time •• •• Short 16.CD3. Publicly notice pending demolition to facilitate deconstruction and salvage in commercial buildings Require that any business demolishing a structure within the City publicly advertise the hours and dates that materials will be available for salvage, provide a survey of potentially salvageable materials, and make such materials available for at least 10 days. Reusable building materials, including lumber, fixtures, furniture, and appliances Staff time •••• Short 46. Required source-separation [Combined with 14] Require source-separation at construction and demolition sites for easily recyclable materials by ordinance. Sheetrock, carpet, asphalt composition shingles, ceiling tile, wood, metal, concrete, asphalt, brick, stucco Staff time •• • Short Decrease permit time as an incentive Comment noted Create incentives for property owners Comment noted C&D Programs 44.CD4. Promote Zero Waste credits in CalGreen Building Code (reuse, recycling, composting, and recycled products) Participate in Green Building Advisory Group. Provide information on Palo Alto Zero Waste policies and programs for construction and demolition and advocate for statewide requirements that support Zero Waste in CalGreen Building Code. Recyclable building materials, including sheetrock, carpet, asphalt composition shingles, ceiling tile, wood, metal, concrete, asphalt, brick, stucco and reusable building materials, including lumber, fixtures, and appliances Staff time • Long 35.CD5. Free collection of small quantities of C&D from residents. Research providing a reuse and recycling opportunity for small quantities of building materials that are generated through home improvement projects. Investigate feasibility to collect small amounts of mixed C&D in a special container. Recyclable building materials, including sheetrock, carpet, asphalt composition shingles, ceiling tile, wood, metal, concrete, asphalt, brick, stucco and reusable building materials, including lumber, fixtures, and appliances •••• • Medium 2-16 Initiative Description Targeted Materials Cost Dot Voting Term 17.CD6. Technical assistance Provide technical assistance to contractors and permittees by publishing information about the City’s ordinance requirements and providing referrals to local reuse, recycling and deconstruction service providers Building materials and C&D debris, including wood, gypsum, paper, plastic, glass, carpet, and roofing materials Staff time + $5-10K + ½ GW EOC - $59,500 • Short C&D Infrastructure 45.CD7. Building Materials Reuse Center Investigate the feasibility of creating a Building Materials Reuse Center in the region for sale of salvaged building materials. The building materials would be available for sale to the public and the Center would provide an outlet for resale from deconstruction. Reusable building materials, including lumber, fixtures, and appliances Staff time •••••••• • Long Work with East Palo Alto on Building Reuse Center and create jobs Comment noted Cubberley C&D collection center Not recommended Need a building materials reuse center Included in #45 General Survey Comments Reasons for not reducing, reusing, recycling or composting more: • Confusion on what is recyclable • No incentive to sort properly • Inconvenience (there is no recycling container near where material is generated) • Lack of space • Concern about recycling personal documents • Too busy to separate waste • Zero Waste is not a priority. Comments noted 3-1 ATTACHMENT 3 ASSUMPTIONS AND CALCULATIONS 3-2 GHG Emissions Factors Commercial Front-Load 12.C1. Mandatory ordinance enforcement for commercial Material Est. Est. MTCO2e Percent + / - Tons Capture Rate Tons Captured MTC2e Reduced Paper 32.4% 1,865 3.4498 Clean, Flattened, Uncoated OCC 1.4% 0.4% 80 25% 20 69 3.4498 Clean, Unflattened, Uncoated OCC 0.7% 0.3% 38 25% 10 33 1.9084 Newspaper 1.0% 0.5% 60 25% 15 29 4.6242 Other Clean Paper 10.2% 1.8% 587 25% 147 678 1.9084 Paper Tissue & Towels 11.9% 1.7% 684 25% 171 326 1.9084 Other Soiled Uncoated Fiber 0.8% 0.3% 47 25% 12 23 3.4498 Coated OCC 0.1% 0.1% 8 25% 2 7 1.9084 Other Coated Paper 1.1% 0.3% 66 25% 16 31 1.9084 Gable Top Cartons 0.2% 0.1% 11 0 0 1.9084 Aseptics 0.2% 0.1% 11 0 0 1.9084 Paper Takeout Containers 0.9% 0.4% 52 25% 13 25 1.9084 Coated Paper Cups 1.9% 0.5% 111 0 0 3.4498 Pizza Boxes 0.2% 0.2% 14 25% 3 12 1.9084 Other Composite Paper 1.7% 0.4% 98 0 0 Plastic 17.0% 977 1.5781 #1 PETE Plastic Packaging 1.2% 0.2% 67 25% 17 27 1.4313 #2 HDPE Plastic Packaging 0.6% 0.2% 32 25% 8 12 1.5781 Expanded #6 Products & Packaging 1.3% 0.5% 72 0 0 1.5781 Other #3-7 Plastic Packaging 1.4% 0.3% 83 25% 21 33 1.5781 Durable Plastic Products 1.2% 0.3% 70 25% 18 28 1.5781 Plastic Takeout Containers 0.4% 0.1% 26 0 0 1.7616 Compostable Plastic Bags 0.1% 0.1% 6 25% 2 3 1.7616 Other Compostable Plastic 0.2% 0.1% 14 25% 4 6 1.7616 Recyclable Film Plastic 2.1% 0.5% 121 0 0 1.7616 Flexible Plastic Pouches 0.1% 0.1% 7 0 0 1.7616 Other Composite Film Plastics 0.2% 0.1% 12 0 0 1.5781 Other Plastic 8.1% 1.3% 465 0 0 Glass 2.6% 152 0.3303 Glass Bottles & Jars 1.6% 0.4% 91 25% 23 8 3-3 GHG Emissions Factors Commercial Front-Load 12.C1. Mandatory ordinance enforcement for commercial Material Est. Est. MTCO2e Percent + / - Tons Capture Rate Tons Captured MTC2e Reduced 0.3303 Blue or Red Glass Bottles & Jars 0.0% 0.0% 0 25% 0 0 0.3303 Other Non-Composite Glass 0.9% 1.2% 53 0 0 0.3303 Other Composite Glass 0.1% 0.2% 8 0 0 Metal 2.4% 138 13.7258 Aluminum Cans & Foil 0.5% 0.2% 30 25% 7 102 5.2848 Other Non-Ferrous Metal 0.0% 0.0% 2 25% 1 3 1.835 Steel Cans & Lids 0.5% 0.2% 29 25% 7 13 1.835 Appliances 0.2% 0.3% 9 0 0 1.835 Other Ferrous Metal 0.7% 0.3% 41 25% 10 19 5.2848 Other Composite Metal 0.5% 0.3% 27 0 0 Organics 22.4% 1,293 -0.1468 Plant Trimmings 3.5% 2.4% 200 25% 50 -7 0.8808 Edible Food Scraps 8.0% 1.3% 458 25% 115 101 0.8808 Inedible Food Scraps 8.2% 1.5% 474 25% 118 104 0.8808 Other Compostable Organics 0.5% 0.7% 29 25% 7 6 0.8808 Diapers 1.4% 0.9% 80 0 0 0.8808 Animal Feces & Litter 0.9% 1.1% 52 0 0 0.8808 Other Organics 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 C&D Debris 10.4% 600 1.9451 Clean Wood 1.6% 1.3% 95 0 0 1.9451 Clean Engineered Wood 0.5% 0.5% 27 0 0 1.9451 Painted Wood 0.6% 0.3% 36 0 0 1.9451 Treated Wood 0.2% 0.2% 9 0 0 0.0367 Inerts 2.9% 2.8% 167 0 0 0.0367 Clean Gypsum 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0367 Painted Gypsum 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0367 Roofing 1.0% 1.2% 59 0 0 0.3303 C&D Glass 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 7.2666 Carpet 1.4% 1.9% 80 0 0 0.3303 Fiberglass Insulation 0.0% 0.0% 1 0 0 0.0367 Other C&D 2.2% 1.9% 126 0 0 Hazardous 4.4% 255 3-4 GHG Emissions Factors Commercial Front-Load 12.C1. Mandatory ordinance enforcement for commercial Material Est. Est. MTCO2e Percent + / - Tons Capture Rate Tons Captured MTC2e Reduced 2.3121 Electronics 0.0% 0.0% 1 0 0 Paint 0.0% 0.0% 2 0 0 Batteries 0.0% 0.0% 2 0 0 Non-Empty Aerosol Cans 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 Mercury Lamps 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 Pesticides 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 Cleaning Products 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 Motor Oil 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 Oil & Fuel Filters 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 Untreated Medical Waste 3.1% 1.4% 177 0 0 Treated Medical Waste 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 1.7616 Blue Wrap 0.1% 0.2% 6 0 0 Medicine 0.1% 0.1% 6 0 0 1.7616 Cold Packs 1.0% 0.8% 58 0 0 Other Hazardous 0.0% 0.0% 2 0 0 Other Materials 8.4% 482 0 0 7.2666 Mattresses 0.8% 1.0% 45 0 0 1.9451 Furniture 2.2% 1.9% 124 0 0 1.8717 Tires & Rubber 1.3% 0.8% 78 0 0 7.2666 Textiles & Leather 3.1% 1.3% 177 0 0 1.5781 Non-Metal Appliances 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 Fines 0.7% 0.2% 40 0 0 Other Materials 0.3% 0.2% 19 0 0 Total 5,762 14% 816 1689 Note that this initiative also addresses multifamily, commercial roll-off and hospital generators, so the total diversion potential of this initiative is approximately 2,070 tons diverted from landfill and 4,400 MTCO2e of greenhouse gas emissions reduced per year. City of Palo Alto (ID # 8778) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 8/27/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Animal Shelter Direction on Operating Agreement with Pets In Need Title: Discussion and Direction on an Operating Agreement with Pets In Need and Interim Improvements for the Palo Alto Animal Shelter From: City Manager Lead Department: Commu nity Services Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction on site use, facility improvements, operational changes and ongoing staff support that would be needed to bring a draft contract between Pets In Need and the City of Palo Alto for an Operating and Management Agreement and Site Use Agreement for the City’s Animal Shelter to City Council. Background California requires that cities and counties provide animal control and sheltering services for the purpose of ensuring the safety of people and animals, providing for the proper care and sheltering of abandoned or neglected domestic animals, licensing domestic animals and providing humane disposal of animals when necessary. There are several ways local jurisdictions meet these requirements; some agencies manage their own animal shelters and animal control services, while others do not provide services within their city limits and instead partner with other agencies to take advantage of economies of scale and to reduce costs. Historically, Palo Alto has maintained its own shelter. Palo Alto currently provides animal control and sheltering services for Palo Alto and two partner cities, Los Altos and Los Altos Hills. In May 2012, following the loss of the City of Mountain View as an animal shelter partner agency, the financial sustainability of the City’s Animal Shelter was discussed at City Council, and at the Policy and Services Committee and the Finance Committee. The Council directed staff to reduce costs and increase revenues to ensure the Animal Shelter remain financially sustainable absent the revenue that had previously been received from the City of Mountain View, which was approximately $500,000 annually. Despite making a variety of service level changes over the following two years, the Animal Shelter was not able to regain financial sustainability. In fact, the cost impact on the City grew. City of Palo Alto Page 2 In June 2014, the Palo Alto Humane Society (PAHS) expressed interest in partnering with the City to operate the Animal Shelter, and in April 2015 the City Auditor presented an audit concluding that Animal Services could not become revenue neutral under its current financial model. The 2015 audit can be reviewed here. Further, the Audit noted that the Animal Shelter faced challenges that were unlikely to be resolved if the City continued to operate the shelter as a city-managed function without a significant increase in general fund subsidy, donations, and/or revenue generating contracts. In approving the Fiscal Year 2016 budget, the City Council directed staff to pursue an alternative service model and allocated $250,000 to assist with possible transition costs with an alternate provider. To date, the City has drawn on some of the $250,000 fund to pay for a facility improvement study and a capital campaign feasibility study. During Fiscal Year 2016, the City Manager’s Office continued outreach and engagement with various community and City department stakeholders, including the Friends of the Palo Alto Animal Shelter (FoPAAS) and PAHS. Staff conducted two Requests for Proposals (RFP) in search of alternative services providers. The first RFP received only one response, which was from Pets in Need. Due to the low response rate and in accordance with procurement best practices, staff conducted debriefing sessions with local animal care providers who did not submit a response to understand why they did not respond. These included Peninsula Humane Society, Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority, Humane Society of Silicon Valley and the County of Santa Clara. The consistent feedback was that the initial RFP was too prescriptive and limited the provider’s ability to apply existing business models and best practices. City staff met with community stakeholders and the SEIU about the feedback. In collaboration with the stakeholders, the City re-issued a revised RFP with a less prescriptive scope of services. The second RFP received two proposals: one from Pets In Need and one from the County of Santa Clara as well as a letter from the Humane Society of Silicon Valley which recommended that the City close the Shelter and partner with other nearby sheltering agencies. Staff conducted an evaluation of the three responses and concluded that the most advantageous responder to the City was from Pets In Need; the response from the County of Santa Clara was more costly and less comprehensive. PIN’s initial response anticipated total expenses of about $1.25 million annually while the County’s proposal anticipated costs of approximately $1.53 million. In September 2016, Council directed staff to proceed with exclusive negotiations with Pets in Need. Since that time, the City has been in negotiations with PIN on terms for a public-private partnership to operate the Palo Alto Animal Shelter. Because the City Auditor found that the existing Animal Shelter is outdated and inadequate to meet modern animal-care standards, the City and PIN have concurrently negotiated an Operations and Management Agreement for City of Palo Alto Page 3 the existing shelter, a Capital Improvement Plan for the City to fund needed improvements at the current facility, and an evaluation of the potential for PIN to launch a successful capital campaign to fundraise for a new shelter facility. Contract terms between the City and PIN that require further Council direction Pets In Need was selected through the RFP process to manage the Palo Alto Animal Shelter for a variety of reasons including their commitment to: - Provide a high quality, full-service shelter operation in Palo Alto - Lead a fundraising campaign to build a new shelter - Work closely with FoPAAS and PAHS - Provide services in a cost effective manner - Maintain partnership agreements with Los Altos and Los Altos Hills While the opportunity to enter into a public-private partnership with PIN remains an exciting opportunity and staff is drafting the necessary contracts terms that are agreeable to PIN, there are a number of considerations for Council to evaluate in approving a contract with PIN. Below are the terms that staff would like to highlight for further Council direction. Since these have emerged more clearly since the Council’s initial direction, Council review of these are an important prelude to finalizing an agreement to bring to Council. 1. Site Usage The Animal Shelter is located in the Baylands Conservation Area adjacent to the Municipal Service Center on Bayshore Road. For several years, the City has leased an adjacent portion of the site to Honda for their excess auto inventory storage. This lease has provided approximately $100,000 per year in general fund revenues. PIN is requesting use of the area currently leased to Honda for Animal Shelter use, specifically for an office/classroom modular unit and an expanded pet exercise area. If the City were to agree to the additional Municipal Service Center space for the Animal Shelter, the City would forgo the ongoing $100,000 in revenues the site currently generates. The Animal Shelter site map can be seen at the end of this report as Attachment C. 2. Facility Improvements As recommended in the City Auditor’s report, the facility is in need of substantial remodeling or possibly rebuilding. The current facility does not sufficiently keep incompatible animals apart nor meet modern kennel size standards, among other issues. Should the City retain animal sheltering services in-house or partner with PIN, the City will need to develop a plan to remodel or rebuild the Animal Shelter. Specifically, PIN requests that the City commit $3.4 million over the next three to five years for the following improvements, which they see as essential to their ability to enter into an agreement with the City: 1) Remodel and expand the medical suite 2) Install a modular office/classroom at the front of the site City of Palo Alto Page 4 3) Add 16 new dog kennels 4) Minor improvements to the existing dog kennels 5) Abatement of hazardous materials in the medical suite area The above improvements will allow PIN to offer reliable services at the Shelter and to house more dogs than the City has been able to house in the past. The medical suite upgrades will allow PIN to offer a separate entrance and lobby area for veterinary customers, as well as expand storage areas and offer additional privacy during procedures. These upgrades are expected to cost approximately $3.4 million over the next three to five years. A portion of the funding for the above capital improvements is budgeted in the FY 2019 Capital Budget, currently funded at $831,000 in CIP PE-19002, which leaves a capital funding gap of $2.6 million that would need to be identified and budgeted in balance with other City capital needs and interests. Staff estimates that approximately funding of $600,000 of that figure may need to be found in FY 2019. (The remaining $2 million would need to be funded in the CIP by FY FY2022.) In addition to the improvements above, the City has signed a Letter of Intent (LOI) to rebuild the Animal Shelter in partnership with Pets In Need (Attachment A). In the attached LOI, the City committed to explore the feasibility of public financing; potentially covering up to 50 percent of design and construction of a new shelter, offset by PIN’s private fundraising. The probable fundraising success for a new shelter, as seen in the BuildingBlox Fundraising Feasibility Study (Attachment B), is between $6 million to $8.8 million. This is less than 50 percent of what it would cost to build a new shelter. It is possible and may be likely that the probable fundraising success for a new Animal Shelter will increase after PIN begins operating the Animal Shelter. 3. Shelter Operations Changes The City’s contract with Pets In Need mandates that PIN continue to provide all of the same services that have been provided by the City’s current Animal Shelter operation and that Shelter access remain at least as extensive as it has been under City operation. Staff expects that customer service and access will be enhanced under PIN’s operation, as they increase operating hours and increased volunteer opportunities. Pets In Need will continue to maintain Palo Alto’s “We Care Alliance” membership with other local shelters, and has a “no kill” philosophy, which staff believes will be a philosophy that has broad community appeal. Only one current shelter service would not be provided if PIN operates the City Shelter: owner requested euthanasia for their pets. This service is typically provided as requested by pet owners for pets with untreatable illnesses. PIN will only euthanize animals at their discretion and in keeping with the principles of their no-kill mission. There are other nearby private and public clinics and shelters that provide this service. Some risk of escalating operating costs to the City exists if the Animal Shelter takes in more than 600 cats and dogs annually, which is the assumed intake level that PIN built into their City of Palo Alto Page 5 operating budget. PIN has indicated they would expect to re-open compensation negotiations if this occurs. 4. City Staff and Ongoing Staffing with a Pets In Need Agreement The City’s current Fiscal Year 2019 budget includes staffing for 10.56 Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) positions in the Animal Services program. Of the budgeted positions, four FTE are dedicated to Animal Control (including one Lead Animal Control Officer and three Animal Control Officers). As planned under the PIN partnership, the four Animal Control positions will remain as City staff housed within the Police Department and will not be included in the transition to Pets In Need. Animal Control Officers will share the Animal Shelter facility with PIN and have been working closely together to ensure a smooth transition. Relationship and facility sharing terms are also described clearly in the Operating Agreement between the City and PIN. City representatives have negotiated an agreement with SEIU local 521 for the five impacted employees at the Palo Alto Animal Shelter who will be laid off should this contract be adopted. SEIU 521 and the City have negotiated a severance package beyond that which is currently outlined in the SEIU 521 contract. The severance package is expected to cost approximately $75,000 which staff proposes to fund out of the $250,000 transition cost funds. A public-private partnership with Pets in Need would be managed by the Community Services Department. This partnership will require oversight as City staff will need to oversee short-term facility improvements and assist in PIN’s onboarding success. Staff also anticipates that the capital campaign and major facility improvements will require City staff assistance and guidance to ensure the new facility meets both the City’s and PIN’s needs. Staff recommends that a 0.48 FTE Management Specialist be added to the Community Services Department’s Administrative Division should this partnership move forward. This position will add approximately $60,000 in staff costs in FY 2019. The need for this position may change in future years. The necessary augmentation to the Community Services Department’s budget will be brought forward along with the final contract for Pets In Need, should the City Council choose to pursue to that option. Conclusion If the City wants to provide a full-service Animal Shelter in Palo Alto, staff believe Pets In Need remains the best option to do so. The costs however will require the City to make some significant near term capital investments in the Animal Shelter as seen above. When we entered into the Letter of Intent with Pets in Need, we acknowledged that our current facility is inadequate. The cost for these investments is more than our initial estimates and will require finding funding in an environment of rising, competing needs. An alternative to a contract with PIN would be to continue to manage the Animal Shelter operations in-house, however, capital improvements would also be needed, and the City would City of Palo Alto Page 6 need to re-hire staff to fill vacant positons at the Animal Shelter and invest in additional staff to effectively operate the shelter. Staff estimates the overall operating costs for the City running the shelter as it should would be more expensive per year than a contract with PIN. In fact the differential in the cost could be $500,000 annually. Resource Impact To date the City has spent $108,000 of the $250,000 which was assigned for the transition to a non-profit partnership. The $108,000 was used for a conceptual design for remodeling or rebuilding the animal shelter and for a fundraising study by BuildingBlox. If this contract moves forward, the remaining $142,000 will be used to pay for negotiated severance packages for laid- off employees and for transitionary start-up costs for PIN. The larger issue is funding an additional $2.6 million in capital expenses over the next few fiscal years. That is a better tradeoff than the City running the shelter as it should be run, which would require adding $500,000 annually to operating costs. There also would be approximately $2 million in capital improvements under the City scenario (versus $3.4 under the Pets In Need plan). But that $1.4 million gap would be offset within three years given the savings of $500,000 per year in Operating Costs under a Pets In Need agreement. Therefore, the staff would recommend returning with an agreement with Pets In Need. If Council disagrees, the only other option would be closing the Animal Shelter and contracting with another service provider, such as SVACA. Policy Implications and Environmental Review Comprehensive Plan Policy C-3.2 - Reinvest in aging facilities to improve their usefulness and appearance. Avoid deferred maintenance of City infrastructure. Attachments: Attachment A: Letter of Intent between Pets In Need and the City of Palo Alto Attachment B: Fundraising Feasibility Estimate by BuildingBlox Attachment C: Facility Map of Animal Shelter Attachments: Attachment A: Letter of Intent Attachment B: BuildingBlox Fundraising Projections Attachment C: Palo Alto Animal Services Site A A P 8 R D T " a c a C T P s T P l A D a it a i w p c T a t s O I M a o August 21, 2 Al Mollica, Ex Pets In Need 871 5th Aven RE: Letter of Dear Mr. Mo The City of "Parties"), in and the Palo components and its partn City, togethe This Letter o Partnership t service for P The existing Palo Alto an ong‐term fu Auditor’s An Department and achievin ts mission t animal a lovi n Palo Alto, will be const programs an comprised o The Parties agreements, the Parties a submitted to Operations a nitially, and Meyers Milia and manage of beginning 017 xecutive Dir d nue Redwood Intent Rega ollica, Palo Alto ( n collaborati o Alto Human s: (1) PIN ass ner cities of L er with sust of Intent re to accomplis alo Alto resi Palo Alto A d its partner unding. Reno nimal Service . The City de ng long‐term to advance t ing home. Th initially in th tructed on C nd services w f excellent c are intere subject to m gree to nego o the City Co and Manage d subject to as Brown Ac ment agreem PIN’s role w ector d City, CA 94 arding Opera (the "City") on with com ne Society (P suming anim Los Altos an tainable long presents th sh these goa dents. nimal Shelte r agencies. A ovation of t es Audit fro esires a mod m financial su the no‐kill m he parties in he current sh ity‐owned la will be enha communicat sted in und mutually acc otiate in goo ouncil and PI ement Servic legal requi ct, the City a ment provid within the M 4063 ation and Re and Pets I mmunity par PAHS), wish mal shelterin d Los Altos H g‐term fund e Parties co als resulting er is inadequ At the same the existing m April 201 dern and ad ustainability movement, r ntend to adv helter facilit and in Palo A nced with a ion and mut dertaking a ceptable term od faith tow N Board of D es Agreeme irements inc nd PIN inten ding for PIN t arch to July ebuilding of t n Need (“P rtners the F to collabora g operations Hills; and (2) ding of ongo ommon inte in a sustain uate in size time, shelte facility is n 15 and a sta dequate Anim for shelter p reduce pet vance these g ty, and subse Alto. The Pa strong pub tual understa nd complet ms and cond ards develop Directors for nt for Existin cluding the nd to negoti to operate t 2018 timefr the Palo Alto PIN”) (each Friends of Pa ate and nego s in Palo Alt ) the buildin oing program erests and c able and co and design ering operat not recomm ff assessme mal Shelter programs an homelessne goals by PIN equently in a arties envisio lic‐private p anding. ting the Pr ditions. On e pment of th r their consid ng Shelter obligation iate and ent the City’s ex rame. o Animal She a "Party" a alo Alto Anim otiate on a p to to serve r ng of a new A ms and serv commitment mmunity‐su to meet the tions lack st mended as d ent from the facility whil nd services. ess, and find N assuming s a new and e on that the A partnership b roject in ac execution of e two agree deration. to meet an ter into a co isting anima elter and collectiv mal Shelter ( project inclu esidents of Animal Shelt vices (“the P t to a Publi upported ani e sheltering able and su described in e City’s Publ le stabilizing PIN seeks to d every dog, sheltering op expanded fac Animal Shelt between the ccordance w f this Letter o ements, whic nd confer u mprehensiv al shelter, wi 1 vely, the (FoPAAS) uding two Palo Alto ter in the Project”). c Private imal care needs of stainable the City ic Works g funding o expand , cat and perations cility that ter’s core e Parties, with two of Intent, ch will be nder the ve service ith a goal DocuSign Envelope ID: CD3D7A06-3772-48EC-9B19-FD4537BD7DD5 2 It is the parties’ goal to continue an Operations and Management Services Agreement until a new Shelter is constructed, and a replacement management and operations agreement for the new facility is negotiated. The parties intend to ensure that the existing facility meets PIN’s operating requirements. Capital Fundraising and Construction Agreement for New Animal Shelter At the same time that the Parties are negotiating and finalizing an Operations and Management Agreement for the existing shelter, the City and PIN also intend to begin negotiations toward the building and operation of a new Animal Shelter. The parties contemplate that a new shelter Capital Fundraising and Construction Agreement will include at least the following elements: Define the roles and responsibilities of the City and PIN, and their community partners FoPAAS and the PAHS, regarding the funding, building and operation of a new Animal Shelter. Identify an appropriate site for a new Shelter. It is the City’s goal to identify and provide existing City land, without cost, for this purpose. Define programmatic and conceptual shelter design, or several design options, together with construction and operations budgets. The City of Palo Alto provided PIN $50,000 in the spring of 2017 for a facility and program needs assessment, which was completed on May 24 2017. The parties will negotiate regarding the City’s and PIN’s responsibilities for funding and conducting design development, including environmental review, and the timing of these activities. Design options shall be presented to the City Council for consideration. Establish a capital funding plan for design, construction and operation of a new Shelter. To that end: o The City intends to immediately provide funding in the amount of $60,000 for the Parties to undertake a Capital Fundraising Campaign Planning Study to evaluate the likely private fundraising capacity for a new Shelter. o Recognizing the potential need for a public funding component for a new Animal Shelter, staff may advance for City Council consideration a recommendation to explore the feasibility of public financing, which could include a tax measure to be submitted to the voters or other new public revenue source, potentially covering up to 50% of design and construction. Exploration of a public financing component is contingent on the outcome of the Capital Fundraising Campaign Planning Study, and agreement on preliminary design concept, scope of programs and services, and ongoing operating costs. o PIN intends to engage in a campaign to raise private funds sufficient, when combined with available public funding, to fund design and construction of a new facility, and to establish stable and sustainable funding, including reserves, for ongoing operations of a new facility. o FoPAAS and PAHS agree to provide community organizing and fundraising assistance for a shared vision that is mutually beneficial under the direction of PIN. Establish a plan for post‐construction operations and management of the new Shelter, including an operations and management budget, definition of the Parties roles and responsibilities, and a plan for sustainable long‐term funding. DocuSign Envelope ID: CD3D7A06-3772-48EC-9B19-FD4537BD7DD5 3 The potential timeline for the Capital Campaign Planning Study, defining a funding plan for a new Animal Shelter and the transition to PIN operating the existing Animal Shelter is as follows: August to December 2017: PIN to continue development of site review and preliminary programmatic and conceptual designs for a new Animal Shelter PIN to conduct Capital Fundraising Campaign Planning Study Parties to prepare Operations and Management Services Agreement for PIN to operate the existing Animal Shelter pending construction of a new Animal Shelter Parties to develop a proposed financing plan for a new Animal Shelter based on approved preliminary programmatic and conceptual designs, and taking into account the results of the Capital Fundraising Campaign Planning Study City and PIN to evaluate interim capital improvements necessary for PIN to begin operations at the existing Animal Shelter and/or other site needs January to March 2018: Council to review and approve an Operations and Management Services Agreement with PIN and initiate environmental review on a proposed Capital Improvement Plan for a new facility to include a financing plan based on the results of the Capital Fundraising Campaign Study Upon Council approval of aforementioned items, PIN prepares to assume operations of the existing shelter City, in collaboration with PIN, completes any interim capital improvement projects at existing shelter March to July 2018: PIN begins operating the existing shelter Capital Campaign for a new Animal Shelter begins Any new facility will be require the Parties to obtain and maintain all required City permits and other authorizations, comply with state and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and furnish or caused to be furnished any financial and non‐financial security, during the construction, as appropriate. Upon request, PIN will provide to the City, insurance, indemnity, lien waivers, performance and payment bonds and covenants, among other things. All design and construction work will be reviewed by one or more of the City's Departments of Community Services, Planning and Community Environment, Development Services, Utilities, and Public Works. Design and construction will be reviewed and approved, as appropriate, by the City's boards and commissions, including, but not limited to, the Architectural Review Board, the Planning and Transportation Commission and the City Council. The City will provide reasonable staff support and other assistance, upon request, in connection with the execution of the Project. This letter is not intended to be a binding contract between the Parties with respect to the Project. It is intended to facilitate discussion of the key contract terms and conditions of the agreement relating to the Project, and it is only an expression of the parties’ intentions for further negotiations. DocuSign Envelope ID: CD3D7A06-3772-48EC-9B19-FD4537BD7DD5 4 The City requests PIN's acknowledgement of this letter in order that the City may proceed with PIN to develop the key terms and conditions of the two agreements concerning the Project. Once these key terms and conditions have been identified, the City will draft agreements for submission to the City Council and PIN Board. Final agreement is subject to approval of the City Council, in its sole discretion. Sincerely, James Keene City Manager Pets In Need hereby acknowledges a mutual interest in developing appropriate agreements and plans between the Parties to complete the Project as described above. ________________________ Al Mollica, Executive Director Pets In Need DocuSign Envelope ID: CD3D7A06-3772-48EC-9B19-FD4537BD7DD5 FEASIBLITY CALCULATIONS 43 85% Confidence 65% Confidence Identified Probable Major Donors # Projected $ Ask Projected Low %Projected Low $ Projected High %Projected High $ Tier 0 & 1 26 $9,725,000 25%$2,431,250 38%$3,646,875 Tier 2 66 $6,375,000 34%$2,167,500 45%$2,868,750 Tier 3 74 $2,575,000 25%$643,750 45%$1,158,750 Sub Total 166 $18,675,000 28%$5,242,500 41%$7,674,375 Probable Donors to Be Added 20 -30 $2,500,000 20%$500,000 30%$750,000 Community Campaign Many NA NA $250,000 NA $400,000 Total $5,992,500 $8,824,375 Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway West Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road ane Almanor Lane This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Project Site 0' 150' Palo AltoAnimal Services CITY OF PALO ALTOINCORPORATE D CAL I F ORN I A P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f A P R I L 1 6 1 8 9 4 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors ©1989 to 2016 City of Palo Alto rrivera, 2018-07-09 11:15:35 PaloAltoAnimalServices PetsInNeed (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Personal\rrivera.mdb) CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY August 27, 2018 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Consideration and Adoption of an Ordinance and Emergency Ordinance Amending Chapter 9.68 of the Municipal Code to Require, for Multifamily Housing Developments of 50 Units or More: Relocation Assistance for No-Fault Evictions or Cause for Eviction and Relocation Assistance for No-Fault Evictions. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council: 1a. Adopt an Emergency Ordinance Amending Chapter 9.68 (Rental Housing Stabilization) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Require Relocation Assistance Payments for No-Fault Evictions for Multifamily Housing Developments Containing 50 or More Rental Units (Attachment A); or 1b. Adopt an Emergency Ordinance Amending Chapter 9.68 (Rental Housing Stabilization) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Require Cause for Eviction and Relocation Assistance Payments for No-Fault Eviction for Multifamily Housing Developments Containing 50 or More Rental Units (Attachment B); and 2. Adopt a substantively identical (non-emergency) ordinance on first reading, which will be effective on the 31st day following its second reading (Attachments A-1 and B-1). Background The City Council adopted housing as a priority for 2018, and in the first half of year the Council has approved a Housing Work Plan and adopted a number of zoning ordinances seeking to spur the creation of more housing throughout the City. In recent months, many members of the public have urged the Council to address an urgent need for tenant protections as part of the City’s approach to its housing crisis. Several Council members have informally requested that staff present one or more emergency ordinances to address this need. Some of the public comment on these issues related to a recently announced plan by Adventurous Journeys (AJ) Capital to convert the President Hotel Apartments to a transient/tourist hotel. While the attached ordinances will apply to the President Hotel Apartments, it should be noted that neither of the ordinances has any bearing on either: 1) the ability of AJ Capital to pursue its redevelopment proposal; or 2) its right as a landlord to evict its tenants in order to exit the rental housing market. The former is governed by the City’s zoning code while the latter is governed by state law (the Ellis Act, Government Code sections 7060-7060.7). Page 2 The proposed ordinances amend Chapter 9.68 of the Municipal Code and will be subject to the definitions provided in Section 9.68.020, a copy of which is provided in Attachment E. Discussion In general, California cities may exercise their police power to regulate and monitor the bases for – and mitigate the impacts of – evictions within their jurisdictions, consistent with requirements in state law. A for-cause eviction ordinance typically provides an exclusive list of reasons for which a landlord may evict a tenant. A landlord is therefore prohibited from evicting a tenant for any reason that is not specified in the ordinance. While local governments may exercise their discretion in determining permissible bases for eviction, some causes must be included under state law (e.g. Ellis Act evictions), and there is little substantive variation among the jurisdictions that have adopted for-cause ordinances. For-cause eviction ordinances are typically adopted in conjunction with a requirement to pay relocation assistance when a tenant is not at fault. That said, both for -cause and relocation assistance requirements may be adopted on their own. The draft ordinance provided as Attachment A would impose a relocation assistance requirement for any eviction in which the tenant is not at fault, but would not substantively limit the permissible bases for eviction. Thus, a landlord would still be allowed to evict a tenant for any non -discriminatory or non-retaliatory reason; the tenant, however, would be entitled to a relocation assistance payment as specified in the ordinance. The alternative ordinance provided as Attachment B proposes the traditional combination of just cause eviction in addition to a relocation assistance requirement. As explained above, this ordinance would strictly limit the permissible reasons for eviction to those stated in the ordinance; it would also specify the scenarios in which relocation assistance is required. Both alternative ordinances propose the following amounts of base relocation assistance for evictions in which the tenant is not at fault: Unit Type Amount 0 bedrooms $7,000 1 bedroom $9,000 2 bedrooms $13,000 3 or more bedrooms $17,000 The base payments are set at approximately three times the current market rate for each type of unit, reflecting high start-up costs of a new tenancy, in addition to the cost of moving and potential lost wages. One half of the base payment would be due at the time the landlord provides notice of an eviction requiring the relocation payment and one half would be due when the tenant vacates the unit. Select data on average rents in Palo Alto is provided as Attachment C, and a comparison of relocation assistance payments required by other Cal ifornia jurisdictions is provided as Attachment D. Page 3 The ordinances also propose a single additional payment of $3,000 where the unit is occupied by a low-income household or one or more the tenants who is elderly, disabled, or a minor child. For qualifying households/tenants, the entirety of the additional $3,000 payment would be due within 15 days after the tenant notifies the landlord of his or her eligibility. Staff has proposed to limit the reach of these requirements to sites containing 50 or more rental units. According to County Assessor’s records, there are approximately 40 parcels in the City that meet this threshold, of which approximately 15 are affordable housing developments and are therefore exempt from Chapter 9.68 in its entirety. Timeline Pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code 2.04.270(d), an emergency ordinance requires affirmative votes of four-fifths of the Council Members present to pass and is effectively immediately upon adoption. In the event a landlord has provided notice of eviction prior to the effective date of the ordinance, staff intends these timelines and obligations to take effect once the ordinance is effective. In addition, staff recommends that the City Council concurrently adopt on first reading a regular ordinance containing substantively the same provisions. This is recommended as a best practice as a safeguard against a procedural challenge to the emergency ordinance. In the event the emergency ordinance is successfully challenged, the regular ordinance will be a lready in effect, limiting the “gap” in coverage to the brief window between the effective dates of the emergency and regular ordinances. Resource Impact As with other elements of the City’s Rental Housing Stabilization ordinance, the proposed ordinances will create privately enforceable rights that do not involve the City in administration or enforcement, except that the Director of Planning and Community Environment is authorized to issue explanatory/implementing regulations and will be responsible for annually updating the amounts of relocation assistance required. Environmental Review The proposed ordinances are not a project within the meaning of section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because they have no potential for resulting in physical change in the environment, either directly or ultimately. In the event that the ordinance are found to be a project under CEQA, they are 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 sig Page 4 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Draft Relocation Assistance Emergency Ordinance (PDF) Attachment A-1: Draft Relocation Assistance Regular Ordinance (PDF) Attachment B: Draft for Cause Eviction Emergency Ordinance (PDF) Attachment B-1: Draft for Cause Eviction Regular Ordinance (PDF) Attachment C: Average Rents August 2018 (PDF) Attachment D: 2018 Survey of California Cities that Require Relocation Assistance Payments (PDF) Attachment E: PAMC 9.68.020 - Definitions (PDF) Department Head: Molly Stump, City Attorney Page 5 180823 sm 010 1 ORDINANCE NO. _____ Emergency Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 9.68 (Rental Housing Stabilization) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals, and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Require Relocation Assistance for No-Fault Eviction for Multifamily Housing Developments Containing 50 or More Rental Units The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows: (a) There is a significant and prolonged shortage of, but increasing demand for, rental housing in the City of Palo Alto. These conditions have created a housing crisis that is particularly acute for those residents of Palo Alto seeking rental housing. (b) Numerous recent studies conclude that the housing crises at the state and local levels have reached emergency levels. An April 2018 report by the California Housing Partnership states that Santa Clara County is facing a “housing emergency,” resulting in a 13% rise in homelessness and demand for almost 60,000 more affordable rental units throughout the county. A May 2018 report by Next 10 ranks California 3rd worst among states in share of household income spent on rental costs and worst in the nation for rental housing over-crowdedness. (c) The cost of housing in Palo Alto is among the highest in the world. As of July 2018, the median home sales price is reported at over $3 million and the median rent is reported as high as $5,900 per month. (d) According to rental market tracking sites Zumper, Trulia, and Rentometer, as of August 2018, the average rent in Palo Alto is approximately $2,300 per month for a studio, $2,900 for a one-bedroom, $4,300 for a two-bedroom, $5,600 for a three-bedroom, and $7,000 for a four-bedroom unit. (e) Tenants evicted in Palo Alto are forced to incur substantial costs related to new housing including, but not limited to, move-in costs, moving costs, new utility hook-ups, payments for temporary housing, and lost work time seeking housing. (f) Move-in costs commonly include first and last month's rent plus a security deposit equal to one month's rent, leading to total relocation expenses in excess of three months’ rent. 180823 sm 010 2 (g) Tenants who do not have adequate funds to move and who are forced to move pursuant to no-fault eviction notice face displacement and great hardship. (h) The impacts of these no-fault evictions are particularly significant on low- income, elderly, and disabled tenants, and tenants with minor children, justifying an additional payment for households with these tenants. (i) Certain no-fault evictions that reduce the number of rental units available, whether on a temporary or permanent basis, exacerbate the housing crisis in Palo Alto, particularly for structures containing 50 of more rental units. (j) For the reasons set forth above, the relocation assistance provided in this ordinance is justified and necessary as an emergency measure for evicted tenants to find new housing and avoid displacement and to otherwise preserve the public peace, health, and safety. SECTION 2. Section 9.68.035 (Relocation Assistance for Certain Displacements) of the Chapter 9.68 (Rental Housing Stabilization) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals, and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows: 9.68.35 Relocation Assistance for No Fault Eviction (a) This section shall be applicable only to structures or lots containing 50 or more rental units. (b) For the purposes of this section, a “no-fault eviction” means an action by a landlord to recover possession of a rental unit for any reason other than the following: 1. The tenant has failed to pay rent to which the landlord is legally entitled. 2. The tenant has violated a lawful obligation or covenant of the tenancy. 3. The tenant has refused the landlord reasonable access to the unit for the purposes of making repairs or improvements, for any reasonable purpose as permitted by law, or for the purpose of showing the rental unit to any prospective purchaser or tenant. 4. The tenant is permitting a nuisance to exist in, or is causing damage to, the rental unit. 5. The tenant is using, or permitting a rental unit to be used for any illegal purpose. 6. The landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession of the rental unit in order to comply with regulations relating to the qualifications of tenancy established by a governmental entity, where the tenant is no longer qualified. No fault evictions shall include, without limitation, actions in which the landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession of the rental unit: 180823 sm 010 3 7. To demolish or otherwise permanently withdraw the rental unit from offer for rent or lease pursuant to California Government Code sections 7060-7060.7. 8. To perform work on the building or buildings housing the rental unit that will render the rentable unit uninhabitable; 9. For use and occupancy by the landlord or the landlord’s spouse, grandparents, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in- law, daughter-in-law, children, or parents provided the landlord is a natural person. 10. For no specified cause. (c) Whenever a landlord seeks a no-fault eviction, other than temporary displacement of 31 days or fewer, the landlord shall provide a relocation assistance payment as follows: 1. Unit Type Amount 0 bedrooms $7,000 1 bedroom $9,000 2 bedrooms $13,000 3 or more bedrooms $17,000 If a rental unit is occupied by two or more tenants, the landlord shall provide each tenant with a proportional share of the required payment. One half of the payment shall be paid at the time that the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction and one half shall be paid when the tenant vacates the unit. 2. Notwithstanding subsection (c)(1), each rental unit that, at the time the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction, is occupied by a low-income household as defined in Chapter 16.65, a tenant who is 60 years of age or older, a tenant who is disabled within the meaning of Government Code section 12955.3, or a tenant who is a minor, shall be entitled to a single additional relocation payment of $3,000. This amount shall be divided equally among the qualifying (i.e. low-income, elderly, disabled, or minor) tenants. In order to receive this additional payment a qualifying tenant must provide written notice to the landlord of his or her eligibility along with supporting evidence within 15 days of receiving the landlord’s notice. The entirety of this additional payment shall be paid within 15 days of the tenant’s written notice to the landlord. (d) Prior to or at the same time that the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction, the landlord shall serve on the tenant a written notice describing the rights described in this section. The failure to provide this notice shall not operate as a substantive defense to an eviction pursuant to California Government Code sections 7060-7060.7. (e) Commencing July 1, 2019, the relocation payments specified in this section shall increase annually at the rate of increase in the "rent of primary residence" expenditure category of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All 180823 sm 010 4 Urban Consumers in the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Region for the preceding calendar year. Current rates shall be published on the City’s website. (f) A landlord may request a waiver or adjustment of the relocation assistance payment required by this section only upon a showing that strict application of its requirements would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property. Requests for waiver or adjustment must be submitted in writing to the Director of Planning and Community Environment together with supporting documentation at least 90 days before the proposed termination of tenancy. Requests shall be acted on by the City Council. (g) The Director of Planning and Community Environment may issue regulations implementing this section. SECTION 3. 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. In addition, this Ordinance is enacted to exercise the specific authority provided for in Chapter 12.75 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the California Government Code and reserved to local governments in Chapter 2.7 of Title 5 of Part 4 of Division 3 of the California Civil Code. In the case of any amendment to these chapters or any other provision of State law which amendment is inconsistent with this Ordinance, this Ordinance shall be deemed to be amended to be consistent with State law. SECTION 4. 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”) 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. // // // // // // 180823 sm 010 5 SECTION 5. The City Council finds and declares that, for the reasons provided in Section 1, this Ordinance is necessary as an emergency measure for preserving the public peace, health, or safety. Pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.04.270(d), this Ordinance shall take full force and effect immediately upon adoption by a vote of four-fifths of the council members present. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services 180823 sm 010 1 ORDINANCE NO. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 9.68 (Rental Housing Stabilization) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals, and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Require Relocation Assistance for No-Fault Eviction for Multifamily Housing Developments Containing 50 or More Rental Units The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows: (a) There is a significant and prolonged shortage of, but increasing demand for, rental housing in the City of Palo Alto. These conditions have created a housing crisis that is particularly acute for those residents of Palo Alto seeking rental housing. (b) Numerous recent studies conclude that the housing crises at the state and local levels have reached emergency levels. An April 2018 report by the California Housing Partnership states that Santa Clara County is facing a “housing emergency,” resulting in a 13% rise in homelessness and demand for almost 60,000 more affordable rental units throughout the county. A May 2018 report by Next 10 ranks California 3rd worst among states in share of household income spent on rental costs and worst in the nation for rental housing over-crowdedness. (c) The cost of housing in Palo Alto is among the highest in the world. As of July 2018, the median home sales price is reported at over $3 million and the median rent is reported as high as $5,900 per month. (d) According to rental market tracking sites Zumper, Trulia, and Rentometer, as of August 2018, the average rent in Palo Alto is approximately $2,300 per month for a studio, $2,900 for a one-bedroom, $4,300 for a two-bedroom, $5,600 for a three-bedroom, and $7,000 for a four-bedroom unit. (e) Tenants evicted in Palo Alto are forced to incur substantial costs related to new housing including, but not limited to, move-in costs, moving costs, new utility hook-ups, payments for temporary housing, and lost work time seeking housing. (f) Move-in costs commonly include first and last month's rent plus a security deposit equal to one month's rent, leading to total relocation expenses in excess of three months’ rent. 180823 sm 010 2 (g) Tenants who do not have adequate funds to move and who are forced to move pursuant to no-fault eviction notice face displacement and great hardship. (h) The impacts of these no-fault evictions are particularly significant on low- income, elderly, and disabled tenants, and tenants with minor children, justifying an additional payment for households with these tenants. (i) Certain no-fault evictions that reduce the number of rental units available, whether on a temporary or permanent basis, exacerbate the housing crisis in Palo Alto, particularly for structures containing 50 of more rental units. (j) For the reasons set forth above, the relocation assistance provided in this ordinance is justified and necessary as an emergency measure for evicted tenants to find new housing and avoid displacement and to otherwise preserve the public peace, health, and safety. SECTION 2. Section 9.68.035 (Relocation Assistance for Certain Displacements) of the Chapter 9.68 (Rental Housing Stabilization) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals, and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows: 9.68.35 Relocation Assistance for No Fault Eviction (a) This section shall be applicable only to structures or lots containing 50 or more rental units. (b) For the purposes of this section, a “no-fault eviction” means an action by a landlord to recover possession of a rental unit for any reason other than the following: 1. The tenant has failed to pay rent to which the landlord is legally entitled. 2. The tenant has violated a lawful obligation or covenant of the tenancy. 3. The tenant has refused the landlord reasonable access to the unit for the purposes of making repairs or improvements, for any reasonable purpose as permitted by law, or for the purpose of showing the rental unit to any prospective purchaser or tenant. 4. The tenant is permitting a nuisance to exist in, or is causing damage to, the rental unit. 5. The tenant is using, or permitting a rental unit to be used for any illegal purpose. 6. The landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession of the rental unit in order to comply with regulations relating to the qualifications of tenancy established by a governmental entity, where the tenant is no longer qualified. No fault evictions shall include, without limitation, actions in which the landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession of the rental unit: 180823 sm 010 3 7. To demolish or otherwise permanently withdraw the rental unit from offer for rent or lease pursuant to California Government Code sections 7060-7060.7. 8. To perform work on the building or buildings housing the rental unit that will render the rentable unit uninhabitable; 9. For use and occupancy by the landlord or the landlord’s spouse, grandparents, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in- law, daughter-in-law, children, or parents provided the landlord is a natural person. 10. For no specified cause. (c) Whenever a landlord seeks a no-fault eviction, other than temporary displacement of 31 days or fewer, the landlord shall provide a relocation assistance payment as follows: 1. Unit Type Amount 0 bedrooms $7,000 1 bedroom $9,000 2 bedrooms $13,000 3 or more bedrooms $17,000 If a rental unit is occupied by two or more tenants, the landlord shall provide each tenant with a proportional share of the required payment. One half of the payment shall be paid at the time that the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction and one half shall be paid when the tenant vacates the unit. 2. Notwithstanding subsection (c)(1), each rental unit that, at the time the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction, is occupied by a low-income household as defined in Chapter 16.65, a tenant who is 60 years of age or older, a tenant who is disabled within the meaning of Government Code section 12955.3, or a tenant who is a minor, shall be entitled to a single additional relocation payment of $3,000. This amount shall be divided equally among the qualifying (i.e. low-income, elderly, disabled, or minor) tenants. In order to receive this additional payment a qualifying tenant must provide written notice to the landlord of his or her eligibility along with supporting evidence within 15 days of receiving the landlord’s notice. The entirety of this additional payment shall be paid within 15 days of the tenant’s written notice to the landlord. (d) Prior to or at the same time that the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction, the landlord shall serve on the tenant a written notice describing the rights described in this section. The failure to provide this notice shall not operate as a substantive defense to an eviction pursuant to California Government Code sections 7060-7060.7. (e) Commencing July 1, 2019, the relocation payments specified in this section shall increase annually at the rate of increase in the "rent of primary residence" expenditure category of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All 180823 sm 010 4 Urban Consumers in the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Region for the preceding calendar year. Current rates shall be published on the City’s website. (f) A landlord may request a waiver or adjustment of the relocation assistance payment required by this section only upon a showing that strict application of its requirements would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property. Requests for waiver or adjustment must be submitted in writing to the Director of Planning and Community Environment together with supporting documentation at least 90 days before the proposed termination of tenancy. Requests shall be acted on by the City Council. (g) The Director of Planning and Community Environment may issue regulations implementing this section. SECTION 3. 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. In addition, this Ordinance is enacted to exercise the specific authority provided for in Chapter 12.75 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the California Government Code and reserved to local governments in Chapter 2.7 of Title 5 of Part 4 of Division 3 of the California Civil Code. In the case of any amendment to these chapters or any other provision of State law which amendment is inconsistent with this Ordinance, this Ordinance shall be deemed to be amended to be consistent with State law. SECTION 4. 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”) 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. // // // // // // 180823 sm 010 5 SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services 180823 sm 010 1 ORDINANCE NO. _____ Emergency Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 9.68 (Rental Housing Stabilization) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals, and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Require Cause for Eviction and Relocation Assistance for No-Fault Eviction for Multifamily Housing Developments Containing 50 or More Rental Units The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows: (a) There is a significant and prolonged shortage of, but increasing demand for, rental housing in the City of Palo Alto. These conditions have created a housing crisis that is particularly acute for those residents of Palo Alto seeking rental housing. (b) Numerous recent studies conclude that the housing crises at the state and local levels have reached emergency levels. An April 2018 report by the California Housing Partnership states that Santa Clara County is facing a “housing emergency,” resulting in a 13% rise in homelessness and demand for almost 60,000 more affordable rental units throughout the county. A May 2018 report by Next 10 ranks California 3rd worst among states in share of household income spent on rental costs and worst in the nation for rental housing over-crowdedness. (c) The cost of housing in Palo Alto is among the highest in the world. As of July 2018, the median home sales price is reported at over $3 million and the median rent is reported as high as $5,900 per month. (d) According to rental market tracking sites Zumper, Trulia, and Rentometer, as of August 2018, the average rent in Palo Alto is approximately $2,300 per month for a studio, $2,900 for a one-bedroom, $4,300 for a two-bedroom, $5,600 for a three-bedroom, and $7,000 for a four-bedroom unit. (e) Tenants evicted in Palo Alto are forced to incur substantial costs related to new housing including, but not limited to, move-in costs, moving costs, new utility hook-ups, payments for temporary housing, and lost work time seeking housing. (f) Move-in costs commonly include first and last month's rent plus a security deposit equal to one month's rent, leading to total relocation expenses in excess of three months’ rent. 180823 sm 010 2 (g) Tenants who do not have adequate funds to move and who are forced to move pursuant to an eviction notice face displacement and great hardship. (h) The impacts of evictions are particularly significant on low-income, elderly, and disabled tenants, and tenants with minor children, justifying an additional payment for households with these tenants. (i) Evictions for causes that reduce the number of rental units available, whether on a temporary or permanent basis, exacerbate the housing crisis in Palo Alto, particularly for structures containing 50 of more rental units. (j) For the reasons set forth above, the for-cause eviction measures provided in this ordinance are justified and necessary as an emergency measure to protect tenants from unfair or arbitrary eviction and to otherwise preserve the public peace, health, and safety. (k) For the reasons set forth above, the relocation assistance provided in this ordinance is justified and necessary as an emergency measure for evicted tenants to find new housing and avoid displacement and to otherwise preserve the public peace, health, and safety. SECTION 2. Section 9.68.035 (Just Cause for Eviction and Relocation Assistance) of the Chapter 9.68 (Rental Housing Stabilization) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals, and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows: 9.68.35 Just Cause for Eviction and Relocation Assistance (a) This section shall be applicable only to structures or lots containing 50 or more rental units. (b) Notwithstanding California Civil Code Section 1946, a landlord may bring an action to recover possession of a rental unit only upon the following grounds: 1. The tenant has failed to pay rent to which the landlord is legally entitled. 2. The tenant has violated a lawful obligation or covenant of the tenancy, other than the obligation to surrender possession upon proper notice. 3. The tenant has refused the landlord reasonable access to the unit for the purposes of making repairs or improvements, for any reasonable purpose as permitted by law, or for the purpose of showing the rental unit to any prospective purchaser or tenant. 4. The tenant is permitting a nuisance to exist in, or is causing damage to, the rental unit. 5. The tenant is using or permitting a rental unit to be used for any illegal purpose. 180823 sm 010 3 6. The landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession of the rental unit in order to comply with regulations relating to the qualifications of tenancy established by a governmental entity, where the tenant is no longer qualified. 7. To demolish or otherwise permanently withdraw the rental unit from offer for rent or lease pursuant to California Government Code sections 7060-7060.7. 8. To perform work on the building or buildings housing the rental unit that will render the rentable unit uninhabitable. 9. For use and occupancy by the landlord or the landlord’s spouse, grandparents, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in- law, daughter-in-law, children, or parents, provided the landlord is a natural person. (c) Whenever a landlord seeks an eviction for the reasons stated in subsections (b)(7), (b)(8), or (b)(9) (a “no-fault eviction”), other than temporary displacement of 31 days or fewer, the landlord shall provide a relocation assistance payment as follows: 1. Unit Type Amount 0 bedrooms $7,000 1 bedroom $9,000 2 bedrooms $13,000 3 or more bedrooms $17,000 If a rental unit is occupied by two or more tenants, the landlord shall provide each tenant with a proportional share of the required payment. One half of the payment shall be paid at the time that the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction and one half shall be paid when the tenant vacates the unit. 2. Notwithstanding subsection (c)(1), each rental unit that, at the time the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction, is occupied by a low-income household as defined in Chapter 16.65, a tenant who is 60 years of age or older, a tenant who is disabled within the meaning of Government Code section 12955.3, or a tenant who is a minor, shall be entitled to a single additional relocation payment of $3,000. This amount shall be divided equally among the qualifying (i.e. low-income, elderly, disabled, or minor) tenants. In order to receive this additional payment a qualifying tenant must provide written notice to the landlord of his or her eligibility along with supporting evidence within 15 days of receiving the landlord’s notice. The entirety of this additional payment shall be paid within 15 days of the tenant’s written notice to the landlord. (d) Prior to or at the same time that the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction, the landlord shall serve on the tenant a written notice describing the rights described in subsection (c). The failure to provide this 180823 sm 010 4 notice shall not operate as a substantive defense to an eviction pursuant to California Government Code sections 7060-7060.7. (e) Commencing July 1, 2019, the relocation payments specified in this subsection (c) shall increase annually at the rate of increase in the "rent of primary residence" expenditure category of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All Urban Consumers in the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Region for the preceding calendar year. Current rates shall be published on the City’s website. (f) A landlord may request a waiver or adjustment of the relocation assistance payment required by this section only upon a showing that strict application of its requirements would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property. Requests for waiver or adjustment must be submitted in writing to the Director of Planning and Community Environment together with supporting documentation at least 90 days before the proposed termination of tenancy. Requests shall be acted on by the City Council. (g) The Director of Planning and Community Environment may issue regulations implementing this section. SECTION 3. 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. In addition, this Ordinance is enacted to exercise the specific authority provided for in Chapter 12.75 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the California Government Code and reserved to local governments in Chapter 2.7 of Title 5 of Part 4 of Division 3 of the California Civil Code. In the case of any amendment to these chapters or any other provision of State law which amendment is inconsistent with this Ordinance, this Ordinance shall be deemed to be amended to be consistent with State law. SECTION 4. 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”) 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. // // // // 180823 sm 010 5 // // SECTION 5. The City Council finds and declares that, for the reasons provided in Section 1, this Ordinance is necessary as an emergency measure for preserving the public peace, health, or safety. Pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.04.270(d), this Ordinance shall take full force and effect immediately upon adoption by a vote of four-fifths of the council members present. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services 180823 sm 010 1 ORDINANCE NO. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 9.68 (Rental Housing Stabilization) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals, and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Require Cause for Eviction and Relocation Assistance for No-Fault Eviction for Multifamily Housing Developments Containing 50 or More Rental Units The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows: (a) There is a significant and prolonged shortage of, but increasing demand for, rental housing in the City of Palo Alto. These conditions have created a housing crisis that is particularly acute for those residents of Palo Alto seeking rental housing. (b) Numerous recent studies conclude that the housing crises at the state and local levels have reached emergency levels. An April 2018 report by the California Housing Partnership states that Santa Clara County is facing a “housing emergency,” resulting in a 13% rise in homelessness and demand for almost 60,000 more affordable rental units throughout the county. A May 2018 report by Next 10 ranks California 3rd worst among states in share of household income spent on rental costs and worst in the nation for rental housing over-crowdedness. (c) The cost of housing in Palo Alto is among the highest in the world. As of July 2018, the median home sales price is reported at over $3 million and the median rent is reported as high as $5,900 per month. (d) According to rental market tracking sites Zumper, Trulia, and Rentometer, as of August 2018, the average rent in Palo Alto is approximately $2,300 per month for a studio, $2,900 for a one-bedroom, $4,300 for a two-bedroom, $5,600 for a three-bedroom, and $7,000 for a four-bedroom unit. (e) Tenants evicted in Palo Alto are forced to incur substantial costs related to new housing including, but not limited to, move-in costs, moving costs, new utility hook-ups, payments for temporary housing, and lost work time seeking housing. (f) Move-in costs commonly include first and last month's rent plus a security deposit equal to one month's rent, leading to total relocation expenses in excess of three months’ rent. 180823 sm 010 2 (g) Tenants who do not have adequate funds to move and who are forced to move pursuant to an eviction notice face displacement and great hardship. (h) The impacts of evictions are particularly significant on low-income, elderly, and disabled tenants, and tenants with minor children, justifying an additional payment for households with these tenants. (i) Evictions for causes that reduce the number of rental units available, whether on a temporary or permanent basis, exacerbate the housing crisis in Palo Alto, particularly for structures containing 50 of more rental units. (j) For the reasons set forth above, the for-cause eviction measures provided in this ordinance are justified and necessary as an emergency measure to protect tenants from unfair or arbitrary eviction and to otherwise preserve the public peace, health, and safety. (k) For the reasons set forth above, the relocation assistance provided in this ordinance is justified and necessary as an emergency measure for evicted tenants to find new housing and avoid displacement and to otherwise preserve the public peace, health, and safety. SECTION 2. Section 9.68.035 (Just Cause for Eviction and Relocation Assistance) of the Chapter 9.68 (Rental Housing Stabilization) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals, and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows: 9.68.35 Just Cause for Eviction and Relocation Assistance (a) This section shall be applicable only to structures or lots containing 50 or more rental units. (b) Notwithstanding California Civil Code Section 1946, a landlord may bring an action to recover possession of a rental unit only upon the following grounds: 1. The tenant has failed to pay rent to which the landlord is legally entitled. 2. The tenant has violated a lawful obligation or covenant of the tenancy, other than the obligation to surrender possession upon proper notice. 3. The tenant has refused the landlord reasonable access to the unit for the purposes of making repairs or improvements, for any reasonable purpose as permitted by law, or for the purpose of showing the rental unit to any prospective purchaser or tenant. 4. The tenant is permitting a nuisance to exist in, or is causing damage to, the rental unit. 5. The tenant is using or permitting a rental unit to be used for any illegal purpose. 180823 sm 010 3 6. The landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession of the rental unit in order to comply with regulations relating to the qualifications of tenancy established by a governmental entity, where the tenant is no longer qualified. 7. To demolish or otherwise permanently withdraw the rental unit from offer for rent or lease pursuant to California Government Code sections 7060-7060.7. 8. To perform work on the building or buildings housing the rental unit that will render the rentable unit uninhabitable. 9. For use and occupancy by the landlord or the landlord’s spouse, grandparents, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in- law, daughter-in-law, children, or parents, provided the landlord is a natural person. (c) Whenever a landlord seeks an eviction for the reasons stated in subsections (b)(7), (b)(8), or (b)(9) (a “no-fault eviction”), other than temporary displacement of 31 days or fewer, the landlord shall provide a relocation assistance payment as follows: 1. Unit Type Amount 0 bedrooms $7,000 1 bedroom $9,000 2 bedrooms $13,000 3 or more bedrooms $17,000 If a rental unit is occupied by two or more tenants, the landlord shall provide each tenant with a proportional share of the required payment. One half of the payment shall be paid at the time that the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction and one half shall be paid when the tenant vacates the unit. 2. Notwithstanding subsection (c)(1), each rental unit that, at the time the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction, is occupied by a low-income household as defined in Chapter 16.65, a tenant who is 60 years of age or older, a tenant who is disabled within the meaning of Government Code section 12955.3, or a tenant who is a minor, shall be entitled to a single additional relocation payment of $3,000. This amount shall be divided equally among the qualifying (i.e. low-income, elderly, disabled, or minor) tenants. In order to receive this additional payment a qualifying tenant must provide written notice to the landlord of his or her eligibility along with supporting evidence within 15 days of receiving the landlord’s notice. The entirety of this additional payment shall be paid within 15 days of the tenant’s written notice to the landlord. (d) Prior to or at the same time that the landlord provides notice of its intent to seek no-fault eviction, the landlord shall serve on the tenant a written notice describing the rights described in subsection (c). The failure to provide this 180823 sm 010 4 notice shall not operate as a substantive defense to an eviction pursuant to California Government Code sections 7060-7060.7. (e) Commencing July 1, 2019, the relocation payments specified in this subsection (c) shall increase annually at the rate of increase in the "rent of primary residence" expenditure category of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All Urban Consumers in the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Region for the preceding calendar year. Current rates shall be published on the City’s website. (f) A landlord may request a waiver or adjustment of the relocation assistance payment required by this section only upon a showing that strict application of its requirements would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property. Requests for waiver or adjustment must be submitted in writing to the Director of Planning and Community Environment together with supporting documentation at least 90 days before the proposed termination of tenancy. Requests shall be acted on by the City Council. (g) The Director of Planning and Community Environment may issue regulations implementing this section. SECTION 3. 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. In addition, this Ordinance is enacted to exercise the specific authority provided for in Chapter 12.75 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the California Government Code and reserved to local governments in Chapter 2.7 of Title 5 of Part 4 of Division 3 of the California Civil Code. In the case of any amendment to these chapters or any other provision of State law which amendment is inconsistent with this Ordinance, this Ordinance shall be deemed to be amended to be consistent with State law. SECTION 4. 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”) 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. // // // // 180823 sm 010 5 // // SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services Zumper.com, retrieved August 17, 2018 Trulia.com, retrieved August 17, 2018 Survey of California Cities that Require Relocation Assistance Payments I. Jurisdictions that structure payment by size of unit Studio 1 bd 2bd 3bd Additional payment for units w/ qualifying tenants Beverly Hills $6,446 $9,523 $12,902 $2,000 Oakland $6,876 $6,876 $8,462 $10,446 $2,500 Richmond* $7,035 $10,784 $14,635 $1,000-$2,200 San Jose $6,925 $8,400 $10,353 $12,414 $2,770-$4,966 Santa Monica $9,950 $15,300 $20,750 $1,500-$3,000 West Hollywood $7,121 $10,055 $13,544 $17,875 $18,851 - $23,738* * Required payments are approximately 50% lower for “owner move-in” evictions ** A total payment of $18,851 is provided to units in which a tenant is elderly, disabled, terminally ill, a dependent minor, or moderate income (up to 120% of AMI); a total payment of $23,738 is provided for units in which a tenant is lower income (up to 80% of AMI). II. Jurisdictions that structure payment by tenant Payment per tenant Maximum per unit Additional payment for qualifying tenants East Palo Alto1 $10,000 none $2,500 Los Angeles $7,900-$10,7502 none Total payment is approximately double San Francisco $6,630 $19,890 $4,190 1 For condo conversions only; published amount not updated since 2012. 2 Amount varies depending on length of tenancy, income, and whether the landlord is a “mom and pop” landlord. III. Jurisdictions that structure payment by other means Requirement payment Additional payment for units w. qualifying tenants Alameda 4x fair market rent + $1,595 none Berkeleya $15,000 $5,000 Glendale 2x fair market rent + $1,000 none Mountain View 3x fair market rent + payment for rental placement services $3,000 a Required for Ellis Act and owner move-in evictions only. 9.68.020 Definitions. (a) "Landlord" means an owner, lessor, or sublessor, or the agent, representative, or successor of any of the foregoing persons who receives, or is entitled to receive, rent for the use and occupancy of any rental unit or portion thereof. (b) "Rent" means the consideration. including any bonus, benefit, or gratuity demanded or received by a landlord for or in connection with the use or occupancy of a rental unit. (c) "Rent increase" means any additional rent demanded of or paid by a tenant for a rental unit. (d) "Rental unit" means a dwelling unit in the city of Palo Alto with the land and appurtenant buildings thereto and all housing services, privileges, and facilities supplied in connection with the use or occupancy thereof, which unit is in a multiple-family dwelling (including a duplex), boardinghouse, lodginghouse, or mobilehome park. The term "rental unit" shall not include: (1) A single-family dwelling; (2) Rooms or accommodations in hotels, boardinghouses, or lodginghouses which are rented to transient guests for a period of less than thirty days; (3) Dwelling units in a condominium, community apartment, planned development or stock cooperative as defined in Chapter 21.40, or in a limited equity stock cooperative as defined in the California Business and Professions Code; (4) Dwelling units in which housing accommodations are shared by landlord and tenant; (5) Housing accommodations in any hospital, extended care facility, asylum, nonprofit home for the aged, or in dormitories owned and operated by an institution of higher education, a high school or an elementary school; (6) Housing accommodations rented by a medical institution which are then subleased to a patient or patient's family; (7) Dwelling units whose rents are controlled or regulated by any government unit, agency, or authority, or whose rent is subsidized by any government unit, agency, or authority; or (8) Dwelling units acquired by the city of Palo Alto or any other governmental unit, agency or authority and intended to be used for a public purpose. (e) "Tenant" means a person or persons entitled by written or oral agreement to occupy a rental unit to the exclusion of others. (Ord. 3420 §§ 1 and 2, 1983: Ord. 3327 § 1, 1982: Ord. 3252 § 1 (part), 1980) City of Palo Alto (ID # 9012) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 8/27/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Human Relations Commission Response to Council Resolution # 9653 Title: Recommendations From the Human Relations Commission in Response to Council Resolution Number 9653 Reaffirming Palo Alto’s Commitment to a Diverse, Supportive, Inclusive and Protective Community From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommendation As requested by Council, the Human Relations Commission (HRC) carefully considered Council Resolution #9653 Reaffirming Palo Alto’s Commitment to a Diverse, Supportive, Inclusive and Protective Community and prepared recommendations to support and extend the Council resolution, focusing in particular on immigration and gender equity issues. The HRC prepared a letter explaining their work and recommendations, attached as Attachment A to this report. Guided by the HRC’s proposals, City staff recommends that Council consider one or more of the following actions to further the HRC’s proposals, providing direction to staff regarding timing and prioritization in light of overall City goals and priorities: 1) California State Senate Bill 54 (SB54) – Sanctuary State – Direct the City Manager to review the City’s policies, procedures and programs, make any adjustments that may be appropriate, and report to Council on the Ci ty’s alignment with SB54. 2) California State Senate Bill 31 (SB31) - California Religious Freedom Act – Direct the City Manager to review the City’s policies, procedures and programs, make any adjustments that may be appropriate, and report to Council on th e City’s alignment with SB31. 3) Send a letter of endorsement to California State Senator Kevin de Leon in recognition of the City’s commitment to the values expressed in SB54. 4) Send a letter of endorsement to California State Senator Ricardo Lara in recognition of City’s commitment to the values expressed in the SB31. 5) Adopt Amnesty International’s resolution in support of Refugee Resettlement in Santa Clara County. City of Palo Alto Page 2 6) Direct staff to study and return to Policy & Services with options for a City ordinance endorsing the United Nations’ Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Staff’s work should include: a. Affirming the City’s commitment to the principals of the United Nations convention of the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, and b. A discussion of the potential for a gender analysis, including potential focus, scope, and phasing of an analysis, and roles of City staff, the HRC, and Council. Executive Summary The recommendations included in this report follow from the work of the HRC in response to Council Resolution #9653, Reaffirming Palo Alto’s Commitment to a Diverse, Supportive, Inclusive and Protective Community (Colleagues Memo from Council Members Holman, Kniss, Wolbach & Burt, passed on D ecember 12, 2016). The HRC designated an ad hoc subcommittee of the Commission tasked with reviewing the Council resolution, planning an approach to address its main areas of emphasis, and drafting a response back to Council. After conducting a baseline assessment of the areas included in the resolution and testing the results against a list of established criteria, the HRC discussed and deliberated the suggested recommendations over a series of several meetings before bringing a final slate of recommendations to the HRC at its February 8, 2018 meeting. The recommendations being brought to the Council for their consideration highlight two key areas of focus of the Resolution; immigration and gender equality. As the subject matter of the Council’s resolution squarely aligns with the charge of the HRC, the Commission will continue to focus its ongoing efforts in support of a supportive and inclusive community and, when appropriate, bring forward other policies for Council consideration. Staff has added additional comments and suggestions to the HRC’s recommendations, to harmonize the HRC’s work with the City’s governance structure and in light of Council’s and the City Manager’s overall work plan and goals. Background On December 12, 2016, the Council passed Resolution #9653, Reaffirming Palo Alto’s Commitment to a Diverse, Supportive, Inclusive and Protective Community. As part of the approval motion, Council moved to refer the subject matter to the HRC, for “recommendation of implementation measures and additional elements that should be considered by the Council in the future.” ( Resolution #9653 - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/55179. Council Action Minutes 12/12/16 - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/55464). The subject matter of the Council’s resolution aligns with the charge of the HRC as the Commission has long addressed diversity and inclusion issues in the community. During the spring of 2017, HRC Chair Valerie Stinger led a community committee to plan a series of four well-attended forums on implicit bias called Being Different Together – City of Palo Alto Page 3 Taking the conversation deeper. This was a follow up to an initial forum on the topic the previous year. The HRC has also lead successful forums on Veterans Homelessness, Domestic Violence, and Senior Issues and takes seriously its role as a leader on human relations issues in the community. In response to Council Resolution #9653, the Commission created an ad hoc subcommittee (subcommittee) in the spring of 2017 to review the resolution, plan its approach to develop recommendations, and draft a response back to Council with assistance from Office of Human Services staff. As the Council’s resolution covered a broad area, the subcommittee’s first task was to identify the key areas that the Resolution reaffirmed including the: • City’s spirit of diversity and inclusion • Rights of vulnerable populations • Rejection of any forms of hate and bias • City’s commitment to lead by example To provide a sound response to Council that would include implementation measures, the subcommittee conducted a baseline assessment of the key focus areas of the resolution by interviewing key leaders in different sectors of the community, researching best practice programs and services locally, regionally and nationally, then “testing” all suggested recommendations for action against the following list of criteria which they established: • Serves vulnerable populations • Provides opportunity to make a difference • Informed by best practices of successful programs elsewhere • Leverages collaboration with local and county partners • Is achievable and scalable • Lies within the City’s sphere of influence • Reasonably serves populations featured in Council Resolution The subcommittee thoughtfully considered a series of options and initially developed a list of recommendations in seven areas: • Immigration • Gender Identity • Hate Crimes • Inclusive Public Engagement • Citywide Diversity Learning • Implicit Bias • Gender City of Palo Alto Page 4 From there, the subcommittee worked through a process of refining the draft action plan to craft a package of recommendations for the coming year, which they hoped would be meaningful, achievable and reach multiple vulnerable populations in the city, while acknowledging that there are additional programs and policies of merit that they hope to recommend or phase-in in the future. The subcommittee submitted a list of draft recommendations centered on immigration and gender equality for the full HRC’s consideration at their August, October, and December 2017 meetings, before the final recommendations included in this report were approved at their February 8, 2018 meeting. (link to February 8,2018 HRC minutes - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63879). There were two items identified by the subcommittee that, with the assistance of city staff, have been resolved. The two items are gender neutral bathrooms and the City’s graffiti removal policy. California Assembly Bill - AB1732 states that starting March 1, 2017, all single-user toilet facilities in any business establishment, place of public accommodation or government agency must be identified as “all-gender” toilet facilities. City Facilities staff have been working to change signage on all affected bathroom facilities. While our Public Works Department had an operational practice of removing hate related graffiti within 24 hours, they solidified their commitment by adding language to that affect to their graffiti removal policy. Discussion As mentioned previously, the HRC subcommittee considered a wide range of responses in their draft action plan and brought several options for the full HRC’s consideration. At the February 8, 2018 HRC meeting, the Commission voted to forward the following recommendations for the Council’s consideration. (5-0-1) Below you will find the listing of these recommendations forwarded by the HRC followed by staff analysis. HRC Chair Stinger has also provided a memorandum outlining the Commission’s decision making process for Council consideration (Attachment A – HRC Recommendations). Immigration: 1) SB54 – Direct the City Manager to review the City’s policies, procedures and programs, make any adjustments that may be appropriate, and report to Council on the City’s alignment with SB54. California State Senate Bill 54, (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB54) known as the “Sanctuary State” bill, would limit state and local law enforcement communication with federal immigration authorities, and prevent officers from questioning and holding people on immigration violations. City of Palo Alto Page 5 2) SB31 – Direct the City Manager to review the City’s policies, procedures and programs, make any adjustments that may be appropriate, and report to Council on the City’s alignment with SB31. California State Senate Bill 31, (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB31) known as the “California Religious Freedom Act,” prohibits a state or local agency from providing or disclosing to federal authorities personally identifying information regarding a person’s religious affiliation when the information is sought for compiling a database of individuals based on religious affiliation, national origin, or ethnicity. SB31 also prohibits state and local law enforcement from collecting information about an individual’s religious beliefs or affiliations except under certain circumstances. 3) Send a letter of endorsement to California State Senator Kevin de Leon in recognition of the City’s commitment to the values expressed in SB54. 4) Send a letter of endorsement to California State Senator Ricardo Lara in recognition of the City’s commitment to the values expressed in SB31. The preceding was suggested to HRC Chair Stinger by Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian, based on his experience in the California State Senate . The HRC believes these letters of thank you would publicly convey the City’s recognition of the sentiment included in both laws and Staff believes that these letters would allow the City to express their endorsement of the concepts included in the legislation. 5) Adopt Amnesty International’s resolution in support of Refugee Resettlement in Santa Clara County. Representatives from the local chapter of the human rights organization Amnesty International approached the HRC for their consideration of forwarding a resolution to Council in support of refugee resettlement in Santa Clara County https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63329). The resolution gives voice to plight of refugees worldwide. There was discussion and concern at the HRC level that this resolution was only symbolic in nature, but there was also mention of the importance of symbolic gestures at times, especially when communities act together. Amnesty International representatives informed the HRC that they have been approaching other cities in Santa Clara County as well. To add possible “action” to this symbolic gesture, the HRC also passed a recommendation to consider adding refugee resettlement as a priority of need during the next Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) funding cycle. City of Palo Alto Page 6 6) Direct staff to study and return to Policy & Services with options for a City ordinance endorsing the United Nations’ Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). CEDAW is an international human rights treaty adopted by the United Nations (UN) in 1979. (http://citiesforcedaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CEDAW_2-Pager_15- March-2018.pdf). To date, 187 of the 193 UN member states have ratified CEDAW. Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Palau, United States (U.S.), and Tonga have not ratified the treaty. It should be noted that several of the countries who are signatories to CEDAW do not offer the rights and/or protections for women already included in U.S. Law. In 2002, the Palo Alto City Council passed Resolution #8217 in support of an effort for United States ratification or accession to CEDAW https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63324). The Council has not acted further on any matter related to CEDAW. In the absence of a U.S. signature on CEDAW and stalled efforts in the U.S. Senate, there is a country-wide grassroots campaign called Cities for CEDAW (with the assistance of the Women’s InterCultural Network, a nongovernmental organization) whose aim is to encourage local cities and counties to pass local legislation establishing the principles of CEDAW (http://citiesforcedaw.org/wp- content/uploads/2018/01/CEDAW-USFact-Sheet-01-2018-1.pdf). According to Cities for CEDAW, the “principles embodied in CEDAW are fully in accord with American laws, principles and values. The U.S. Constitution already protects women’s rights to due process and equality under the law, and numerous laws on both the federal and state level also protect women, prohibiting sex discrimination in employment, education, housing and credit; providing for family and medical leave and child care; and combating domestic violence and human trafficking….” However, they state that “American women enjoy opportunities and status not available to most of the world’s women, yet few would dispute that more progress is needed. CEDAW provides an opportunity for dialogue on how to address persistent gaps in women’s full equality, particularly regarding closing the pay gap, reducing domestic violence, and stopping trafficking.” According to the Cities for CEDAW website, at present, nine cities or counties in the U.S. have passed local ordinances to become “CEDAW cities” (or counties); San Francisco, Berkeley, Cincinnati, Honolulu, Los Angeles, Miami-Dade County, Pittsburgh, San Jose and Santa Clara County. The City of Berkeley (population approximately 120,000) is the city closest in population to Palo Alto (population approximately 64,000) which has passed a CEDAW ordinance. It should be noted that the City of Berkeley already had a Commission on the Status of Women, which was designated to serve as the CEDAW oversight body. Its CEDAW ordinance does not include specific outcome goals, but reiterates city policy and commitments with respect to core CEDAW principles. Around 25-30 cities/counties nationwide have passed local CEDAW resolutions. City of Palo Alto Page 7 CEDAW ordinances vary in their scope and approach. Smaller cities have tended to focus on broad goals and statements of support for principles of equity and human rights. Some of the larger cities and the counties, most of which already had staff dedicated to equity programs, have adopted more defined programs, including some or all of the following elements: • Commitment to conducting a gender analysis of City operations (e.g., workforce, programs, budget) • Establishment of an oversight body (task force) to monitor the implementation of a local CEDAW ordinance • Provide funding to support the implementation of CEDAW principles Consideration of forwarding a recommendation to Council on a CEDAW ordinance was discussed at the February 8, 2018 HRC agenda (CEDAW Packet – Staff Report - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63326, Subcommittee report - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63325, Public Letters to the HRC - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63804 While Human Services staff strongly supports gender equality and the sentiment driving the request for a CEDAW ordinance, Human Services staff communicated the following observations, concerns and questions to the HRC during their deliberations: • Gender Equity Goals o What are the community’s goals for gender equity and what actions would be most impactful for them? o What are the HRC’s goals for gender equality and is CEDAW the right mechanism to reach these goals? o Would the City’s efforts be best directed outward at areas of community concern, rather than focusing on internal operations of City government? • Time Commitment and Budget o The commitment of staff time and the budget needed to implement the initial and ongoing work connected to the ordinance could be significant, which could draw attention and resources away from other core functions and priorities. A comprehensive gender analysis of City operations is beyond the scope and expertise of Human Services staff, and would require considerable time and resources from the City Manager’s Office, Human Resources, ASD, and many other departments. Council will need City of Palo Alto Page 8 to consider the appropriate time that this work could be undertaken without competing with other critical projects and priorities. • Building on current approaches o The City does not need an ordinance to conduct a gender equity study of City operations. The City’s Human Resources Department already does periodic checks into gender-based pay equity and makes recommendations for increases when needed. o Other meaningful avenues to impact gender equity exist and should be explored. The HRC discussed the proposed recommendations at great length. There was strong support expressed for the concept of gender equity. Discussion centered on the unknown and perceived amount of work involved in enacting and overseeing an ordinance, setting up and managing a task force, conducting and analyzing a gender equity study, and to whom this responsibility was going to fall. Several commissioners felt that this could overwhelm the HRC and staff. Other discussion centered on the options for forwarding a resolution vs. an ordinance for Council consideration. Still other commissioners questioned whether the focus of the work of the task force should be inward facing to City operations or outward facing to meet the needs of marginalized women in the community, finally concluding that while the focus could be on the City of Palo Alto as an employer and as a policy maker, there is broader focus on the City as an influencer and community stakeholder. CEDAW framework allows Council to make a determination as to what they would like to accomplish in regards to gender equity. After much discussion, the HRC generally felt it had deliberated the matter to the level of its ability, given the fact that it does not have the authority to analyze or authorize the staff and/or financial resources needed to implement CEDAW, that the decision should be made to forward a recommendation to Council for discussion and decision on whether to pursue a CEDAW ordinance and where the focus should lie. The HRC’s Council Liaison, Cory Wolbach, was present at the meeting and expressed support and encouragement for forwarding a recommendation for the Council’s consideration. The HRC passed a recommendation (6–0), so that Council could enter into a discussion regarding CEDAW, and if affirmed, provide its counsel on the depth and scope of the City’s commitment and resource allocation. Staff continues to have concerns regarding the focus, time commitment and cost involved in enacting a CEDAW ordinance. Staff highly recommends that if Council does direct staff to study a CEDAW ordinance and return to Policy & Services, that it considers recommending a flexible framework which includes the following: City of Palo Alto Page 9 • Limited scope of work • Pre-established length of time for completion, with the ability to revi sit on an annual basis to consider staff and financial resources for the coming year before authorizing additional studies. Resource Impact Recommendations 3, 4 and possibly 5 can be pursued with existing staff and within current budgets. Recommendations 1 and 2 will require more time and effort from the City Manager’s Office and City departments that perform relevant work. Depending on the Council’s direction and the nature and scope of any resulting ordinance, Recommendation 6 could be manageable with current staffing and budgets or could require new staff and additional budget allocations. Given these potential implications, Council will need to consider the appropriate time that this work could be undertaken without competing with other critical projects and priorities. Policy Implications The following elements of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan connect to the topic of this staff report. Policy S-1.6 Work with the PAPD to develop effective, transparent law enforcement strategies that protect the privacy and civil liberties of the public and results in a safe community for all people GOAL C-1 Deliver community services effectively and efficiently. Program C1.2.3 Identify barriers to participation in City programming and facilities across gender, age, socioeconomic and ethnic groups and sexual identity and orientation, as well as mental and physical abilities, and adopt strategies to remove barriers to participation. GOAL C-5 Sustain the health, well-being, recreation and safety of residents and visitors and improve the quality, quantity and affordability of social services for all community members, including children, youth, teens, seniors, the unhoused and people with disabilities. Policy C-5.3 Celebrate diversity in Palo Alto. Policy C-5.7 Implement the Healthy Cities Healthy Community Resolution that supports healthy social, cultural and physical environments that promote and support well -being and creative expression for ourselves, our families and our community. Attachments: • ATTACHMENT A- HRC RECOMMENDATIONS-final.- 5-7-18 ATTACHMENT A MEMORANDUM March 7, 2018 To: City Council From: Valerie Stinger, Chair Human Relations Commission (HRC) Subject: Policy Recommendations from the HRC in Response to the Council Resolution Reaffirming Palo Alto’s Commitment to a Diverse, Supportive, Inclusive and Protective Community (#9653) Executive Summary The HRC received direction to provide implementations responsive to Council Resolution #9653. After consideration of the needs in the city and assessment of alternative responses, a work plan, including policies and programs, was prepared. Policy recommendations, focusing on (1) immigration and (2) gender equity are recommended to Council in this memo. 1) Refer California State Senate Bill 54 (SB54) – Sanctuary State - to City Attorney to confirm that City’s policies and procedures are consistent with SB54. 2) Refer California State Senate Bill 31 (SB31) - California Religious Freedom Act - to City Attorney to confirm that City’s policies and procedures are consistent are consistent with SB31. 3) Send a letter of endorsement to California State Senator Kevin de Leon in recognition of the City’s commitment to the values expressed in SB54. 4) Send a letter of endorsement to California State Senator Ricardo Lara in recognition of the City’s commitment to the values expressed in SB31. 5) Adopt Amnesty International’s resolution in support of Refugee Resettlement in Santa Clara County. 6) Direct staff to draft a Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) ordinance, that, a. Affirms the City’s commitment to the principles of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women, and b. Authorizes a gender analysis and designates a body to conduct and oversee the analysis and its powers, scope and responsibilities. The HRC also acknowledges that to support the proposed programs and policies, we are making extensive demands on staff. Their limitations could constrain our ability to successfully achieve our goals for diversity and inclusion. The HRC relies on and works with staff to carry out these programs, set additional priorities, initiate new work and monitor outcomes. We believe that our ability to continue the work would be enhanced by additional staff, consultant services or interns. We ask that Council recognize the demands on staff to support diversity and inclusion, and we ask that staff and/or consultant services be dedicated to Diversity and Inclusion. Discussion of Recommendations The HRC had responsibility to propose policies and institute programs to validate the principles stated in Council Resolution #9653. The programs complement the policy recommendations and are shown in Attachment 1. Discussion of the policies recommended to Council follows. The Commission would like Council to be aware of the full plan of programs that support Resolution #9653 in the initial phase. Much of the program work in Attachment 1 is underway as the HRC has the capacity to bring forward these programs. It should be noted that these programs represent a start. It is the intent of the HRC to continue our efforts to support the Resolution. It should also be noted that the city measures well on many scales of inclusion and the intent of most proposals is to be proactive and community building, more than corrective. With consideration for your time and priorities, we bring forward for your approval only the policy recommendations. (Full report on subcommittee response on Resolution #9653 presented at 2/8/18 HRC meeting -https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63327). The following recommendations were discussed and voted on at the February 8, 2018 Human Relations Commission Meeting. Recommendations concerning Immigration and Religious Affiliation 1) Refer California State Senate Bill 54 (SB54) – Sanctuary State - to City Attorney to confirm that City’s policies and procedures are consistent with SB54. California State Senate Bill 54, (Text – SB54 - https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB54) known as the “Sanctuary State” bill, would limit state and local law enforcement communication with federal immigration authorities, and prevent officers from questioning and holding people on immigration violations. SB54, (including Chpt. 17.25, California Values Act) curtails the use of re sources to allow mass deportations that separate families; keeps schools, hospitals, court houses safe and accessible, and is aligned with the city’s legislative priority to oppose attempts to undermine rights of any group, whether by federal government; or by coercing states or local government; or by weakening existing laws and enforcement thereof against harassment, discrimination, and hate crimes. The bill went into effect on Jan. 1, 2018. 2) Refer California State Senate Bill 31 (SB31) - California Religious Freedom Act - to City Attorney to confirm that City’s policies and procedures are consistent with SB31. California State Senate Bill 31, (Text SB31 - https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB31) known as the “California Religious Freedom Act,” prohibits a state or local agency from providing or disclosing to federal authorities personally identifying information regarding a person’s religious affiliation when the information is sought for compiling a database of individuals based on religious affiliation, national origin, or ethnicity. SB 31 also prohibits state and local law enforcement from collecting personal information about an individual’s religious beliefs or affiliations except under certain circumstances. SB31, California Religious Freedom Act, prohibits the use of state and local governments to create a Muslim registry. This measure was approved by the Governor on October 15, 2017 and took immediate effect. 3) Send a letter of endorsement to California State Senator Kevin de Leon in recognition of the City’s commitment to the values expressed in SB54. 4) Send a letter of endorsement to California State Senator Ricardo Lara in recognition of the City’s commitment to the values expressed in SB31. Council Resolution #9653 states, “The City of Palo Alto recognizes, values, and will proactively work to ensure the rights and privileges of everyone in Palo Alto, regardless of religion, ancestry, country of birth, immigration status, disability, gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity.” The HRC is recommending that the Council direct the City Attorney to review SB54 and SB31 to confirm that Ci ty policies and procedures are consistent with this new law. The HRC acknowledged that City Attorney review is typically standard operating procedure, but also felt that in this climate, with this legislation it’s a profound statement to visibly confirm that indeed we are following these state laws. Compliance with and endorsement of SB54 and SB31 confirm our commitment to the legislation and to ‘everyone “living, working, and visiting” in Palo Alto, regardless of religion …, immigration status’. Endorsement can communicate that the legislation is consistent with our values and our commitment to actively carry out the elements of the legislation. It is worth noting that subsequent to the HRC vote the Trump administration sued California over immigration laws. ("https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/06/us/politics/justice-department-california- sanctuary-cities.html") Thus the HRC had no discussion of whether to follow state or federal legislation and the consequences of the decision. 5) Adopt Amnesty International’s resolution in support of Refugee Resettlement in Santa Clara County. Representatives from the local chapter of the human rights organization Amnesty International requested that the HRC forward to Council a resolution in support of refugee resettlement in Santa Clara County. (Refugee Resolution - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63329). The resolution gives voice to plight of refugees worldwide, including such points as: The world is facing the largest refugee crisis since World War II, with over 21 million refugees, 86% of whom are hosted by developing countries who do not have the resources to adequately support such large numbers 51% of refugees are children Refugees in most urgent need of resettlement are identified based on their vulnerabilities and risk of further exposure to violence and exploitation - including children traveling alone, female-headed households, victims of torture, the physically disabled and members of the LGBT community While the Commission did vote to forward the resolution, there were concerns over what Palo Alto, alone, could realistically accomplish and the symbolic nature of the resolution. These remain. The representatives expressed hope of building countywide commitment for the support of refugee resettlement. Support across the county has not yet been verified. While the HRC generally does not support resolutions considered symbolic in nature, it was acknowledged that symbolic gestures may be warranted at times, especially when communities are motivated to act together. Attempting to address the symbolic nature of the resolution, the HRC passed a recommendation to consider adding refugee resettlement as a priority need during the next Human Services Resource Allocation (HSRAP) funding cycle, if warranted at that funding cycle. Gender Equity 6) Direct staff to draft a Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) ordinance, that a. Affirms the City’s commitment to the principles of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women, and b. Authorizes a gender analysis and designates a body to conduct and oversee the analysis and its powers, scope and responsibilities. CEDAW is an international human rights treaty adopted by the United Nations (UN) in 1979 and is considered a comprehensive international agreement on the basic human rights of women. To date, 187 of the 193 UN member states have ratified CEDAW. Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Palau, United States (U.S.), and Tonga have not ratified the treaty. Council Resolution #9653 states, “The City of Palo Alto recognizes, values, and will proactively work to ensure the rights and privileges of everyone ’living, working, and visiting‘ in Palo Alto, regardless of…, gender.” The recommendation to Council includes a statement of values, grounded in a plan of action. Enthusiasm for the process and what could be accomplished exists. It is clear that gender equity is not yet realized, even in progressive Palo Alto. Gender discrimination in Palo Alto, as well as the current political and social climate, highlight longstanding, pervasive, and still unresolved gender equality issues that continue to affect the women of our community, nation and the world. There is a continued need for the City and community to proactively identify where there are opportunities for improvement and to suggest policies and programs, which can be adopted to address gender equality issues specific to the City of Palo Alto. To clarify, the recommendation herein is asking Council to direct staff to draft an ordinance, which first affirms the City of Palo Alto’s commitment to the principles of CEDAW; and second, authorizes a gender analysis and designates who would conduct that. That draft ordinance would return to Council. If approved, it would become law, the CEDAW ordinance. The gender analysis would then be authorized and could proceed. The body authorized to conduct the gender analysis would bring back meaningful recommendations, based on their analysis. With respect to composition of the body, it is recognized that City resources are limited. To augment City resources, the body could be made up in different ways including: (1) using existing staff and budgetary resources, (2) dedicating new staff and budgetary resources, (3) hiring outside consultants, (4) leveraging support from local universities, community groups, stakeholders and experts, or (5) some combination thereof. To assist the body in conducting and/or overseeing the gender analysis, community expertise might well be leveraged. The body would be responsible for directing the study of specific, locally relevant gender study priorities, establishing a work plan, conducting and/or overseeing the gender analysis, and preparing recommendations for policies and programs. The proposed recommendation was supported in public oral comments and discussed at length by the HRC in their February 8, 2018 meeting. (CEDAW Packet – Staff Report - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63326, Subcommittee report - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63325, Public Letters to the HRC - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63804 As noted there was strong support for the concept of gender equity and the CEDAW process, particularly the opportunity for dialogue, flexibility in implementation, focus on local gender issue concerns, and the value of a public commitment. There were also questions about the amount of work, the budget for the work, the mechanism of a binding ordinance, the leadership resources required, and the optimal framework. Staff noted that the commitment of HRC and staff time needed to implement the initial and ongoing work connected to the ordinance are not completely known and look to be quite significant which could draw HRC and Human Services staff away from other core functions and priorities. The Commission’s deliberation centered on the goals and hoped for outcomes from a commitment to the principles of CEDAW and from a gender analysis specific to Palo Alto concerns. Those endpoints contrasted with concern that the resources were neither in place nor available to get the job done efficiently. Taking into account all the elements of the deliberation, the belief in gender equity was strong enough to go to the next step of enquiry. That is, at its core, how would this City move forward on a gender analysis. Balancing enthusiasm and outstanding questions, the HRC passed a recommendation (6–0), so that Council could enter into a discussion regarding CEDAW, and if affirmed, provide its counsel on the depth and scope of the City’s commitment and resource allocation. Attachment 1 Programs in Progress or Under Consideration to Support Council Resolution #9653 These represent the work of the HRC and the Office of Human Services and are included here for information only. GENDER IDENTITY -Collaborate with the County of Santa Clara to conduct a Listening Campaign to understand how to best support LGBTQ youth, the adult and working community, and seniors and friends and family HATE CRIMES -Collaborate with County to ensure that city reporting needs are included in proposed Hate Crime Reporting System -Formalize operational policy for graffiti removal INCLUSIVE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT -Expand Welcoming America Week programming, with local partners -Investigate a collaboration to institute an Immigrant Leadership Training Program -Host a Community Dinner -Be more strategic in inclusive outreach (investigate ILG models) -Investigate the possibility of a language access policy CITY WIDE DIVERSITY LEARNING -Consider a City/School/Library/Public Art/Children’s Theatre Consortium program focusing on a topic such as the history of Japanese Internment or Holocaust or Racism or Bigotry -Sponsor joint program, e.g. History of Racism or Historical ‘Otherness’ IMPLICIT BIAS -Staff dialogue and training to strive for diversity and better communications GENDER -Explore and consider recommending the strategy for becoming a CEDAW city City of Palo Alto (ID # 8727) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 8/27/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance Update & Discussion Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.42.040 Related to Accessory and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units to Clarify or Mod ify Various Provisions Including Setback Requirements for Detached ADU Basements, Allowance for Setback and Daylight Plane Encroachments for Detached ADUs, Bonus Lot Coverage and Floor Area Eligibility, Bonus Floor Area Amount to Match Minimum Unit Size as Established by Building Code, Reduced Height Limit for Detached ADUs Located Within Identified Eichler Tracts, Replacement Parking Provisions as Applicable to JADUs, Allowance for Replacement Parking to be Located Within Driveways Located in Street -side Setbacks, Allowance for Existing Driveways to be Expanded to Accommodate Replacement Parking, Allowance for Noncomplying Structures to be Rebuilt as Part of Conversion to ADU, and Applicable Zoning Districts that Allow ADU Development; Finding the Ordinance Exempt from Review Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3); and Discussion of Other Potential ADU -related Regulations. Planning & Transportation Commission Recommended Approval of the Ordinance. From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions to amend the Accessory Dwelling Units regulations: City of Palo Alto Page 2 1. Find the proposed Ordinance exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3); and 2. Adopt an Ordinance (Attachment A) amending Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.42.040, Accessory and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units. Executive Summary On May 8, 2017, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5412 amending Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to implement the new State requirements related to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADU). These new regulations have eased the development requirements for ADUs for property owners and support the creation of additional, more affordable, housing units. With the implementation of the new regulations, the City has seen an increase in the number of ADU permit applications filed. In 2017, 31 ADU applications were submitted for review. For 2018, 26 applications have been submitted so far this year. In previous years, the City had an average of four ADUs reviewed each year. Although local regulations have only been in effect for 13 months, staff has encountered some challenges implementing the current code and proposes revisions to address these concerns. On April 25, 2018, the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) reviewed and recommended approval of the proposed ordinance with a 5 -0-2 (Lauing, Riggs absent) vote. This report also discusses Council direction to make ADUs available to low and moderate income households and options to address illegally established AD Us. Background In October 2015, the City Council approved a Colleagues Memo that directed the PTC to review the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) related to ADUs and recommend strategies to increase production of these units. Subsequently, the PTC conducte d two study sessions in January and July 2016 (reports #6462 & #6944), just prior to the State of California’s adoption of ADU and JADU1 legislation in September 2016. In response to the state ADU regulations, the City prepared a draft ordinance to incorporate the mandatory state requirements and some optional provisions with the existing local regulat ions. The PTC reviewed the ordinance on November 30, 2016 (report #7368) and made recommendations. In March 2017, the City Council held its first public hearing on ADUs (report #7517) and discussed the ordinance and directed certain modifications. On April 17, 2017, the Council adopted the ADU ordinance with further refinements (reports #7921 & #8048), which became effective on June 8, 2017. The City Council also directed staff to provide a quarterly report on ADU permits and to conduct a study 1 The establishment of Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADU) as a permitted use was not required by state law and was left to the discretion of the local jurisdiction. With the local adoption of the ADU regulations in April 2017, the City Council allowed for these JADU units in Palo Alto. City of Palo Alto Page 3 session with the PTC to analyze the results of the ordinance; the study sessions were held on December 13, 2017 (meeting minutes) and January 10, 2018 (report #8773 & meeting minutes). Prior to the implementation of the City’s ADU ordinance, the State regulations that became effective on January 1, 2017 governed all ADU permit applications submitted for review in the City. Once the City’s ordinance became effective on June 8, 2017, all ADU permit applications not already approved were subject to the new local regulations. As of the preparation of this report, the City has reviewed 54 ADU permit applications since the State and local regulations were implemented. In 2017, the City received 31 applications to establish ADUs, which exceeds the average of four units per year that the City has historically processed. For 2018, the City has received 26 ADU applications to date. As part of the ADU code update process, staff has set up a project webpage (http://cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pln/advance/accessory_dwelling_units_regulations_updat e.asp ) to provide information to the public. Updated State Regulations Effective January 2018 In 2017, the City adopted comprehensive regulations related to ADUs to conform to state law that became effective on January 1, 2017. Subsequently, the State le gislature passed two additional bills AB 494 and SB 229, signed by the Governor in September 2017, clarifying the previously adopted ADU legislation. On February 26, 2018, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. #5430 that included modifications to remain consistent with State law and minor clarifications. Those State law changes incorporated into the Ordinance were (1) clarification that an ADU may be constructed on sites with either an existing or proposed single-family dwelling unit, and (2) a requirement that ADUs established through conversions of space within an existing single-family home or an existing accessory structure, be allowed in any zoning district where single-family residential is an allowed use. Staff is aware that other ADU-related amendments are being considered by the State legislature in other pending bills (e.g. AB-2890). Staff will address any adopted changes once any bills have been adopted. Typically the State regulations take effect on January 1 of the following year, so Council can expect staff to return prior to that time to update the ADU regulations accordingly. Discussion Since the City adopted new ADU regulations in 2017, staff has reviewed over 50 applications and has had many more conversations with property owners regarding ADUs . It is from this experience that staff has prepared and recommends approval of the attached ordinance. The local ADU regulations have been in place for a relatively short time. As more time passes and City of Palo Alto Page 4 more projects are reviewed, staff will be able to provide additional feedback and analysis of the ADU provisions, but it is clear that the adopted 2017 regulations have increased the local production of ADUs. Planning and Transportation Commission Review Over the course of four public hearings, with two study sessions and two action meetings2, the PTC discussed and reviewed the proposed code clarifications as reflected in Attachment A and discussed in this report. At its meeting on April 25, 2018, the PTC voted (5 -0) to recommend approval of the draft ordinance with a few minor amendments. In addition to discussing the staff proposed revisions, the PTC discussed ideas for additional code revisions. T wo of these ideas received majority support of the PTC. The first idea was to include a code change for the allowance of an eave on a detached ADU to encroach into the setback (and this is reflected in the attached ordinance). The second idea was for Council to consider a lower daylight plane for detached ADUs, in order to increase the access to daylight for units built in the rear yard of adjacent properties (and this is not included in the ordinance, but is described later in this report). Additional det ails of the PTC’s deliberations are provided in the meeting minutes (see Footnote 2 for link). Summary of Proposed ADU Ordinance Revisions 1. Clarify the Applicable Zone Districts that Allow ADU Development The proposed ordinance would provide greater clarity on which zoning districts allow for development of ADUs and JADUs. No policy change is associated with this amendment. 2. Clarify the Setback Requirements for Detached ADU Basements The setback requirement for detached ADUs is six feet from the rear and side property lines. This six foot rear yard setback allows the detached ADU to be placed within the standard rear yard setback that is applicable to the primary residence, which is 20 feet in R -1 zoned properties. The municipal code generally prohibits basements in the required rear and side yards and, while detached ADUs are permitted in the rear yard setback, the code is unclear as to whether ADU basements are similarly permitted in the rear yard. The attached ordinance clarifies this with an additional sentence “No basement shall encroach within a required rear yard setback.” 2 PTC Hearing 03/28/2018 staff report and meeting minutes PTC Hearing 04/25/2018 staff report and meeting minutes City of Palo Alto Page 5 The PTC recommends no basements be allowed in the standard rear yard setback. Accordingly, only detached ADUs located outside of required rear yard setback would be permitted to have a basement, and the basement area is included in the ADU maximum floor area calculation . The PTC noted concerns regarding impacts to trees and dewatering as reasons supporting this prohibition. If Council concurs, no change is required to the attac hed ordinance. If, however, Council supports basements for rear yard ADUs, this direction would need to be provided to staff for inclusion in the ordinance for final adoption at the second reading. The Council could direct staff to delete the sentence “No basement shall encroach into a required rear yard setback”, which is found in paragraph D (Setbacks and Daylight Plane) under Item 9 (Additional Development Standards for Detached Accessory Dwelling Units). However, Council may consider requiring some basement setback (a greater setback than the allowable above-grade setback). Trees and Dewatering In response to the concerns raised by the PTC, staff would note that there are existing regulations in place to address tree protection and dewatering issues. T he City’s tree protection measures apply to all development in the City, including ADUs. All ADU permits submitted for review are screened for impacts to protected trees. In recent years, concerns have been raised that temporary construction-related groundwater dewatering may be wasting water, potentially damaging structures, trees and vegetation, and depleting or altering the flow of groundwater. In response, the City established new requirements in February 2016 designed to minimize and standardize the p rocess of pumping and discharge of groundwater from dewatering of below ground structures (e.g., basement or parking garage) during construction. These regulations apply to an ADU with a basement. Note: A pending State bill (AB-2890), if passed, would establish a maximum four foot side and rear setback for newly developed ADUs. 3. Clarify Allowable Setback and Daylight Plane Encroachments for Detached ADUs In the discussions with the PTC on the setbacks for basements, attention was given to the possible projections that could be allowed into the required setbacks for detached ADUs. Several commissioners expressed strong support for allowing the building eave to encroach into the required setback and the PTC included this direction in its motion to recommend approval of the ordinance. Although it was not specifically discussed by the PTC, staff recommends that eaves also be allowed to extend into the daylight plane, as reflected in the draft ordinance (under Item 9 paragraph D). For eaves, these two development standards, setbacks and daylight plane, often have a causal effect on one another. If Council supports adding some flexibility for setback City of Palo Alto Page 6 encroachments for eaves, the same flexibility could be applied to eaves encroaching, to a limit extent, into the daylight plane. 4. Clarify Bonus Lot Coverage and Floor Area Eligibility3 The general intent of providing bonus lot coverage and floor area is to give some development flexibility for existing developed sites that may be at or near the related maximums allowed. With the current bonus provisions, the additional lot coverage needed for an ADU would be 100% exempt, and up to an additional 175 square feet (SF) of floor area would be allowed. The code specifically states that these bonuses are given when development of an ADU is on a site “with an existing single-family residence.” Staff believes this takes into consideration that existing developed lots upon which ADUs could not be established previously, but now otherwise could include ADUs, may have insufficient lot area to accommodate the ADU. The bonuses allow flexibility for existing developed sites to promote this housing alternative. In contrast, staff believes the bonuses were not intended for new construction of single family homes. With new development, the lot is not or no longer constrained by existing improvements, floor plans, other accessory structures, and there are options for designing and incorporating an ADU on the lot without the need for the bonus lot coverage or floor area. However, in staff’s experience, some property owners who are building completely new homes also want to take advantage of these bonuses. Many new homes maximize permitted floor area and the interest for additional floor area sets forth a two -step process whereby someone can build a new home and receive final approval, thus becoming an “existing home,” and then file plans for an ADU and an additional 175 SF. If it is Council’s intent to apply these exemptions to existing homes (before the new ADU regulations were adopted), then an amendment to the code is required to clarify this intent. If, however, the Council determines that new construction qualifies for the exemption, the code should also be amended to eliminate the two -step process and more explicitly state the intent of this provision. As drafted in the attached ordinance, lot coverage and floor area bonuses would apply only to properties with existing homes or proposed homes with a valid building permit as of January 1, 2017, which is when the State adopted the ADU regulations. If the Council’s intent is different, direction should be provided in its motion and staff would draft corresponding changes to the ordinance for final adoption at the second reading. 3 Note: In the following discussion section 5, staff recommends increasing the 175 square foot floor area exemption bonus up to 220 square feet. City of Palo Alto Page 7 Note: A pending State bill (AB-2890), if passed, would fully exempt ADUs from a site’s floor area and lot coverage calculation. 5. Adjust Bonus Floor Area Amount to Match Minimum Unit Size as Required by Building Code The current ADU and JADU regulations establish a maximum unit size for ADUs and JADUs , but do not expressly address a minimum unit size. With respect to ADUs, the code and state law both provide that an ADU includes an “efficiency unit” as defined under state law. Based on the current California Building Code requirements (Section 1208.4) for a n efficiency unit, the minimum size for a new ADU is 220 SF, absent adoption of a local ordinance reducing the minimum size (for example to 150 SF). For JADUs, the minimum size is based on California Residential Code requirements for a minimum room size (Section R304.1), currently 70 SF. Staff will continue to rely on the relevant building codes for determining the minimum unit size. As discussed in the above section, ADUs may qualify for a 175 SF floor area bonus, but this additional floor area does not fully cover the 220 SF minimum ADU unit size requirement. Because of this, there may be instances where an owner is unable to establish an ADU on their property unless a greater allowance is given for bonus floor area . To account for this discrepancy, staff, with PTC support, recommends the bonus floor area be increased up to a maximum of 220 SF. This change is found on page 2, Section 1 of the Ordinance (Attachment A). Staff’s recommendation is to: a. Add clarifying language to the code for ADUs and JADUs th at states the minimum unit size shall be based on the respective building code requirements. b. Add revised language to the code for ADUs (and not JADUs) that states that the allowed bonus floor area shall match the minimum unit size as required by the current building codes. Based on today’s building code requirements, the bonus floor area would therefore increase by 45 SF, expanding it from 175 to 220 square feet. Note: Please see note for #4 above. Additionally, as this discussion relates to unit size, th e State is considering a maximum unit size of not less than 800 square feet; this would have the potential to impact the existing 600 square foot maximum for attached ADUs. 6. Reduce the Height Limit for Detached ADUs Located Within Identified Eichler Tracts On January 18, 2018, at a community meeting regarding the draft “Eichler Neighborhood Design Guidelines,” staff received input regarding reducing the height of ADUs in Eichler tracts. The current ADU height limit for a detached unit is 17 feet and one story. The eaves of a one - story Eichler home are low due to the slab -on-grade construction that was used; typical one- story Eichler homes are nine to 11 or 12 feet tall. Limited follow up discussion took place with City of Palo Alto Page 8 the Historic Resources Board (HRB) in meetings on January 25 and February 22, 2018, which resulted in a recommendation that ADUs should not exceed the height of the primary home on the lot. There are 31 identified single family Eichler Tracts (map) that contain approximately 2,700 properties. The proposed ordinance includes new height restrictions of 12 feet for detached ADUs and that attached ADUs be no taller than the primary residence at the area of attachment. The intent of the lower height limit is to reflect the size and type of construction typical of these properties, respect neighborhood character and preserve the sense of openness and privacy enjoyed by residents in these tracts. This action would also be consistent with the “Eichler Neighborhood Design Guidelines” that was approved by Council on April 2, 2018. During the PTC discussion, two of the six commissioners present did not support the proposed reduced height limit within the Eichler Tracts. One commissioner expressed the position that the height limits should be consistent for all ADU development; and the other expressed a desire to have more flexibility with the height prov ided it was consistent with the Eichler Neighborhood Design Guidelines. Note: A pending State bill (AB-2890), if passed, would establish a height limit of no less than 16 feet for detached ADUs. 7. Clarify that the Replacement Parking Provisions Also Apply to JADU Development A JADU is only permitted within the existing building envelope of the primary dwelling unit, and must, at a minimum, utilize one existing bedroom. It could be possible that a JADU incorporates a portion of a garage for the new living unit. In this circumstance, the current provisions are not clear about replacement parking requirements for the primary residence, if all or a portion of an existing garage was utilized for the JADU. To address this, staff recommends that the same replacement parking provisions for ADUs also be applied to JADUs. Specifically, this approach requires any required covered parking to be re-established on site, but, consistent with State law, gives the owner flexibility as to how to provide that required parki ng space in terms of location and whether it is covered or uncovered. Similar to the City’s local provision for ADUs, JADUs by State law do not require any parking. 8. Allow Replacement Parking to be Located Within Driveways Located in a Street-side Setback State law specifies that required replacement parking (i.e. for the primary home) may be “located in any configuration” on the subject property. The existing regulations allow replacement parking to be located in the front yard setback on an existing dri veway as an uncovered space. In the case of corner lots, the code is silent on allowing parking in the street side setback. Many corner lots have just the one driveway located on the street side ; allowing replacement parking in this location on a driveway would be a reasonable accommodation for City of Palo Alto Page 9 these types of lots. Staff suggests that replacement uncovered parking be allowed in the street side setback similar to what has been permitted for the front yard setback. In addition, for the street-side replacement parking only, a provision has been added to allow the Director the discretion to modify the required parking space dimensions, if necessary to accommodate parking when appropriate. This flexibility is proposed because in the R-1 zone, the street-side yard setback (i.e. 16 feet) does not meet the required parking space length of 17.5 feet. This limited discretion further supports ADU development, allows for site specific review, and reduces the need for exception requests through the Variance process. 9. Allow Existing Driveways to be Expanded to Accommodate Replacement Parking As mentioned above, the current ADU provisions allow required replacement parking for the primary dwelling unit to be located within an existing driveway located within the front yard setback. In the review of ADU permits, some homeowners have wanted to expand the existing driveway to accommodate more parking, which the ADU regulations do not allow. Removing the ADU development from the scenario, today a homeowner is permitted to expa nd the existing driveway without City permits, providing it meets code provisions (i.e. driveways and walkways may be established subject to paving permeability requirement). As a work-around to get a larger driveway, an ADU applicant can first complete a driveway expansion, which then becomes ‘existing,’ and then submit for the ADU permit with plans reflecting the ‘existing’ expanded driveway. In order to facilitate streamlining the permit process, staff recommends modifying the ADU requirements to allow the expansion of existing driveways in the front and street-side yards to accommodate the required replacement parking. 10. Clarify When Non-complying Accessory Structures May be Rebuilt to Convert to an ADU The ADU regulations permit the conversion of exist ing legal structures to establish an ADU. Staff has received ADU proposals that include the conversion of existing non-habitable space, such as a garage (attached and detached) or accessory structure, which had a legal non - complying element (e.g. height too tall, daylight plane encroachment, setback encroachment). As already mentioned, providing these are existing legal structures, they can be converted to ADUs. The issue that staff did not anticipate when the local ADU regulations were prepared was that these existing non-complying structures are sometimes deemed structurally unsound for establishing a living unit by building code standards. In order to be building code compliant, the structure must be demolished, wholly or partially, and rebuilt. The general zoning rule is that once a non-complying structure is removed, all new construction must meet current applicable codes (PAMC Section 18.70.100(b) Noncomplying facility – Replacement). City of Palo Alto Page 10 The intent of the ADU regulations, however, is to allow the conversion of existing structures to create living units, including the conversion of garages and similar structures. At the PTC study session, the options the PTC initially discussed were at the opposite ends of the spectrum; at one end, the PTC noted that all new rebuilds, regardless of circumstance, should be fully zoning compliant, and at the opposite end, the PTC noted the City should allow reconstruction of non- complying structures, or portions thereof - a a “rebuild” that retains the non-complying condition. When the PTC took action on the draft ordinance, they supported the language as proposed by staff (and this is reflected in the attached ordinance), which allows reconstruction. Where the need to rebuild existing accessory structures has been presented to staff by ADU applicants, reconstruction in place has been approved. The proposed ordinance continues to advance this concept but also includes some specific parameters to ensure there is no increase in the degree of the non-conformity, and requires a minimum three-foot setback from interior side and rear property lines. Alternative approaches to this issue are to require the rebuild to be code compliant, consistent with PAMC Section 18.70.100(b), or establish other parameters where a rebuild could be permitted. Note: A pending State bill (AB-2890), if passed, would prohibit the correction of nonconforming conditions as a requirement for ministerial approval. Other Considerations Removed Amendment – ADUs and Maximum 50% Rear Yard Coverage In the draft Ordinance the PTC reviewed, staff included a clarification that ADUs not be considered in the calculation of R-1 maximum rear yard coverage and the PTC supported the clarification. After additional consideration of this proposed amendment, staff determined the proposed clarification is not necessary. Once an accessory structure is converted to an ADU, the accessory structure regulations (including the one referenced in this paragraph ) would no longer be applicable. As background information, the R-1, R-2, RE, and RMD development standards limit accessory structure coverage to no more than 50% of a required rear yard [e.g. PAMC Section 18.12.080(b)(6)]. There has been some debate as to whether ADUs should be subject to this provision, which could be problematic for some property owners. Existing (and retained) garages, along with other accessory structures located on a parcel, could restrict a new detached ADU from being established on some properties if the 50% coverage restriction included ADU coverage. Accessory structures, once converted to ADUs,are no longer considered to be accessory structures (e.g. tool sheds and detached garages); they have become habitable, accessory dwelling units, and therefore staff does not applied this 50% coverage restriction to ADUs. Consider Reductions to the Daylight Plane City of Palo Alto Page 11 The PTC motion to recommend approval of the draft ADU ordinance included a recommendation that the City Council consider a lower daylight plane (DLP) limit for detached ADUs. This recommendation has not been included in the draft ordinance, Attachment A. Currently, a detached ADU is subject to a daylight plane measured at the property line at eight feet high with a slope of 1:1 (45 degrees) to a maximum height of 17 feet, as shown with the blue dashed line (top line) in Figure 1. The concern raised by the PTC about the DLP was its impact on the access to daylight for ADUs when developed side by side on two adjacent lots; these two ADUs would be separated by a minimum of 12 feet (six foot setbacks on each property). In Figure 1, there are three DLPs shown in two ADU scenarios, one with a gable r oof and one with a hip roof. The blue line (top) represents the current requirement with a 1:1 ratio for the angle; the green line (middle) represents a 1:2 ratio for the angle; and the red line (bottom) represents a 1:3 ratio for the angle and a 12 foot height limit (this is the current DLP and height restrictions for detached accessory structures on R-1 lots). The graphic provided is to help visualize the various DLPs and better facilitate the Council’s discussion on this topic. City of Palo Alto Page 12 Figure 1: Daylight Plane Examples on a Gable and Hip Roof ADU City Council Follow-up Discussion Items At the March 7, 2017 Council meeting regarding the ADU regulations, Council directed staff to return in 2018 with additional information regarding the two issues below. The PTC discussed these issues and their comments are provided below. Options to Make ADUs Available to Moderate or Low Income Residents City Council directed staff to explore further the possible options to make ADUs accessible to moderate or low income residents, seniors, people with disabilities, or public employees. This City of Palo Alto Page 13 type of program reflects the larger concern regarding the lack of affordable housing in Palo Alto and the greater Bay Area. One comment staff has heard from property owners is that the development impact fees to establish an ADU are too high, nearly $10,000 per unit. These fees have been a concern for many wanting to construct ADUs, but are assessed to off-set the impact new housing units have on city services, parks, libraries and other community programs. For some property owners, it may be worthwhile to deed restrict their ADU as affordable housing for a period of time (for example 10 years) in exchange for reduced or waived impact fees. In such circumstances, a property owner may be less interested in generating rental income and more interested in providing independent living facilities for a relative with disabilities or aging parents. For others, reducing or waiving the impact fees would not likely be a sufficient motivator to deed restrict the ADU to a certain income level. The City of Pasadena recently implemented a similar program. Another possible approach would be to partner with an organization that can provide financing in exchange for affordability. As an example, Housing Trust Silicon Valley, a local non-profit organization based in San Jose, is currently developing a pilot program that would provide low - cost flexible loans to homeowners for the purpose of constructing an ADU in exchange for their agreement to rent the units at affordable costs to low- and middle-income earners. The Housing Trust’s funding “will be used to make capital loans to homeowners — who can easily spend $100,000 or $200,000 on ground-up construction of an ADU. But the Housing Trust also intends to create an educational outreach program — involving classes, workshops and technical assistance — to help homeowners navigate the ADU process.”4 The partnership option, where the City contributes funding, ideally would place responsibility of the program management on the agreeable non-profit organization. Given sufficient staff and financial support, the City could also offer technical and educational assistance. For example, the City could develop prototype designs for ADUs that can be readily utilized for the permit process and can be approved more expeditiously. To be clear, however, staff is not sufficiently resourced at this time to take on this responsibility without adjustment to the department’s work program. The PTC’s comments were generally in line with the above noted options. There was majority support for providing a fee waiver in exchange for a long term commitment (10 -15 years) to provide affordable housing. Other comments in cluded: 4 The Mercury News “Bank funds ‘granny’ units project in affordable housing experiment for San Jose, L.A.” October 9, 2017: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/09/an-affordable-housing-experiment-for-san-jose-and- los-angeles-bank-funds-pilot-project-to-help-build-granny-units/ City of Palo Alto Page 14 Perform additional financial analysis to understand the impacts of waiving fees. Establish a few ADU template plans that provide an “off the shelf” approvable project. Create partnership program that identifies architects who specialize in ADUs who can be engaged by home owners to streamline the permit review process. Allow an opt-out provision for homeowners that no longer want to continue to provide their unit as affordable and require payment of fees that were waived. Utilize a third party (e.g. Palo Alto Housing) to administer the program. The State was considering eliminating all development impact fees charged by local agencies and school districts, but these amendments, at the time of this report, did not have support to move forward. Strategies for Legalizing Illegally Constructed ADUs As with the item above, on March 7, 2017 Council directed staff to return in 2018 with options and discussion of mechanisms to bring existing unpermitted ADUs into compliance, including when existing ADUs do not meet the new standards. There are a few cities in the Bay Area that have implemented protocols to legalize illegal ADUs. These cities include San Francisco, Santa Cruz, and Oakland. Generally, the unpermitted units are required, at a minimum, to be building code compliant for all health and safety concerns, and then special consideration was given to other non-complying development standards (e.g. setbacks, height, lot coverage, etc.). Staff has considered what could be an appropriate method to review and support the legalization of unpermitted ADUs. The City currently has a Home Improvement Exception (HIE) process that could be utilized for this purpose; granting an HIE requires specific findings to be made. The City would require that the unit be compliant with all life safety standards as required by the building codes and then, on a case -by-case basis, review the existing zoning conditions to determine what is appropriate for the project. Other than the size limitation, the Director would have the discretion to waive development standards using the HIE review process to accommodate legalization of the unit, providing it is deemed safe for habitation and the project meets HIE findings. The overall objective would be to allow an ADU that is safe f or habitation and would not be considered a nuisance. Such programs, however, can create other challenges that should be considered. Illegal units that cannot meet building codes or are not approved through a City process would have to be removed and existing tenants would be displaced. Illegally established ADUs may cost too much to be structurally upgraded, resulting in further displacement. Program implementation is another significant consideration. The Council would need to consider whether these unit s are addressed on a case by case basis when brought to the City’s attention, or if there is a brief City of Palo Alto Page 15 amnesty period whereby owners of illegal units could seek permits to legalize these units. Again, it is possible that not all units could be approved. And, the administrative time establishing and following through on such a program would be significant. Presumably, building permit and HIE review fees would cover the cost of staff time, but this would take time away from staff time for processing other applications. The PTC did not have any additional suggestions on how to approach this issue. They did express concerns about the displacement of residents, and about the importance of addressing life safety conditions. There was an overall sentiment that tryi ng to address this issue was complex and required a sensitive strategic approach. As noted in the earlier discussion in section #10 regarding non-complying accessory structures, the State is considering prohibiting the correction of nonconforming conditio ns as a requirement for ministerial approval. If approved, this State regulation could have a direct impact on this discussion. Based on existing resources and pending State legislation, staff encourages Council to defer making any final determinations on this topic until more information is gathered and decisions are made about the planning department’s work program for next year. Policy Implications The proposed ordinance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan provisions and would advance related housing element programs. The Comprehensive Plan emphasizes the importance of the City’s residential neighborhoods and the quality of life for residents. Policy L - 2.3 of the Land Use and Community Design Element emphasizes the need to allow and encourage diversity of the City’s housing stock and supports ADU development. Additionally, the Housing Element provides specific goals and programs to encourage ADU development. Goal H1 directs the preservation of the unique character of the city’s residential neighb orhoods and Programs H1.1.2 and H3.3.5 encourage modifying existing second unit development standards in the Zoning Code, such as lowering the minimum lot size and allow for increased floor area, in order to facilitate the creation of additional ADUs while maintaining neighborhood character and increasing the City’s affordable housing supply. Resource Impacts The proposed ordinance is not anticipated to have any resource impacts. Building permits would be required for new ADUs and JADUs and the associated building permit fees would be collected for the review/permitting process. Timeline City of Palo Alto Page 16 With Council approval of these revisions or further modifications on the first reading, the second reading would be scheduled as a consent calendar review for adoption. F ollowing the second reading, the ordinance would become effective 31 days after adoption. Environmental Review The proposed code amendments have been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. Specifically, the proposed amendments have been determined to be exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) (Review for Exemption) because the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significantly effect on the environment. Attachments: Attachment A: Draft Ordinance (DOCX) NOT YET APPROVED 1 ORD 2018-08-27 ADU Amendment Minor Revisions Ordinance No. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Amend Requirements Relating to Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Section 18.42.040 (Accessory and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units) of Chapter 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (“PAMC”) is amended to read as follows: 18.42.040 Accessory and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units The following regulations apply to zoning districts where accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units are permitted. (a) Accessory Dwelling Units (1) Purpose The intent of this section is to provide regulations to accommodate accessory dwelling units, in order to provide for variety to the city's housing stock and additional affordable housing opportunities. Accessory Dwelling Units shall be separate, self- contained living units, with separate entrances from the main residence, whether attached or detached. The standards below are provided to minimize the impacts of accessory dwelling units on nearby residents and throughout the city, and to assure that the size and location of such dwellings is compatible with the existing or proposed residence on the site and with other structures in the area. (2) Applicable Zoning Districts The establishment of an accessory dwelling unit is permitted in the following zoning districts when single family residential is a permitted land use: Single-Family (R-1), including subdistricts; Two Family Residential (R-2); Residential Estate (RE); Two Unit Multiple Family Residential (RMD); Open Space (OS); Multiple Family Residential (RM); and Planned Community (PC). (2)(3) Minimum Lot Sizes A. In the R-1 district and all R-1 subdistricts, RE district, R-2 district, and RMD district, and properties zoned Planned Community (PC) where single-family residential is an allowed use, the minimum lot size for the development establishment of an accessory dwelling unit is 5,000 square feet. B. In the OS District, the minimum lot size for the development establishment of an accessory dwelling unit is 10 acres. (34) Setbacks and Daylight Plane NOT YET APPROVED 2 ORD 2018-08-27 ADU Amendment Minor Revisions A. Except as otherwise provided in this section, accessory dwelling units shall comply with the underlying zoning district’s setbacks, including daylight plane requirements. B. Notwithstanding subsection (A) above, no setback shall be required for an existing garage that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit, except as provided in subsection (a)(56) below. C. In districts permitting second story accessory dwelling units, a setback of five feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit constructed above a garage. (45) Lot Coverage/Floor Area Ratio A. An accessory dwelling unit shall be included in the lot coverage and floor area ratio FAR requirements applicable to the parcel. B. Exceptions: i. Lot Coverage. When the development establishment of an accessory dwelling unit on a parcel with an existing single family residence that was legally permitted and existing or proposed with a valid building permit as of January 1, 2017, would result in the parcel exceeding the lot coverage requirement, the accessory dwelling unit shall not be included in the calculation of lot coverage applicable to the property, so long as the parcel meets the underlying zoning district’s minimum lot size requirement or is substandard by no more than ten percent (10%) of the underlying zoning district’s minimum lot size requirement. ii. Basements FAR. In the R-1 district and all R-1 subdistricts, basement space used as an accessory dwelling unit, or portion thereof, shall not be included in the calculation of floor area for the entire site, providing the measurement from first finished floor to grade around the perimeter of the building is no more than three (3) feet. iii. Additional Floor AreaR. When the development of a new one-story accessory dwelling unit on a parcel with an existing single family residence that was legally permitted and existing or proposed with a valid building permit as of January 1, 2017, would result in the parcel exceeding the maximum floor area ratio, an additional 220 175 square feet of floor area above the maximum amount of floor area otherwise permitted by the underlying zoning district shall be allowed. This additional floor area shall be permitted only to accommodate the development of the accessory dwelling unit and shall not be applied to the primary residence. (56) Conversion of Space in Existing Single Family Residence or Existing Accessory Structure NOT YET APPROVED 3 ORD 2018-08-27 ADU Amendment Minor Revisions Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(23), (a)(34), (a)(45), (a)(78) and (a)(89), in the R-1 district and all R-1 subdistricts, the RE, R2, RMD and OS districts, and properties zoned RM or Planned Community (PC) where single-family residential is an allowed use, an aAccessory dDwelling uUnit shall be permitted if the unit is contained within the existing space of a single-family residence or an existing accessory structure, has independent exterior access from the existing residence, and the side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire safety, and if the accessory dwelling unit conforms with the following: i. For the purposes of this subsection (6), the portion of the single-family residence or accessory structure subject to the conversion shall be legally permitted and existing as of January 1, 2017. ii. Notwithstanding the allowance in this section, only one accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit may be located on any lot subject to this sectionConversion of an accessory structure to an accessory dwelling unit may require rebuilding or substantial renovation to comply with the California Code of Regulations Title 24, as adopted by the City of Palo Alto. In such instances, and where the existing accessory structure does not comply with applicable accessory dwelling unit development standards in the zoning district, the structure may be renovated or rebuilt, provided that: A. If the existing structure does not comply with the applicable development standards for accessory dwelling units in the zoning district, the renovated or rebuilt structure shall not increase the degree of non-compliance, such as increased height or size, or further intrusion into required setbacks; B. The renovated or rebuilt structure provides a minimum three foot setback from any interior side and rear lot lines, and 16 foot setback from any street side property line, if applicable; and C. The renovated or rebuilt structure shall comply with subsection (a)(7), below, pertaining to privacy requirements. D. Nothing in this subsection (a)(6)(ii) shall restrict or prevent a renovated or rebuilt structure from being designed to achieve or improve compliance with the development standards applicable to an accessory dwelling unit in the zoning district. iii. No new or separate utility connection shall be required between the accessory dwelling unit and utility service, such as water, sewer, and power. iv. The accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the provisions of subsections (a)(67), (a)(910), and (a)(1011). v. New floor area may be added to a space converted in accordance with this subsection (a)(6) and shall comply with the all regulations set forth in subsection (a), including but not limited to setbacks, maximum accessory dwelling unit size, and height. NOT YET APPROVED 4 ORD 2018-08-27 ADU Amendment Minor Revisions (67) Privacy Any window, door or deck of a second story accessory dwelling unit shall utilize techniques to lessen views onto adjacent properties to preserve the privacy of residents. These techniques may include placement of doors, windows and decks to minimize overview of neighboring dwelling units, use of obscured glazing, window placement above eye level, and screening between the properties. (78) Additional Development Standards for Attached Accessory Dwelling Units A. Attached accessory dwelling units are those attached to the main primary dwelling. All attached accessory dwelling units shall be subject to the additional development requirements specified below. B. Attached unit size counts toward the calculation of maximum house size. C. Unit Size: The maximum size of an attached accessory dwelling unit living area, inclusive of a habitable basement, shall not exceed 600 square feet and shall not exceed 50% of the proposed or existing living area of the primary existing dwelling unit. The accessory dwelling unit and any covered parking provided for the accessory dwelling unit shall be included in the total floor area for the site, but the covered parking area is not included in the maximum 600 square feet for attached unit. Any basement space used as an accessory dwelling unit or portion thereof shall be counted as floor area for the purpose of calculating the maximum size of the accessory unit. The minimum unit size shall be established consistent with the Building Code. D. Maximum height (including property in a special flood hazard zone): One story and 17 feet, or no taller than the primary residence at the area of attachment if located in an Eichler Tract identified in the adopted Palo Alto Eichler Neighborhood Design Guidelines. However, in the RE District attached aAccessory dDwelling uUnits may be two stories and 30 feet. In the OS zoneDistrict, attached Aaccessory Ddwelling Uunits may be two stories and 25 feet. E. Separate Entry Required for Attached Units: A separate exterior entry shall be provided to serve an accessory dwelling unit. F. Except on corner lots, the accessory dwelling unit shall not have an entranceway facing the same lot line (property line) as the entranceway to the main dwelling unit unless the second entranceway is located in the rear half of the lot. Exterior staircases to second floor units shall be located toward the interior side or rear yard of the property. G. If covered parking for an accessory dwelling unit is provided in the RE zone, the maximum size of the covered parking area for the accessory dwelling unit is 200 square feet. (89) Additional Development Standards for Detached Accessory Dwelling Units NOT YET APPROVED 5 ORD 2018-08-27 ADU Amendment Minor Revisions A. Detached accessory dwelling units are those detached from the main primary dwelling. All detached accessory dwelling units shall be subject to the additional development standards specified below. B. The maximum size of the detached accessory dwelling unit living area, inclusive of a habitable basement, shall be 900 square feet. and the minimum unit size shall be established consistent with the Building Code. i. The accessory dwelling unit and any covered parking shall be included in the total floor area for the site, but the covered parking area is not included within the maximum 900 square feet for detached unit. ii. Any basement space used as an accessory dwelling unit or portion thereof shall be counted as floor area for the purpose of calculating the maximum size of the accessory unit. C. Maximum height (including property in a special flood hazard zone): one story and 17 feet, or one story and 12 feet, if located in an Eichler Tract identified in the adopted Palo Alto Eichler Neighborhood Design Guidelines. D. Setbacks and Daylight Plane: nNotwithstanding subsection (a)(34)(iA), a detached accessory dwelling unit may be located in a rear yard, but must maintain a minimum setback of six feet (6’) from the interior side and rear property lines and sixteen feet (16’) from a street side yard. No basement shall encroach into a required rear yard setback. No portion of a building may encroach into a daylight plane beginning at a height of eight feet (8’) at the property line and increasing at a slope of one foot (1’) for every one foot (1’) of distance from the property line. a. No projections, such as but not limited to windows, doors, mechanical equipment, venting or exhaust systems, shall be permitted to encroach into the required setbacks and daylight plane, with the exception of a roof eave up to two feet. E. If covered parking is provided for an accessory dwelling unit in the RE District, the maximum size of covered parking area for the detached accessory dwelling unit is 200 square feet. (910) Additional Requirements for All Accessory Dwelling Units A. Sale of Units: The Aaccessory dwelling unit shall not be sold separately from the primary residence. B. Short term rentals. The accessory dwelling unit shall not be rented for periods of less than 30 days. C. Number of Units Allowed: Only one accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit may be located on any residentially zoned lot. NOT YET APPROVED 6 ORD 2018-08-27 ADU Amendment Minor Revisions D. Existing Development: A single-family dwelling shall exist on the lot or shall be constructed on the lot in conjunction with the construction of the accessory dwelling unit. E. Occupancy: The owner of a parcel proposed for accessory dwelling use shall occupy as a principal primary residence either the primary dwelling or the accessory dwelling, unless both the primary dwelling and the accessory dwelling are rented to the same tenant and such tenant is prohibited from sub- leasing the primary dwelling or the accessory dwelling. F. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the accessory dwelling unit, the owner shall record a deed restriction in a form approved by the city that: includes a prohibition on the sale of the accessory dwelling unit separate from the sale of the single-family residence; requires owner-occupancy consistent with subsection (a)(910)(vE) above; does not permit short-term rentals; and restricts the size and attributes of the accessory dwelling unit to those that conform with this Ssection 18.42.040. G. Accessory dwelling units shall not be required to provide fire sprinklers if they are not required for the primary residence. H. Street Address Required: Street addresses shall be assigned to all accessory dwellings to assist in emergency response. I. Street Access: When parking is provided, the accessory dwelling unit shall have street access from a driveway in common with the main residence in order to prevent new curb cuts, excessive paving, and elimination of street trees, unless separate driveway access is permitted by the director upon a determination that separate access will result in fewer environmental impacts such as excessive paving, unnecessary grading or unnecessary tree removal, and that such separate access will not create the appearance, from the street, of a lot division or two-family use. J. For properties listed in the Palo Alto Historic Inventory, the California Register of Historical Resources, the National Register of Historic Places, or considered a historic resource after completion of a historic resource evaluation, compliance with the appropriate Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties shall be required, as determined by the Planning Director. K. No protected tree shall be removed for the purpose of establishing an accessory dwelling unit unless the tree is dead, dangerous or constitutes a nuisance under Section 8.04.050. Any protected tree removed pursuant to this subsection shall be replaced in accordance with the standards it in the Tree Technical Manual. L. Except as modified by this Section 18.42.040, the accessory dwelling unit shall conform to all requirements of the underlying zoning district, any applicable combining district, and all other applicable provisions of this Title 18. NOT YET APPROVED 7 ORD 2018-08-27 ADU Amendment Minor Revisions (1011) Parking A. No additional parking shall be required for accessory dwelling units. B. If an accessory dwelling unit replaces existing required covered parking, replacement spaces shall be provided. When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit, any required replacement spaces may be located in any configuration on the same lot as the accessory dwelling unit. To comply with this requirement, uncovered or tandem spaces may be provided on existing driveways within the required front and street side yards; and covered parking and mechanical automobile parking lifts may be located in required side and rear yard setbacks in compliance with Section 18.40.050. , including, but not limited to, within the front setback if on an existing driveway, as covered spaces, uncovered spaces, or tandem spaces, or by the use of mechanical automobile parking lifts. All new parking spaces and structures shall comply with development standards of the underlying zoning and the applicable parking design standards in Chapter 18.54, except as provided below:. i. The Director shall have the authority to modify required replacement parking spaces by up to one foot in width and length upon finding that the reduction is necessary to accommodate parking in a location otherwise allowed under this code and is not detrimental to public health, safety or the general welfare. ii Existing front and street side yard driveways may be enlarged to the minimum extent necessary to comply with the replacement parking requirement above. Existing curb cuts shall not be altered except when necessary to promote public health, safety or the general welfare. (b) Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (1) Purposes: This Section provides standards for the establishment of junior accessory dwelling units, an alternative to the standard accessory dwelling unit. Junior accessory dwelling units will typically be smaller than an accessory dwelling unit, will be constructed within the walls of an existing single family structure and requires owner occupancy in the single family residence where the unit is located. (2) Development Standards. Junior accessory dwelling units shall comply with the following standards: A. Number of Units Allowed: Either one accessory dwelling unit or one junior accessory dwelling unit, may be located on any residentially zoned lot that permits a single-family dwelling except as otherwise regulated or restricted by NOT YET APPROVED 8 ORD 2018-08-27 ADU Amendment Minor Revisions an adopted Coordinated Area Plan or Specific Plan. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall only be located on a lot which already contains one legal single- family dwelling. B. Size: A junior accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 500 square feet in size. C. Lot Coverage/Floor Area Ratio: i. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall be included in the calculation of lot coverage and FAR floor area ratio applicable to the property. ii. A primary residence lot with a junior accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted to develop an additional 50 square feet of floor area above the maximum amount of floor area otherwise permitted by the underlying zoning district. This additional area shall be permitted to accommodate the junior accessory dwelling unit. D. Owner Occupancy: The owner of a parcel proposed for a junior accessory dwelling unit shall occupy as a principal primary residence either the primary dwelling or the junior accessory dwelling. Owner-occupancy is not required if the owner is a governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization. E. Sale Prohibited: A junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be sold independently of the primary dwelling on the parcel. F. Short term rentals: The junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be rented for periods of less than 30 days. G. Location of Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit: A junior accessory dwelling unit shall be created within the existing walls of an existing primary dwelling, and shall include, at a minimum, the conversion of an existing bedroom. H. Separate Entry Required: A separate exterior entry shall be provided to serve a junior accessory dwelling unit, with an interior entry to the main living area. A junior accessory dwelling may include a second interior doorway for sound attenuation. I. Kitchen Requirements: The junior accessory dwelling unit shall include an efficiency kitchen, requiring and limited to the following components: i. A sink with a maximum waste line diameter of one-and-a-half (1.5) inches, ii. A cooking facility or appliance which does not require electrical service greater than one hundred and twenty (120) volts, or natural or propane gas, and iii. A food preparation counter and storage cabinets that are of reasonable NOT YET APPROVED 9 ORD 2018-08-27 ADU Amendment Minor Revisions size in relation to the size of the junior accessory dwelling unit. J. Parking. No additional parking is required beyond that required at the time the existing primary dwelling was constructed. Any required parking displaced with the establishment of a junior accessory dwelling unit shall be restored in compliance with Section 18.42.040(a)(11)(B). K. Fire Protection; Utility Service. For the purposes of any fire or life protection ordinance or regulation or for the purposes of providing service for water, sewer, or power, a junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be considered a separate or new unit. L. Deed Restriction. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a junior accessory dwelling unit, the owner shall record a deed restriction in a form approved by the city that includes a prohibition on the sale of the junior accessory dwelling unit separate from the sale of the single-family residence, requires owner-occupancy consistent with subsection (b)(2)(ivD) above, does not permit short-term rentals, and restricts the size and attributes of the junior dwelling unit to those that conform with this section. SECTION 2. Any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance. SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. The Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.17 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15061(b)(3), 15301, 15302 and 15305 because constitute minor adjustments to the City’s zoning ordinance to implement State law requirements related to accessory dwelling units as established in Government Code Section 65852.2, and these changes are also likely to result in few additional dwelling units dispersed throughout the City. As such, it can be seen with certainty that the proposed action will not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. / / / / / / / / / / NOT YET APPROVED 10 ORD 2018-08-27 ADU Amendment Minor Revisions SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: __________________________________ __________________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________________ __________________________________ Assistant City Attorney City Manager __________________________________ Director of Planning & Community Environment City of Palo Alto (ID # 9467) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 8/27/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 2nd Quarter 2018 ADU Development Activity Report Title: Report to City Council on Accessory Dwelling Unit/Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit Development Activity for Second Quarter 2018 From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation This is an informational report and no action is requested. Background The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 54121 on May 8, 2017, which amended Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to implement State requirements related to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) and to encourage the construction of accessory dwelling units. At the time of the adoption of the updated regulations, Council direct ed staff to provide quarterly reports on permits filed for the construction of accessory dwelling units. Council received the last development report summary on May 7, 2018 (Report #89692). Discussion In the second quarter of 2018, a total of 20 ADU building permit applications were filed. All the applications are under review. Except for one of the applications, all the ADU applications were in the R-1 single family zone. The majority of applications filed (60%) were for sites in South Palo Alto. Seven of the ADU applications were for new detached units and one was for a new attached unit. The remaining applications were for conversions of garages and other accessory spaces. 1 Ordinance 5412: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/57945 2 Staff Report 8969: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/64796 City of Palo Alto Page 2 For this reporting quarter, the majority of the ADU applications were for one bedroom units. The unit sizes ranged from 175 to 900 square feet, with an average unit size of 540 square feet. There were two projects proposed utilizing the floor area bonus allowed under the City’s ordinance. The City has not yet received an application for a Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit. Additional details about the units reviewed and proposed are provided in the attached table (Attachment A). With the implementation of the State regulations in 2017, the City experienced a significant increase in ADU permit activity; prior to this implementation there was an average of four ADU permits per year. In the second quarter of 2018, the City received 20 ADU applications, bringing the total for the calendar year to 26. Below is a summary of the ADU activity since the 2017 State regulations became effective. Table 1: ADU Applications Filed Since January 1, 20173 Total Number of Applications Applications Approved Applications Under Review4,5 Application Withdrawn/Not Approved April 1 - June 30 (Q2-2018) 20 0 20 0 January 1 - March 31 (Q1-2018) 6 4 2 0 Sept 9 - December 31 (Q4-2017) 20 15 4 1 (Not Approved) June 9 – September 8 (Q3-2017) 4 1 2 1 (Withdrawn) January 1 - June 8 (Q1/Q2-2017) 6 5 1 0 Total 56 25 29 2 Source: Planning Department Accela Data 2018. Includes all projects with Building Permit applications filed from January 1, 2017. ADU Code Updates 3 Applications filed in 2016 and receiving Building Permit approval in 2017 are not included in this dataset. 4 This category includes projects pending applicant resubmittals. 5 The data in this report suggests ADU application processing times may be increasing and some of this may be related to vacancies in the Planning department. While there are a variety of reasons why some applications take longer to process than others, staff has initiated a review of completed and pending applications to learn if there are administrative solutions to improve application processing times. Staff will rep ort back on these findings for the next quarterly report or sooner if able. City of Palo Alto Page 3 In May 2017, as part of the implementation of the local ADU regulations, the City Council directed staff to review the newly effective regulations and identify potential amendments that may be incorporated into a revised ordinance. After conducting Study Sessions with both the PTC and City Council, staff prepared a draft ordinance that was reviewed and recommended for approval by the PTC on April 25, 2018 (Report #91296). The City Council review of this ordinance is tentatively scheduled for August 20, 2018. Attachments: Attachment A: ADU Applications from April 1 to June 30, 2018 (PDF) 6 Staff Report 9129: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/64677 Page 1 of 2 Att a c h e d De t a c h e d Att a c h e d De t a c h e d Ga r a g e Ot h e r A c c e s s o r y Sp a c e s i n c l u d i n g Ba s e m e n t a n d M a i n Ho u s e 1 North Palo Alto R-1 4/3/2018 No x x 400 2 South Palo Alto R-1 4/12/2018 No x x 525 3 South Palo Alto R-1 (8,000)(S)4/17/2018 No x x 450 4 North Palo Alto R-1 4/19/2018 No x 515 5 North Palo Alto R-1 (10,000)4/19/2018 No x 888 6 South Palo Alto R-1 (10,000)4/27/2018 No x 872 7 South Palo Alto R-1 5/7/2018 No x 314 8 South Palo Alto R-1 (S)5/10/2018 No x x 249 9 North Palo Alto R-1 (10,000)5/25/2018 No x 747 10 South Palo Alto R-1 6/5/2018 No x x 364 11 North Palo Alto R-1 6/12/2018 No x x 447 12 South Palo Alto R-1 6/19/2018 No x x 419 13 South Palo Alto R-1 5/16/2018 No x x 420 14 South Palo Alto R-1 5/24/2018 No x x 475 15 North Palo Alto R-1 5/25/2018 No x x 1000 ATTACHMENT A ADU Building Permit Applications Filed between April 1, 2018 to June 30, 2018 # Pro j e c t L o c a t i o n Zo n i n g Da t e F i l e d Bu i l d i n g P e r m i t I s s u e d Type of ADU (New) Type of ADU (Converted)Type of Conversion AD U S i z e ( S Q F T ) Page 2 of 2 Att a c h e d De t a c h e d Att a c h e d De t a c h e d Ga r a g e Ot h e r A c c e s s o r y Sp a c e s i n c l u d i n g Ba s e m e n t a n d M a i n Ho u s e # Pro j e c t L o c a t i o n Zo n i n g Da t e F i l e d Bu i l d i n g P e r m i t I s s u e d Type of ADU (New) Type of ADU (Converted)Type of Conversion AD U S i z e ( S Q F T ) 16 South Palo Alto R-1 6/5/2018 No x 175 17 North Palo Alto R-1 6/8/2018 No x x 519 18 South Palo Alto RE 6/21/2018 No x 898 19 South Palo Alto R-1 6/22/2018 No x 898 20 North Palo Alto R-1 6/29/2018 No x x 324 Source: Planning Department Accela Data 2018. Includes Building Permit applications filed from April 1, 2018 through June 30, 2018 City of Palo Alto (ID # 9484) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 8/27/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Mechanical Parking Studies For Downtown Surface Parking Lots Title: Informational Report on Mechanical Parking Studies for Lot D and Other Surface Parking Lots in Downtown Business District From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation This is an informational report and no Council action is required. Background In December 2016, Council authorized a contract with Watry Design, Inc. (“Watry”) to provide design and environmental review services for the Downtown Parking Garage Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project (PE-15007). Following the award of a contract to Watry, several conceptual options were developed for the downtown garage. In April 2017, conceptual designs were presented to Council which included a base option with five above-ground levels, a retail option with five above-ground levels with retail space, and a basement option with five above-ground levels and one basement level (no retail space) (CMR 7942). Council directed staff to proceed with the full preliminary design of a new parking garage with five levels of above-ground parking, one level of basement parking, and retail space on the Waverley Street frontage. Council also directed staff to analyze additional mechanical parking options without causing a delay in this project. Discussion In May 2017, a mechanical parking study was completed by Watry that analyzed mechanical parking options in the Downtown Parking Garage, adding additional CITY OF PALO ALTO City of Palo Alto Page 2 parking spaces, using a puzzle lift system and a stacker system. Options 1 through 5 below were defined and, for feasible options, compared to the self-park option: Self-Park Option: Five levels of above-ground parking with retail and one basement level (331 spaces); Option 1: Five levels of above-ground parking with retail and one basement level with a two-level puzzle system (basement level and pit) (388 spaces); Option 2: Five levels of above-ground parking with retail and one basement level with a two-level stacker system (415 spaces); Option 3: Five levels of above-ground parking with retail and a three- level puzzle system (ground level and pit) (364 spaces); Option 4: Puzzle system tower with more than a three-level puzzle system; Option 5: Mechanical system under the basement ramp. Options 4 and 5 were deemed nonviable due to the structural impact of an extended story height and lack of available head room under the basement ramp area, respectively. The project cost-per-stall includes the mechanical parking equipment, and soft and hard costs. The costs do not account for the annual operating maintenance ($40,000 to $50,000), mechanical parking equipment replacement at end of life, and annual attendant costs ($102,000). The operating maintenance cost is a $30 per stall monthly cost for maintenance by the vendor. In staff’s discussions with vendors, they stated that they are not aware of any instances in which mechanical parking is being used for public parking without attendant operation of the equipment, and they recommended that one or more attendants be on site depending on the number of mechanical parking spaces. Including these additional operating and maintenance costs over the lifetime of the garage raises the cost per stall for mechanical parking options higher than the cost of a traditional parking space. Self-Park Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Total project cost per stall* $84,942 $82,231 $76,546 $87,746 City of Palo Alto Page 3 *does not include ongoing annual operating maintenance, equipment replacement and annual attendant costs Following the analysis of mechanical parking options for the Downtown Parking Garage project, staff believed that costs might be lower in a dedicated mechanical parking garage that did not have the inefficiencies of the proposed Downtown Parking Garage layout. In April 2018, a Request for Information (RFI) for qualified partners interested in developing mechanical parking projects on City-owned parking lots in the University Avenue – Downtown Business District was posted on the City’s eProcurement system. One response to the RFI was received from Griffin| Swinerton Team in association with CityLift (“Griffin Swinerton”). In the conceptual design included as part of the RFI response (Attachment A), Griffin Swinerton chose Lot A at the corner of Lytton Avenue and Emerson Street to illustrate the design philosophy, space count, cost, project delivery, and operation of a public mechanical parking lift system. The conceptual designs in the RFI included three separate parking structures and drive aisles, parking platform widths of 9’-6” to accommodate nearly all vehicles, and building heights that vary from three to five levels (20 feet for the 3-level, 26 feet for the 4-level, and 32 feet for the 5-level). Each parking structure is 96-feet wide and fits 10 parking platforms. CityLift’s Puzzle Lift System (PLS) was chosen by Griffin Swinerton for this approach. Design Alternative Number of Spaces Height 3-Level Parking Structure 124 - 140 20 feet 4-Level Parking Structure 148 - 170 26 feet 5-Level Parking Structure 180 - 210 32 feet Griffin Swinerton developed a preliminary cost model for a prevailing wage, public-private-partnership (P3) project delivery which reflects current figures as of April 2018 from both CityLift and Swinerton Builders. The project cost per stall includes the mechanical parking equipment, foundation, an allowance for building skin per square foot, roofing, electrical, plumbing, fire sprinklers, site work, and signage. It also factors in general contractor’s costs. The costs do not account for contingency, cost escalation, operating maintenance, equipment replacement or attendant costs. City of Palo Alto Page 4 3 Level Puzzle Lift 4 Level Puzzle Lift 5 Level Puzzle Lift Total Project Costs $52,576 - $54,950 $54,585 - $57,126 $55,968 - $58,499 Similar to the mechanical parking options reviewed for the Downtown Parking Garage project, Griffin Swinerton recommended attendants to operate the parking equipment, and specified the number of attendants at different hours of the day based on the number of garage spaces. Assuming the number of recommended attendants for 200 stalls and using the pricing in the City’s current valet contract, the attendant annual cost would be approximately $360,000. Overall, staff determined that while the initial installation cost of mechanical parking may be equal to or less than traditional parking garages per stall, on-going maintenance costs and the requirement of attendants make the overall cost more expensive. Mechanical parking also lends itself to residential and commercial applications where users are familiar with the systems and use them frequently, which could include future projects providing parking for City staff. Attachments: Attachment A: Griffin Swinerton Palo Alto Mechanical Parking RFI Response 1 1.Statement of Interest April 25, 2018 Cecilia Magana Contract Administrator City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Dear Ms. Magana: Griffin|Swinerton in association with CityLift (the Griffin|Swinerton Team) is pleased to submit to the City of Palo Alto its response to the Request for Information (RFI) for Mechanical Parking (“Project”). This response is an expression of interest in participating in a resulting procurement process and to provide relevant information to be used in developing governmental policy and structuring a formal Request for Proposals as well as Project-related agreements. With several decades of collective public-sector project experience, the Team has proven experience in the delivery of innovative projects of this significance. Experience in Public, Private Partnership (P3) Project Delivery: Griffin|Swinerton, established in 2009, is a fully integrated, highly experienced organization that combines the best of the development and cons truction industries. Griffin Structures and Swinerton Builders have a long and successful track record working with counties and cities utilizing multiple alternative forms of project delivery. Excellence in Automated, Mechanical Lift Parking: CityLift Parking designs, installs, and services semi-automated to fully automated parking lift systems that reduce the footprint needed for parking and can typically be done at a lower cost per space than conventional parking. CityLift is the exclusive U.S. partner of a 26-year old automated parking system manufacturer whose technology has been proven with 60,000 spaces installed in over 13 countries. Domestically, in a few short years CityLift has assembled a pipeline of installed and in-progress projects totaling over 50 projects and 2,200 parking spaces in eight States, with its largest number of projects in California. We would welcome the opportunity to engage in further dialogue as desired. Please find attached to this letter our response to the RFI. Sincerely, GRIFFIN|SWINERTON Roger Torriero Principal rtorriero@griffinswinerton.com Dave Callis Principal dcallis@swinerton.com Attachment A ftr< . ' ' \§-) 2 2. Statement of Experience The City of Palo Alto is seeking information from qualified development partners to explore ways to increase the supply of off-street parking for downtown employees and visitors in the most cost-effective manner possible. In our response to this RFI, Griffin|Swinerton has assembled a team that represents the best in their respective fields, with a particularly deep expertise and successful track record in public-private partnerships and construction/delivery of parking structures – both conventional parking and the installation and maintenance of mechanical automated parking lift systems. The Griffin|Swinerton Team possesses industry leading expertise in the three most crucial aspects of delivering best - in-class mechanical parking solutions to the City of Palo Alto: • Expertise in public-private partnerships (P3) – leveraging decades of experience as a trusted partner government clients, since 2009 Griffin|Swinerton has been successfully delivering P3 projects for public assets throughout California • Mechanical Parking Lift Systems – CityLift is the domestic leader in mechanical parking lift system and the exclusive U.S. partner of a 26-year old automated parking system manufacturer whose technology has been proven with 60,000 spaces installed in over 13 countries. • California Construction Leadership & Parking Structure Expertise – with a 130-year history, over 3,000 employees in 17 U.S. offices and headquartered in San Francisco, Swinerton Builders has an unmatched track record in the construction industry for buildings and renewable energy facilities of all kinds. Swinerton’s dedicated Parking Structure team has a vast array of expertise from building over 45 parking structures. Each Team member’s expertise is more fully described below: Griffin|Swinerton, A Joint Venture (Project Developer). The Griffin|Swinerton joint-venture team was established in 2009. It is a fully integrated, highly experienced organization that combines the best of the development and construction industries. Griffin Structures and Swinerton Builders both have a long and successful track record working with cities in an open book, fully transparent process utilizing multiple alternative forms of project delivery, including Public Private Partnerships (P3). Griffin|Swinerton has internally established the protocols necessary to mitigate price and performance risk, thus ensuring success within the P3 delivery method. We have formulated a P3 delivery process so that financial risk is mitigated in a clear and open manner. Furthermore, with the guarantees for price and schedule, assurance of user engagement, and a clear program for community input and dialogue, we will be able to meet the requirements and expectations of all project stakeholders. Griffin|Swinerton projects delivered as P3s in California are more fully described in this proposal and range from the P3 delivery of Orange County's $188 million Building 16 within its civic administration center to the $12 million turn- key P3 delivery of the Quartz Hill Library for Los Angeles County. CityLift Parking designs, installs, and services semi-automated to fully automated parking lift systems that reduce the footprint needed for parking and can typically be done at a lower cost per space than conventional parking. CityLift is headquartered in Oakland, CA and has offices in Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, and Boston. CityLift is the exclusive U.S. partner of a 26-year old automated parking system manufacturer whose technology has been proven with 60,000 spaces installed in over 13 countries. Domestically, in a few short years CityLift has assembled a pipeline of installed and in-progress projects totaling over 50 projects and 2,200 parking spaces in eight States, with its largest number of projects in California. GRIFFI:\ S\\ 1'1/ERTO:\ cityl!ft 3 CityLift’s expert engineering and design team works with both preferred and local architects and project managers from conception to design and delivery of the best car parking solution for a given situation. Stacked parking maximizes the space and value of a given site by allocating land to better uses. Griffin Structures, Inc. Established in 1981 as a California corporation, Griffin Structures (Griffin) is a diversified program and construction management Corporation serving the public and private sectors for 36 years. Griffin offers a wide portfolio of services for projects of all sizes and complexities— both new construction and renovations. Griffin’s in-house construction management services specialize in oversight of multiple forms of project delivery, including service both as an extension of staff, and as Owner’s Representatives. More than 90 percent of Griffin’s last five years’ construction value was for public sector entities. The scope of these projects range from $1.5 million to almost $200 million. Griffin’s mission has been to manage clients’ risk and streamline project delivery. During its long history, Griffin has never missed a completion deadline or exceeded a Project budget. Swinerton Builders (Design-Builder) Headquartered in San Francisco since 1888, the Swinerton Family of Companies has provided commercial construction and construction management services throughout the Western United States for over 130 years. Today, with over 3,000 employees and over $4 billion in annual revenue, Swinerton is achieving remarkable success in the industry across a wide range of markets including: Renewable Energy, Healthcare, Federal, Education, Corporate Interior Services, Retail, Multi-family Residential, and Hospitality. In addition to these markets, Swinerton also has a robust self-perform parking structure group that specializes in parking structures of varying sizes, types, configurations, and delivery methods. Swinerton’s self-perform operations also encompass self-perform concrete, drywall, and demolition. Since Swinerton’s inception in 1888, it has been a forward- thinking company that strategically seizes opportunities and executes every project with passion and relentless accountability. As a 100% employee-owned company with construction excellence spanning three centuries, we are recognized as one of the top general contractors in the nation and have built a reputation for delivering added value to our clients. Swinerton’s General Contracting License #92 is the longest-held license number in California history. Throughout the 129 years of construction excellence, Swinerton has held several former names—but the reputation has always remained the same. These names include: Swinerton and Walberg (1942-2000); Lindgren and Swinerton (1923-1942); The Lindgren Company (1908-1942); Lindgren Hicks (1900-1908); and Boyd, Shaples, and Lindgren (1888-1900). From our chairman to our frontline project teams, we work diligently and passionately every day to be the best builders, and partners for our clients. Swinerton Parking Structures Swinerton Builders has extensive Design-Build and Parking Structure project experience and is ranked as the #1 Construction Service Provider in California by the Engineering News Record for the last three years consecutively. Swinerton’s experience includes over 45 parking structures of varying size and complexity for private and public clients. Swinerton team members are well respected in the industry for their design-build and parking structure experience. Through past Design-Build projects, team members have learned how to work collaboratively with clients to align project goals and values with the client’s mission. Swinerton is currently the Design-Builder on San Diego County’s largest two parking structures; UCSD Osler Parking Structure and the San Diego Airport Parking Plaza. Additionally, this team is working on or has recently completed parking structures for, Community Memorial Hospital, Children’s Hospital of Orange County, St. Jude Medical Office Building, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and Sunroad Centrum. ~GRIFFIN (~ ST R.UC T UR.ES 4 Swinerton combines its industry-leading design-build construction services with self-perform capabilities. By utilizing the know-how of a specialty subcontractor with the resources and knowledge of a full-service general contractor, this approach helps Swinerton efficiently control the project’s schedule, quality, and costs. From in-house BIM detailing to self-fabrication all the way to forming and placing concrete, we can efficiently design and build parking structures that can scale to the needs of any project. 5 3. Approach Grifin|Swinerton in association with CityLift is prepared to design, permit, finance, and construct the mechanical parking project in close collaboration with the City of Palo Alto. The Project would be delivered using a public -private partnership (P3) model and structured as a turnkey, build-to-suit transaction. The following describes the integrated approach of the Griffin|Swinerton Team in association with CityLift in designing a project that meets the City of Palo Alto’s requirements; processing project approvals at the State and local level; and project financing and delivery using Griffin|Swinerton’s open book, customizable, and fully transparent guaranteed maximum price (GMP) P3 structure. 3.1. Proof of Concept Design Approach In the conceptual design included as part of this response, the Griffin|Swinerton Team led by CityLift chose Lot A at the corner of Lytton Avenue and Emerson Street to illustrate the design philosophy, space count, cost, project delivery, and operation of a public mechanical parking lift system. Lot A is in a busy node of activity for downtown employees and retail patrons, so offers a good case study to analyze a high-density parking solution that would serve a variety of users. Also, to directly address the City’s need for more public parking in the downtown core, the design concept provides a parking-only solution as opposed to incorporating a mix of uses such as ground floor retail or other commercial space, a design choice that is aligned with comments made by City staff during the Pre-RFI Teleconference on April 11, 2018. Conceptual design plan – Lot A, corner of Lytton Avenue and Emerson Street 6 City of Palo Alto Planning and Zoning Guidelines In preparing the response to this RFI, a member of the Griffin|Swinerton Team met in person with the Planning Manager of the Development Services Center within the City of Palo Alto to discuss the Project concept, the architectural review process, planning fees, the zoning designation, and the process overall. The following is a brief discussion of the planning and zoning guidelines that materially impact architectural site planning and layout for mechanical parking within Palo Alto. Lot A is in a Public Facilities District (PF) zone and is adjacent to the Downtown Commercial District (CD) zone. The conceptual site plan provided as part of this RFI response is consistent with the height, floor area ratio, setbacks, and site coverage requirements under this zone. The PF zone restricts height to 50 feet and in the case of parking facilities in a PF zone, sets floor area ratio, setbacks, site coverage requirements by the most restrict adjacent zone, in this case the CD zone which permits buildings conforming to a more urban, dense design paradigm. The recent March 2017 amendment to the Palo Alto Planning Code (Section 18.54.020) includes provisions for mechanical lift parking. Section 18.54.020 permits the use of mechanical lift parking for off-street parking, and among the planning code requirements are provisions for: • parking serving permitting building types (multifamily, hotel, industrial, institutional, etc.) or other uses approved by the Planning Director • required enclosures that screen parking from public view and shall be architecturally compatible with site conditions • parking spaces that shall accommodate mid-size sport utility vehicles and full-size cars (without going so far as to accommodate large sport utility vehicles) • submission requirements for analysis and reports of the mechanical parking solution (e.g. effectiveness, operational details, drawings, maintenance schedules, and potential impacts, etc.) • a requirement that 10% of parking spaces should be standard, non-mechanical spaces for all non-residential uses, which would apply to public parking solution. The Planning staff representative that our Team consulted with also verbally indicated that City Planners will require that ground floor exterior cladding be permeable and pleasing to pedestrians, rather than a solid, opaque exterior. All of the aforementioned was taken into account in devising the conceptual site plans as part of this RFI response, in addition to assumptions on site coverage of improvements, and the various quality levels of building skin/exterior cladding that were input into the cost estimate within this response. Parking Dimensions and Space Counts The conceptual designs shown below included three separate parking structures and drive aisles, parking platform widths of 9’6” to accommodate nearly all vehicles, and building heights that vary from three to five levels (20 feet for the 3-level, 26 feet for the 4-level, and 32 feet for the 5-level). Each parking structure is 96-feet wide and fits 10 parking platforms. Design Alternative Number of Spaces Height 3-Level Parking Structure 124 - 140 20 feet 4-Level Parking Structure 148 - 170 26 feet 5-Level Parking Structure 180 – 210 32 feet 7 Scenario A – Mix of Mechanical and Non-Mechanical Parking m ,= m :<> Cf) 0 z ;l m m --< I LYTTON AVE. I I LOT 'A' I 9'.S' PLATFORMS . ~ xi----- ~: \ -----½--~--~---L-,------------ I I 11"-SUHi AU..:;..-ALl....., I 3L P : 1 ,2cARS SU RFAC E; 12 CARS TOTA L 124 CARS , / ____ r, 1 ·<------j_.,.> 4 LP : 136 CARS SU RFAC E; 12 CARS TOT A L ; 148 CARS 5LP : 1 G8 CARS SURFAC E; 12 CARS TOTAL 180 CA RS 41.P 17CARS ,--·-·--------·-21 CARS -·------·-··-I 2a~X~ -·------·--· 21 ~AAS --------·-··-·--, 11:i .~l lf 1:1 ~f 1:1 ~l 1l1:i 7~~ ,1 ~1, f t->11 1 ,' ~~• ~1 I !:.:_~Il l;.:' I ~,:''(~-,•,._':,,,' t;;'' , /t \/f ,l 1 t\l e\i t \l /f \/f \l ;n l:f1i tl, 00 -\ , -~--t -_:-1 -~-t'' -~-----_:-t', -~--t -_:-t'', -~-+•', _ __:_~-~-' ~- • ~ f?~~,g .. ~"';l" .~ .~ g,'{?',\ ' , .: l t _. 1' _,. I I J ' _,. I .:-l J I I _,. l I I J l ... ' ·, \ ~ \ 1 / I\ ~ /I \ ~ / \ ~ ! I \ -;; ! \ 1 /I \ ~ 'I \ ~ : ' .~ / ,•,~ '~ ,',',f:: 1'1 ~'.=: / •,~ /1\~ I ~ ;,,r-:: ;,•!'?, ,' ~,¾ I 00 ' ' 1,1 ", /,~ ,' l,1~ ! I,\~ ,,= I 1.1 ~ ! ,1,= j 1.1 ~ I 1-1~ ,,.",. I ~1tJ~J:~J&J~~~J:Qfu:fILJ& 1 7fl C.A•<S 17f' .... n S BUILDING OLP 21 CAAS T 8 Scenario B1 – High Density Mechanical Parking (3-Level) LOT'A' 9'-6" PLATFORMS LYTTON AVE. I ~---.-_ --_ --,----~---.-_ --_ -..---__ Fr___ -"". --_ --------,-_ . ---~ 1 < ~ ,1;_ ~ J I ~ ; ' :~ f ,. ?; ,'I, ~ ; • :;:: ,-, !;:°, .:1:. ~ Jl =. _i~\ I\~ /j\~ :\~ /\i /j\j ij\~ /\i /\j /i\1 \~ Let\ I•,;:!?, :1·,:'::; ~~; ',~ .'1',~ ,'1 '.~ ,' \~ _' \~ ;,·,~ \='2:; '1 ~-;, \ ~ / 1~_a \ ~ 'i \ i / -_a\~ / 1~_a \ ~ / 1-_a \ ~ / -_,. \ ~ / ~ \, :;_::_ / 1-_a \ ~ 'i \ i / :.t ' -, ,.w I -,W ' -.!a! • - ' Ila 1-I ,:.: • ~ • .!a! ' - ' -,:.: I -!a ' - , 'Jt ·t / r:& t ·t. \-J ; ·r. r ; rt ·t / r:. ·t ; ·i t / '7 \-' : r::~ t t. 't----/.--i- , .•11 l .' ,.":)I \ ... , I .K l I 1 ,_•:.:,e \ : ,.•:l '· 1 -·~ \ 1 ti l_ .' ,.":ll l _•/j '. ! 1:1 '., 1•• ,;_• ·•,,• 7 ! •.; 1~• ',; I"~,; e; •.; ., " 1;• ·., e ;" 1t..' V ,: -i[' V ,: V " I «' , " V ,i' V " V "[~~, ~ ~ ~ 1.::..1 ··~··~··~ ·~··~··~··~··~ ~ ~ 1 I '· '· ' l ,. --__ ,,)' BUILDING 9 Scenario B2 - High Density Mechanical Parking (4- and 5-Level) _l I> ,-i. I LOT 'A' 9'-6" PLATFORMS LYTTON AVE. BUILDING ~p ?1 r..llRS 10 Puzzle Lift System CityLift’s Puzzle Lift System (PLS) was chosen for this approach as it is the most versatile mechanical parking offering and is ideal for new construction. These systems are widely used in residential, mixed-use, and public parking structures in both garages and free-standing parking towers. The PLS is a semi-automated parking solution, where mechanical systems move a car to its parking space, however putting the car into the systems as well as operating the system requires a key fob and some action by an attendant (or a trained driver) which is well suited for a public parking solution where individual safety and liability protection are of critical concerns. The PLS comes in 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7-level configurations, the steel frame doubles as the building structure, and Electric Vehicle (EV) charging can be accommodated in the parking stalls. Other key features of the PSL include: Project Type New construction or retrofit 5-level Puzzle Lift System Building Application Free-standing or garage Independent Access Yes EV Charging Yes Security Gates Yes Remote Monitoring Yes Maximum # Levels 7 Retrieval Speed Avg 36 seconds Benefits Price and operating costs Middleton Center, 2-level puzzle Customized for exterior, free-standing use 11 Seismic Considerations When introducing the mechanical parking system to the U.S. market, CityLift’s structural engineering team designed the steel members specifically to be free-standing structures that would withstand a 200-year California seismic event. A Resilient Parking Solution Understanding that with the rapid advancement of transportation technologies and service offerings underway, particularly with ride-sharing networks and autonomous vehicle (AV) technologies, we are entering a period of great uncertainty with respect to parking demand levels over the next several decades. Therefore, all new parking solutions which require significant upfront investment that would be repaid over a 20- to 30-year timeframe should be able to address how the system will avoid potential obsolescence. Rather than thinking about how CityLift’s PLS can be retrofitted to an alternate building use type should parking demand be dramatically reduced in the coming years, the structural frame of the PLS can be deconstructed and recycled in a manner that is far cheaper and easier than retrofitting the structure to a commercial building, for example. After the bolts are removed from the steel members of the parking structure and materials are reused elsewhere or recycled, a slab will remain which can be repurposed in any manner that the City prefers. 3.2 Entitlements and Permits As the Griffin|Swinerton Team progresses through Schematic Design (SD), Design Development (DD), and Construction Documents (CD) during Predevelopment, we will also need to secure a variety of project approvals as described in this subsection. Planning Approvals In terms of the City’s planning approvals process, it is anticipated that the Project will go through an Architectural Review Board process including community meetings, be reviewed by the Planning & Transportation Commission and City Council review due to the newness of this mechanical parking as a public facility. It does not appear that the Project will require a zoning change as the proposed use fits within current PF zoning regulations and planning code requirements for mechanical parking. Customary planning fees are anticipated, but it is still an open question as to whether or not the City will require payment of development impact fees for the Project. Given that the Project contemplated is a public facility delivered through a public private partnership (P3), the City would be effectively “charging itself” by levying impact fees. CEQA Clearance The City will be the lead Agency on processing the required CEQA documents with Griffin|Swinerton being the primary responsible party to provide the necessary documentation for approvals. The scope, expense, and duration of the CEQA process will be determined by whether the proposed mechanical parking project will be governed by a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to comply with the CEQA requirements for the project. In embarking on this Project, Griffin|Swinerton would retain an Environmental Consultant experienced in the CEQA guidelines and mandatory items to be included in an MND or EIR. Technical studies that would be key in determining the scope of CEQA process include Traffic Study, Air Quality Study, and Noise Impact Study, among others. Based on the technical reports and other data assembled, our Team would collaborate with the City to expeditiously prepare an Initial Study for the project using the most recent version of Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Once the Initial Study has been prepared, the CEQA documentation team will have a better understanding of the type of CEQA document necessary to analyze fully project impacts in compliance 12 with City and State CEQA guidelines. An MND or EIR would be prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines in the State Public Resource Code. In consultation with the City, our Team can assist the process by compiling of list of agencies and organizations who will receive copies of all notices and environmental documents. This list will include the local jurisdictions, the State Clearinghouse, agencies with known permitting responsibilities, and public agencies which may be affected by the proposed project. Once the controlling CEQA report has been reviewed and accepted by the City, the appropriate processing steps for approval will be initiated including the public review comment period. Community Outreach The main goals of effective community and stakeholder outreach address improving public awareness; minimizing impacts to residents, businesses, and commuters; and ensuring a safe construction work zone. Griffin|Swinerton has found that early and frequent involvement and input creates community connections to a project, provides a greater understanding of project realities, and identifies potential issues before they become problems. Griffin|Swinerton outreach activities occur pre-, during, and post-construction, including Outreach Plans, holding community meetings, regular email updates to stakeholders and subscribers, and a dedicated project website/hotline/information channel to solicit feedback. Building and Other Permits This Project will require extensive review by the various departments and divisions involved in both public and private development projects throughout the City. After the Planning Division has approved the Project and the Project proceeds through Design Development and Construction Documents, at least the following City review requirements will apply: • Building Division – with overarching responsibility, review of complete building plans • Public Works Department – as the project involves site work in the public right-of-way • Fire Department – life safety and fire protection/sprinkler system are critical project components • Water Quality Control Division – sand oil interceptors will be required for this parking use • Water/Wastewater Utilities Division – primarily for fire protection/sprinkler service added • Electrical Utilities Division – for bringing electrical disconnects and service meters to the parking lifts 3.3. Public-Private Partnership (P3): Project Financing and Delivery Griffin|Swinerton is pleased to provide a description of our approach to public-private partnerships (P3) that is perfectly aligned with the City’s preferred transaction structure that was discussed with the City during the Pre-RFI Teleconference on April 11. Our P3 structure enables the design, permitting, and construction of the Project as a turnkey, built-to-suit transaction utilizing privately-financed tax-exempt bonds for 100% of project costs to match the lowest cost financing available to municipalities. The Project would be delivered using a public-private partnership (P3) model and structured as a turnkey, build-to-suit transaction. The P3 legal structure involves a “lease/leaseback” arrangement with the City, where execution of a Ground Lease (i.e. site lease) and Facility Lease Agreement (i.e. parking facility leaseback) occur simultaneously. As is typical in our collaborative P3 projects, the Agreements will be jointly produced by the Griffin|Swinerton Team and the City. The Griffin|Swinerton Team will undertake the financing and development of the parking facilities via a project- specific not-for-profit company, or Single Purpose Entity (SPE), where City representatives may be designated as board members of the SPE, should the City so desire, so that the City retains control and oversight of the Project at all times. When the Project reaches substantial completion of construction and commissioning, Griffin|Swinerton’s role would end. The City could elect to refinance the outstanding debt or keep the SPE structure in place to avoid additional 13 transaction costs. When the parking facilities are placed in service, the City would enter into separate contracts with CityLift for servicing and maintenance of the mechanical lift system and a parking operator. The diagram below illustrates the relationship of the Griffin|Swinerton Team with the City and the mechanics of our project-specific financing structure. By design, the onus of the financing is on the Griffin|Swinerton team to efficiently shift the risk of project execution to the development team and accelerate project completion. The security for the private financing will be a leasehold deed of trust (by way of the Ground Lease) supported by the Project’s lease revenue in the Parking Lease with the City, where lease payments are equal to the debt service payments. Provisions in the Ground Lease and Parking Lease allow the City, at any time, to take-out the financing, enabling the City’s preferred turn-key project delivery approach. 3.4. Operations and Maintenance Following the organization in the RFI document, the approach to operations and maintenance is included in the following Section 4.2. Financing Authority ! Indenture 1 Debt Service Trustee Bond l Proceeds Bond l Proceeds Investors ~CITY OF ¥PALO ALTO Loan Agreement I Ground I Facility Lease w lease Take-out Option Non-Profit Special Purpose Entity (SPE) I I Development Agreement .. l 1 __ :1_··J_H - E ~ E i ,; it C lcityl!ft - I -~ SWINERTON • I • t • I -@ ARCHIT ECT .tM¾ 14 4. Cost 4.1 Total Project Costs The Griffin|Swinerton Team developed a preliminary cost model for a prevailing wage, P3 project delivery which reflect current figures as of April 2018 from both CityLift and Swinerton Builders. Costs are preliminary, based on conceptual designs and will be subject to change over time due to inflation and design refinements. The cost model estimates total project costs, including the mechanical parking equipment, foundation, a range for building skin ($65 to $80 per square foot), roofing, electrical, plumbing, fire sprinklers, sitework, and signage. It also factors in general contractor’s costs and project soft costs. Cost Range Per Space 3 Level Puzzle Lift 4 Level Puzzle Lift 5 Level Puzzle Lift Mechanical Parking System $17,544 $19,475 $22,424 Direct Construction Costs $42,702 - $44,655 $44,453 - $46,544 $45,678 - $47,762 Total Project Costs $52,576 - $54,950 $54,585 - $57,126 $55,968 -$58,499 CITY OF PALO ALTO - REQUEST FOR INFORMATION CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE - LOT A MECHANICAL PARKING - 3 LEVELS PALO ALTO, CA Direct Costs Unit Qty Cost/Unit Total $/Space $/GSF $/Site SF Foundation - Slab-on-grade 20,265 SF $30 /SF 607,950$ 4,343$ 60.41$ 30.00$ Mechanical Parking System & Superstructure 140 Spaces $17,544 /Sp 2,456,160$ 17,544$ 244.08$ 121.20$ Exterior Enclosure 15,713 SF $65 /SF 1,021,340$ 7,295$ 101.49$ 50.40$ Roofing 10,063 SF $15 /SF 150,945$ 1,078$ 15.00$ 7.45$ Electrical 10,063 SF $40 /SF 400,000$ 2,857$ 39.75$ 19.74$ Plumbing 10,063 SF $23 /SF 230,000$ 1,643$ 22.86$ 11.35$ Fire Protection 10,063 SF $22 /SF 225,000$ 1,607$ 22.36$ 11.10$ Sitework 20,265 SF $2 /SF 42,300$ 302$ 4.20$ 2.09$ Signage Allowance Allowance 20,000$ 143$ 1.99$ 0.99$ Subtotal - Direct Costs 5,153,695$ 36,812$ 512.14$ 254.32$ Indirect Costs Unit Qty Total $/Space $/GSF $/Site SF Contractor Gen Conditions, Insurance, OH/Fee 16%824,591$ 5,890$ 81.94$ 40.69$ TOTAL - Direct & Indirect Costs 5,978,286$ 42,702$ 594.09$ 295.01$ Soft Costs Unit Qty Total $/Space $/GSF $/Site SF Architecture & Engineering 6.0%358,697$ 2,562$ 35.65$ 17.70$ Planning Fees & Building Permits 4.5%269,023$ 1,922$ 26.73$ 13.28$ Utility Connection Fees 1.0%59,783$ 427$ 5.94$ 2.95$ Legal Allowance 35,000$ 250$ 3.48$ 1.73$ Insurance Allowance 60,000$ 429$ 5.96$ 2.96$ Property Taxes NIC -$ -$ -$ -$ Developer Overhead/Fee 4.5%299,960$ 2,143$ 29.81$ 14.80$ Project Contingency 4.5%299,960$ 2,143$ 29.81$ 14.80$ Subtotal - Soft Costs 1,382,424$ 9,874$ 137.38$ 68.22$ Total Project Costs 7,360,710$ 52,576$ 731.46$ 363.22$ 3-LEVELS cityl!ft GRIFFIN --- SWINERTON I I I I I I I 15 4.2 Operations and Maintenance CityLift’s Service Program – below is a summary of the term, cost, and services included in CityLift’s Service Program. The following should not be construed as a full, detailed description of services, an offer, or a proposed agreement. These items are subject to change and reflect the maintenance package offered by CityLift as of the time of this RFI response. 1. Term – the Service Program is offered for a period of up to sixty months following installation of mechanical parking equipment. 2. Cost – For the first 12 months following the completion of installation, the CityLift Service Program will be provided to the City without additional cost. Thereafter, the annual cost for the Service Program would be priced at $25 per space per month. 3. Training – on-site operational training for designated City staff and/or their hired daily parking operator/property manager, operational training materials are provided, and property manager training for key fob programming and ongoing fob set up or replacement, which is the responsibility of the property manager. 4. Response to Service Calls – CityLift will respond to calls for on-site service/repairs within 1 hour with notification at CityLift’s designated customer service number. 5. Remote Monitoring – CityLift performs 24x7 remote monitoring of operating system. 6. Equipment Maintenance – a detailed repair and maintenance check is performed monthly with additional checks performed quarterly and annually. 7. Substitute Transportation – If a malfunction in the equipment, for which CityLift is responsible for, prevents access to a user’s car, CityLift will reimburse the user for the cost of using alternative transportation (e.g. taxi, Lyft, or Uber) up to a maximum of $50 per occurrence. 8. Parts Replacement – CityLift provides a 1 year product warranty. During the warranty period, CityLift will replace all worn or defective parts that are not damaged by a third party. 9. City Lift Quarterly Maintenance – includes verification that the following are in proper working order: cycling all spaces through rotation, perimeter fence, safety signage, platform cleanliness and integrity, tire guides, ground surface tracks, lift chains, control box, all columns and beams, and frame tolerances. Property Management/Operations Ace Parking was consulted for property management, operations, and staffing details. Ace Parking has worked with CityLift to manage select installations of its mechanical parking systems and is well versed in providing property management services to public parking lots and garages for municipal clients. • Varied Levels of Parking Service – The increased density of parking spaces offers the City a variety of options for differentiated levels of parking service and parking space designations. o For Downtown Employees: Some parking aisles or space blocks could be dedicated to downtown employees on a first come, first service basis whose access is permissible via a special permit from the City (for a fee or free, depending). There could be assigned monthly spaces for an additional specialized permit. o For Downtown Patrons & Visitors: All or the non-employee remainder of the spaces could be first come, first serve for the general public (assuming a 2 to 4 hour time restriction). There is also an option for daily parking spaces for a fee. cityl!ft 16 • Hours of Operation and Attendant Staffing – operations of parking facilities in downtowns like that of Palo Alto generally have peak hours in the morning commute, lunch rush, and evening commute hours. These hours would require greater staffing than in non-peak hours in the early morning and late night. The following is based on Ace Parking’s general guidelines for staffing peak and non-peak hours for parking facilities in busy suburban downtowns. The following theoretical attendant staffing plan assumes a lot has 150 to 200 cars. Hours of Operation Peak Non-Peak Attendants Comments 12am to 5am* After Hours-Closed x 0 Gates are closed; after hours auto access can be provided by an on-call employee for a fee 5am to 7am x 1 (entire facility) Parking operation for early morning employees 7am to 10am x 1 per 50 cars Morning commuters 11am to 1pm x 1 per 50 cars Lunch rush for employees, patrons, and other visitors 1pm to 4pm x 2 (entire facility) 5pm to 8pm x 1 per 50 cars Evening commuters 8pm to 12am* x 1-2 (entire facility) Primarily to service evening patrons of nightlife (restaurants, cafes, bars) * Weekdays – the parking facility may close earlier at 10pm or 11pm; Weekends or special events – the parking facility may close later than 12am 17 5. Development Team Griffin|Swinerton, A Joint Venture Northern California Office 1850 Warburton Avenue, Suite 120 Santa Clara, CA 95050 Southern California Office 2 Technology Drive, Suite 150 Irvine, CA 92618 Description The Griffin|Swinerton joint-venture team was established in 2009. It is a fully integrated, highly experienced organization that combines the best of the development and construction industries. Griffin Structures and Swinerton Builders both have a long and successful track record working with cities in an open book, fully transparent process utilizing multiple alternative forms of project delivery, including Public Private Partnerships (P3). Griffin|Swinerton projects delivered as P3s in California are more fully described in this proposal and range from the P3 delivery of Orange County's $188 million Building 16 within its civic administration center to the $12 million turn-key P3 delivery of the Quartz Hill Library for Los Angeles County. Griffin Structures, Inc. Established in 1981 as a California corporation, Griffin Structures (Griffin) is a diversified program and construction management Corporation serving the public and private sectors for 36 years. Griffin offers a wide portfolio of services for projects of all sizes and complexities—both new construction and renovations. Griffin’s in-house construction management services specialize in oversight of multiple forms of project delivery, including service both as an extension of staff, and as Owner’s Representatives. Swinerton Builders (Design-Builder) Headquartered in San Francisco since 1888, the Swinerton Family of Companies has provided commercial construction and construction management services throughout the Western United States for over 130 years. Today, with over 3,000 employees and over $4 billion in annual revenue, Swinerton is achieving remarkable success in the industry across a wide range of markets including: Renewable Energy, Healthcare, Federal, Education, Corporate Interior Services, Retail, Multi-family Residential, and Hospitality. In addition to these markets, Swinerton also has a robust self-perform parking structure group that specializes in parking structures of varying sizes, types, configurations, and delivery methods. Swinerton’s self-perform operations also encompass self-perform concrete, drywall, and demolition. Primary Contact Roger Torriero Principal, Griffin|Swinerton CEO, Griffin Structures, Inc. (408) 955-0431 rtorriero@griffinswinerton.com Dave Callis Principal, Griffin|Swinerton Senior Vice President, Swinerton Builders (415) 421-2980 dcallis@swinerton.com Website www.griffinstructures.com / www.swinerton.com Size of Firm Griffin Structures, Inc. (25) / Swinerton Builders (over 3,000) Role Project Developer, Construction Management, Construction 18 CityLift 2335 Broadway Suite 100 Oakland CA 94612 Description CityLift Parking designs, installs, and services semi-automated to fully automated parking lift systems that reduce the footprint needed for parking and can typically be done at a lower cost per space than conventional parking. CityLift is headquartered in Oakland, CA and has offices in Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, and Boston. CityLift is the exclusive U.S. partner of a 26-year old automated parking system manufacturer whose technology has been proven with 60,000 spaces installed in over 13 countries. Domestically, in a few short years CityLift has assembled a pipeline of installed and in- progress projects totaling over 50 projects and 2,200 parking spaces in eight States, with its largest number of projects in California. Primary Contact Scott Gable CEO (844) 388-0424 sgable@cityliftparking.com Website www.cityliftparking.com Size of Firm 32 Role Mechanical Lift Parking Provider – Installer and Service Provider 22 QUALIFICATIONS Roger Torriero is a nationally-recognized leader in the implementation of Public / Private Partnership (P3) projects. He has successfully led the team efforts for five public sector P3 projects in California, two of which are library projects. Roger’s extensive involvement in virtually all aspects of both public and private sector real estate development, finance, design, and construction provides Griffin|Swinerton with specialized expertise in the conceptualization and realization of challenging projects. He is an expert in forward planning, finance, entitlements, project delivery methodologies, and community-based participatory planning. REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE County of Los Angeles, Quartz Hill Library (P3), Quartz Hill, CA El Gabilan Branch Library (P3), Salinas, CA County of Orange, Building 16 Administration Building (P3), Santa Ana, CA Salinas Police Service Headquarters (P3), Salinas, CA West Hollywood City Hall (P3), West Hollywood, CA Yorba Linda Library and Arts Center, Yorba Linda, CA Tustin Library, Tustin, CA Half Moon Bay Library, Half Moon Bay, CA Visalia Fullerton Library, Fullerton, CA El Centro Library, El Centro, CA Hesperia Library, Hesperia, CA Mariners Library, Newport Beach, CA Bloomington Library, Bloomington, CA Willowbrook Library, Los Angeles, CA Watsonville Main Library, Watsonville, CA Hermosa Beach Library Needs Assessment, Hermosa Beach, CA Lawndale Community Center, Lawndale, CA County of Riverside Family Law Court, Riverside, CA Huntington Beach Senior Center, Huntington Beach, CA Buena Park Community Center, Buena Park, CA Quail Hill Community Center, Irvine, CA Laguna Beach Community Center/Senior Center, Laguna Beach, CA San Dimas Community Center Expansion, San Dimas, CA Pine Avenue Community Center and Gardens, Carlsbad, CA Delhi Community Center, Santa Ana, CA Lake Forest Community Center, Lake Forest, CA Roger Torriero Principal-in-Charge EDUCATION Master of Architecture, Accademia di Belli Arti a Firenze Italia Bachelor of Architecture, Syracuse University, New York REGISTRATION California Contractor License #793600, Classes A & B AFFILIATIONS U.S. Green Building Council, Member Urban Land Institute, Member American Public Works Association National Association of Industrial & Office Parks, Member Associated General Contractors of America, Member Construction Management Association of America, Member Design-Build Institute, Member YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 40 23 QUALIFICATIONS Dave has 25 years of experience in construction, ranging from managing all aspects of preconstruction and construction. Dave is particularly skilled in his thorough knowledge of construction practices, codes, scheduling, estimating, budget preparation, value engineering and constructability reviews. Other responsibilities include: business development and maintaining client relationships, interviews, presentations and final contract negotiations. Dave has experience in managing all aspects of division personnel, including hiring, project assignment, training and development. REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE County of Los Angeles, Quartz Hill Library (P3), Quartz Hill, CA El Gabilan Branch Library (P3), Salinas, CA County of Orange, Building 16 Administration Building (P3), Santa Ana, CA Salinas Police Service Headquarters (P3), Salinas, CA Fullerton Library Renovation &Expansion, Fullerton, CA Turner Riverwalk, Riverside, CA Fullerton Community Center, Fullerton, CA Laguna Beach Community Center, Laguna Beach, CA Laguna Hills Community Center, Laguna Hills, CA San Bernardino Valley College Gymnasium, San Bernardino, CA John Wayne Airport Tenant Improvement, Santa Ana, CA San Dimas City Hall &Community Center, San Dimas, CA Burbank Community Services Center, Burbank, CA Cypress Community Center, Cypress, CA Kaiser Permanente Foothill Ranch Medical Office Building (MOB), Foothill Ranch, CA John Wayne Airport Parking Structure, Santa Ana, CA Broadcom Corporate Complex, Irvine, CA CHOC Parking Structure, Orange, CA Scholle Office Complex, Irvine, CA’ Ontario Airport Towers, Ontario, CA Ladera Ranch Corporate Terrace Medical Office Building, Ladera Ranch, CA Dave Callis Principal-in-Charge EDUCATION Bachelor of Science, Construction Management California State University, Long Beach AFFILIATIONS NAIOP, Member ACRE-IE, Member YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 28 24 QUALIFICATIONS Korin Crawford is responsible for originating, evaluating, structuring, and closing public-private partnerships (P3s) for the Griffin|Swinerton business unit. Korin leverages 18 years of experience in infrastructure, real estate, and M&A of property- backed operating businesses with an emphasis on P3s and real estate transactions in complex regulatory environments. Prior to joining Griffin Structures, Korin was an Executive Advisor to the Los Angeles City Administrative Officer (CAO) as a subject matter expert on infrastructure delivered through a variety of alternative financing methods including P3s. In this role, Korin spearheaded $3.5 billion of investment opportunities spanning municipal facilities, transit, renewable energy, and habitat restoration projects. From 2006 to 2015, Korin led his own consulting and investment practice, offering advisory services to for-profit and non-profit real estate investors, developers, and public agencies (including utilities, ports, city/county, redevelopment, and school districts) to finance and develop land, real estate, renewable energy, and energy efficiency. REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE Los Angeles Convention Center Expansion and Modernization (P3), Los Angeles, CA Los Angeles Civic Center Master Plan (P3), Los Angeles, CA Downtown Los Angeles Streetcar (P3), Los Angeles, CA Mission Rock / SWL 337 - Port of San Francisco (P3), San Francisco, CA Pier 70 Redevelopment - Port of San Francisco (P3), San Francisco, CA Mission Bay Redevelopment - Port of San Francisco (P3), San Francisco, CA Bayview Hunters Point Shipyard Redevelopment (P3), San Francisco, CA Oakland Army Base Disposition and Reuse (P3) - Port of Oakland, Oakland, CA Fillmore Renaissance and Jazz Heritage Museum (P3), San Francisco, CA Oakland Uptown Redevelopment (P3), Oakland, CA Pinole Vista and Pinole Valley Shopping Center Ground Lease and DDA Audit (P3), Pinole, CA Korin Crawford Project Principal EDUCATION Master of Science in Management, Stanford Graduate School of Business Master of Science, Electrical Engineering, Stanford University Bachelor of Science, Electrical Engineering, Duke University PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Energy Execs Urban Land Institute, Member Cleantech Institute, Certified Cleantech Professional YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 18 © CITYLIFT PARKING 2018. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. WWW.CITYLIFTPARKING.COM 2335 BROADWAY, SUITE 100, OAKLAND, CA 94612 DEVELOPMENT TEAM SCOTT GABLE – CEO Over 28 years of real estate and business operations experience, Scott serves as CityLift’s CEO. Prior to creating CityLift, Scott served as CFO for Starwood Waypoint residential and Trust where he played a key role in establishing the single family rental industry as an institutional asset class-eventually taking the company public in 2014. Previous to this, Mr. Gable was with Wells Fargo Bank where he helped create the home equity lending business and ultimately served as its EVP of Operations across the US. Scott began his career with Booz Allen Hamilton where he consulted on operations and strategy for consumer products, entertainment, and retail companies-eventually becoming a principal. He holds an MBA from Harvard Business School and an AB in International Relations from Stanford University. TERENCE CHEN – CHIEF ENGINEER Terence comes to CityLift with 17 years of engineering expertise. He is an expert in manufacturing and field installation and currently serves as Chief Engineer for CityLift Parking. Prior to CityLift, Terence was Technical and Quality Director of Snap-on’s Asia Pacific Region where he created robust quality and warranty systems to support fast growth in the vehicle lift, tire changer, wheel balancer, and aligner verticals. Terence began his career with FCI as a process engineer leader setting up a new automotive harness manufacturing facility. Terrence holds a Master Degree in Engineering from Suzhou University and a Bachelor Degree in Mechanical and Lift Engineering from Shanghai Maritime University. BRANDON RICHARDSON – CIO/CTO Brandon oversees all technical aspects of the company from product integration to supply chain digitization. Prior to CityLift, Brandon served as the Alaska Regional IT Manager for ConocoPhillips where he played a key role in technologically transforming the region through advanced analytics and modernization initiatives. Prior to ConocoPhillips, Brandon served in numerous leadership roles within Chevron developing enterprise strategies, driving control system integration and overseeing global ERP deployments. Brandon begin his career 21 years ago, as an officer in the US Army implementing innovative solutions in some of the most hazardous environments in the world. He holds an MBA from Norwich University and a BA in Political Science from Texas State University, San Marcos. MIKE BRINCK – VP OF SALES Mike has a 25-year proven record in direct sales, channel sales, and executive management and joined CityLift full time in June as the Vice President of Sales. Previous to joining CityLift, Mike spent 16 months consulting for Digital Realty Trust (DLR) - a world leader in the data center space, and prior to that co-founded a data center infrastructure monitoring business focused on UPS and battery backup power systems where he helped build a profitable global business over 6 years and then successfully sold it to a private equity firm in June of 2012. Prior to Canara, Mike was responsible for growing several successful enterprise software/hardware startups such as Data Power Monitoring Corporation, Alternative Systems, Vastera (successful IPO in 2000), and Qiva by building direct and channel sales efforts. . 19 6. Recent Projects The attached project profiles and case studies include the following: Griffin|Swinerton – Recent public facilities delivered using a public-private partnership (P3) structure CityLift – Case studies of mechanical lift parking projects. Swinerton Builders – Project history of conventional parking structures. 12 County of Los Angeles Quartz Hill Library County of Los Angeles, CA Griffi n Structures partnered with Swinerton Builders to deliver a turn-key library for the County of Los Angeles. The Griffi n|Swinerton comprehensive proposal to replace the County’s existing branch library in the unincorporated Antelope Valley community of Quartz Hill, was structured around a lease with an option to purchase the project during the lease term. The lease structure gives the County fl exibility, while the design-fi nance-build P3 model guarantees an occupancy cost to the County. The Quartz Hill Library began with a County-issued RFP outlining parameters for the location—a one- to two-acre site with sole ingress/egress rights, zoning and entitlements allowing for public uses, and access to utilities that met its public library specifi cations. The team secured a 1.7 acre site and developed conceptual designs before submitting its proposal. The team designed the LEED Gold facility, secured entitlements and all development approvals, and fi nanced the entire project. In 2016, Grif fi n|Swinerton delivered a move-in ready library, outfi tted with County-specifi ed furniture, fi xtures and equipment. Awards • American Public Works Association (APWA), Southern California Chapter • Construction Management Association of America, Southern California Chapter Award Cost: $12MM Size: 12,000 SF Start / Completion Date 2015 / 2016 Client: County of Los Angeles Contact: Bradley Bolger, Sr. Manager, Offi ce of CEO (213) 974-1360 | bbolger@CEO.lacounty.gov 13 El Gablian Branch Library Salinas, California Grif fi n|Swinerton is serving as the Development Team for the new El Gabilan Branch Library in the City of Salinas. This facility will be delivered utilizing a Public-Private Partnership (P3) which will provide for the design, fi nancing, construction, and delivery of the new library. The building will be delivered completely fi nished and furnished as a turnkey project. Working with the City’s selected Architect, the Griffi n|Swinerton Team will provide the services necessary to move the El Gabilan Library project from a fi nal schematic design to the design of a fully constructed and equipped building with associated parking and site development. Relevancy • P3 Library Start Date / Completion Date 2018 / TBD Client City of Salinas Contact: Donald Reynolds Assistant Public Works Director (831) 758-7241 donaldr@ci.salinas.ca.us 14 Grif fi n|Swinerton is heading the development team for the County of Orange’s new administrative of fi ce building. The LEED Silver project known as Building 16 is the fi rst phase of a multiphase master plan. This phase is comprised of a 250,000 SF, six-story offi ce building over two levels of subterranean parking. The tenants will be Public Works, Waste Management, Treasurer/Tax Collector, as well as a One Stop Shop, providing ‘walk up service’ to all departments for the County’s constituents. The project is estimated to be complete in 2020. The project is bordered by a future OC Street Car transit stop to the south, service and pedestrian paseo to the east, a central courtyard to the north and a rejuvenated pedestrian-friendly street to the west. Likewise, the project’s elevations change with the solar orientation which allows fi ltered sunlight to enter the east and west facades while the southern exposure shields the interiors from the harsh southern sunlight. County of Orange, Administration Building (Bldg. 16) Santa Ana, CA Cost $166M (estimated) Size: 250,000 SF Start / Completion 2017 / est. 2020 Client County of Orange Contact: Scott Mayer, Chief Real Estate Offi cer (714) 834-3046 | scott.mayer@ocgov.com 15 Salinas Police Service Headquarters Salinas, CA Griffi n|Swinerton is a member of the development team that is providing services for the design, fi nancing, construction and delivery of this new $49 facility. The new 74,000 square foot building will replace the City’s existing police department headquarters, built in 1958. The Police Headquarters will address the space needs identifi ed in the City’s 2014 needs assessment study for the Police Department. Planning and development includes a comprehensive community outreach component to engage residents and businesses. “The reference check is what really tilted the scale toward [selecting] the Griffi n|Swinerton team.” —City of Salinas Council Staff Report (April 18, 2017) Cost: $49MM Size: 74,000 SF Start | Completion 2018 | est. 2020 Client: City of Salinas Contact: Donald Reynolds Assistant Public Works Director (831) 758-7241 donaldr@ci.salinas.ca.us 16 West Hollywood City Hall West Hollywood, California Relevancy • One of the fi rst public P3 projects in California Start Date / Completion Date 1990 / 1991 Client: City ofWest Hollywood Contactt Joan English Retired Director of Transportation (310) 413-3302 Steve Campbell Manager of Facilities & Field Services (323) 848-6850 scampbell@weho.org Grif fi n Structures worked with the City of West Hollywood to redevelop an aging commercial building into a new City Hall and state-of-the-art Emergency Operations Center. The turn-key project was delivered move- in ready to serve West Hollywood residents and businesses, through a Public Private Partnership (P3). This project, completed in 1991, was one of the very fi rst municipal P3 projects undertaken in the United States. The comprehensive turn-key project converted a dilapidated 1950s of fi ce building into a striking new City Hall and Emergency Operations Center. The building was stripped down to its structural steel frame to accommodate a complete interior and exterior reconstruction to meet the City’s needs and speci fi cations. This also provided for the installation of technologies to support the Emergency Operations Center. Delivery of the project was structured around a P3 lease-leaseback agreement with an option to purchase. The agreement provided the City with guaranteed “up front” annual occupancy costs, while also offering fl exibility with the option to purchase feature.. CUSTOMIZED PARKING SOLUTIONS TAKE THE SPACE OUT OF PARKING. 2 CASE STUDIES 3 PUZZLE BROADWAY/GRAND PUBLIC GARAGE OAKLAND, CA 438 WEST GRAND AVE., OAKLAND, CA Building Type: Mixed UseSolution: 2-Level PuzzleParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 30Developer: Signature Development GroupCompleted Date:2015 IDORA APARTMENTS OAKLAND, CA 5239 CLAREMONT AVE., OAKLAND, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 3 Number of Spaces: 42Developer: Temescal Investors, LLCArchitect: KTGY ArchitectsContractor: Hawk DevelopmentsCompletion Date:October 2016 THOMAS BERKLEY OAKLAND, CA 528 THOMAS BERKLEY, OAKLAND, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: PuzzleParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 22Developer: CRC DevelopmentCompletion Date:2017 MAXWELL APARTMENTS OAKLAND, CA 1801 JEFFERSON ST., OAKLAND, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: 3 Level Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 75Architect:BDE Architecture Developer: Bay West DevelopmentGeneral Contractor: West BuildersCompletion Date:2017 STONEFIRE APARTMENTS BERKELEY, CA 2010 MILVIA ST., BERKELEY, CA Building Type: Mixed UseSolution: PuzzleParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 61Developer: The Austin GroupCompletion Date:2017 240 PACIFIC SAN FRANCISCO, CA 240 PACIFIC AVE., SAN FRANCISCO, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: PuzzleParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 37Developer: GrosvenorCompletion Date:2017 THE AUSTIN SAN FRANCISCO, CA 1545 PINE, SAN FRANCISCO, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: PuzzleParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 78Developer: Pacific Pine LLCArchitect: BDE ArchitectsContractor: Swinerton BuildersCompletion Date:2017 H3 HOTEL HEALDSBURG, CA HEALDSBURG AVE., HEALDSBURG, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: PuzzleParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 43Developer: Hotel HealdsburgCompletion Date:Q3 2017 DOGPATCH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 800 INDIANA, SAN FRANCISCO, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: Puzzle with pitParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 50Developer: Avalon Bay Opera WarehouseArchitect:Pyatok ArchitectsContractor: Avalon BayCompletion Date:Q3 2017 AVALON BAY PUBLIC MARKET EMERYVILLE, CA 6701 SHELLMOUND ST., EMERYVILLE, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: 2 and 3-Level PuzzleParking Levels: 1Number of Spaces: 155Developer: Avalon BayArchitect:TCA ArchitectsCompletion Date:2018 ELMWOOD LOS ANGELES, CA 4807 ELMWOOD, LOS ANGELES, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: 2 Level Puzzle with TandemParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 14Architect:R&ADeveloper: Markwood EnterprisesGeneral Contractor: Pacific West BuildersCompletion Date:2018 DUNSMUIR LOS ANGELES, CA 1233 DUNSMUIR, LOS ANGELES, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: 2 Level Puzzle with TandemParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 14Architect:R&ADeveloper: Markwood EnterprisesGeneral Contractor: Pacific West BuildersCompletion Date:2018 39 A STREET SOUTH BOSTON, MA 39 A STREET SOUTH BOSTON, MA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: 2 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 24Architect:Tim JohnsonDeveloper: East Way DevelopmentCompletion Date:2018 100 A STREET SOUTH BOSTON, MA 100 A STREET SOUTH BOSTON, MA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: 3 Level Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 12Architect:Sutphin ArchitectsDeveloper: OranmoreGeneral Contractor: Brenco ConstructionCompletion Date:2018 93 W BROADWAY SOUTH BOSTON, MA 93 W BROADWAY SOUTH BOSTON, MA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: 3 Level Puzzle Tandem with Pit Parking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 80Architect:Stefanov ArchitectsDeveloper: OranmoreGeneral Contractor: Brenco ConstructionCompletion Date:2018 EXPRESSIVE LIGHTING BROOKLYN, NY 245 48TH STREET BROOKLYN, NY Building Type: ResidentialSolution: 3 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 10Architect:KPWDeveloper: Expressive LightingCompletion Date:2018 1542 KENNEDY JERSEY CITY, NJ 1542 KENNEDY BLVD JERSEY CITY, NJ Building Type: Mixed UseSolution: 3 Level Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 48Architect:RCA DesignDeveloper: Myneni Towers LLCGeneral Contractor: Myneni Inc.Completion Date:2017 STONEGATE BUILDINGS BAYONNE, NJ 172 AVENUE F BAYONNE, NJ Building Type: Mixed UseSolution: 3 Level Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 20Architect:DAL Design GroupDeveloper: Stonegate BuildingsCompletion Date:2018 89 BRIGHTON AVE ALLSTON, MA 89 BRIGHTON AVE ALLSTON, MA Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level Puzzle Parking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 26Architect:PCA Developer: Eden PropertiesGeneral Contractor: Cranshaw ConstructionCompletion Date:2018 BENTO NASHVILLE, TN 1267 THIRD AVE S. NASHVILLE, TN Building Type: Residential Solution: 5 Level Puzzle Parking Levels: 5Number of Spaces: 83Architect:EOA Architects Developer: Bento BoxGeneral Contractor: BL HarbertCompletion Date:2018 MIDDLETON TOWN CENTER MIDDLETON, WI 7551 HUBBARD AVE MIDDLETON, WI Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level Puzzle Parking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 85Architect:Angus-Young AssociatesDeveloper: T. Wall EnterprisesGeneral Contractor: Miron ConstructionCompletion Date:2017 SOUTH FLORIDA SHOWCASE MIAMI, FL 7430 NE 4TH CT MIAMI, FL Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level Puzzle Parking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 9Architect:UrbanicaDeveloper: Amicon DevelopmentCompletion Date:2018 ALTO POTRERO HILL SAN FRANCISCO, CA 1301 16TH STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level Puzzle Parking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 48Developer: Wood PartnersCompletion Date:2018 BROADWAY VALDEZ OAKLAND, CA 2800 Broadway Oakland, CA Building Type: Mixed –UseSolution: 2 Level Puzzle Parking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 120Developer: Alliance ResidentialCompletion Date:2018 1726 RIDGE AVE EVANSTON, IL 1726 RIDGE AVE EVANSTON, IL Building Type: Mixed –UseSolution: 2 Level Puzzle Parking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 22Developer: PavewayCompletion Date:2018 684 GRAND STREET JERSEY CITY, NJ 684 GRAND STREET JERSEY CITY, NJ Building Type: ResidentialSolution: 3 Level Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 57Architect:RA Design & ConsultantsDeveloper: Myneni TowersCompletion Date:2018 MYNENI & SONS LLC 1532 HARRISON STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CA 1532 HARRISON STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 66Architect:BAR ArchitectsDeveloper: Build Inc. General Contractor: Cannon ConstructorsCompletion Date:2018 221 S. HUNTINGTON AVE BOSTON, MA 221 S. HUNTINGTON AVE BOSTON, MA Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 19Architect:PCA Developer: Samuels & AssociatesGeneral Contractor: CranshawCompletion Date:2018 42111 OSGOOD RD FREMONT, CA 42111 OSGOOD RD FREMONT, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 136Developer: Silicon Sage BuildersCompletion Date:2018 TELEGRAPH ARTS OAKLAND, CA 471 26TH STREET OAKLAND, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 3 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 92Architect:SB Architects Developer: Square Foot VenturesGeneral Contractor: Brown ConstructionCompletion Date:2018 3205 PICO BLVD SANTA MONICA, CA 3205 PICO BLVD SANTA MONICA, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 3 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 14Architect:Belzberg Architects Developer: Tyler Development Corp.Completion Date:2018 214 DE LA GUERRA SANTA BARBARA, CA 214 DE LA GUERRA SANTA BARBARA, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 3 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 32Architect:Cearnal Collective ArchDeveloper: Kibo GroupCompletion Date:2018 ALTA 601 OAKLAND, CA 625 16th STREET OAKLAND, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 3 Level Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 68Architect:SB Architects Developer: Wood PartnersGeneral Contractor: Brown ConstructionCompletion Date:2018 19th & J SACRAMENTO, CA 1827 J STREET SACRAMENTO, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 3 Level Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 23Architect:HRGA ArchitectsDeveloper: Mohanna DevelopmentGeneral Contractor: Davis Reed ConstructionCompletion Date:2018 214 MARKET STREET BOSTON, MA 214 MARKET STREET BOSTON, MA Building Type: Residential Solution: 3 Level Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 22Architect:Embarc StudioDeveloper: City Realty GroupCompletion Date:2018 1433 BUSH STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CA 1433 BUSH STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 4 Level Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 4Number of Spaces: 15Architect:RG ArchitectureDeveloper: JG Sullivan ConstructionCompletion Date:2018 CHICAGO SHOWCASE CHICAGO, IL 1718 W. JULIAN CHICAGO, IL Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 5Developer: DCR BUILDERSCompletion Date:2018 TEMESCAL MUSE OAKLAND, CA 364 40th STREET OAKLAND, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 7Developer: John Malick & AssociatesGeneral Contractor: Camello Inc.Completion Date:2018 SUMMIT PUBLIC SCHOOLS REDWOOD CITY, CA 890 BROADWAY REDWOOD CITY, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 15Architect: Studio Bondy ArchitectureDeveloper: Summit Public SchoolsGeneral Contractor: GLR BuildersCompletion Date:2018 511 E 5TH STREET SOUTH BOSTON, MA 511 E 5TH STREET SOUTH BOSTON, MA Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 15Developer: Ahern ConstructionCompletion Date:2018 240 LORTON AVE BURLINGAME, CA 240 LORTON AVE BURLINGAME, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 3 Level Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 14Architect: MBH ArchitectsDeveloper: Dewey Land CoGeneral Contractor: OPI BuildersCompletion Date:2018 GIRARD PLAZA LA JOLLA, CA 7824 GIRARD PLAZA LA JOLLA, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: Premium StackerParking Levels: 1Number of Spaces: 4Architect: Alcorn & Benton ArchitectsDeveloper: Arco MexicoGeneral Contractor: GJR BuildersCompletion Date:2018 JUNIPER LOFTS OAKLAND, CA 950 63RD STREET OAKLAND, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 2 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 19Architect: Baran Studio ArchitectureDeveloper: Proforma ConstructionCompletion Date:2018 1689 ALICE STREET OAKLAND, CA 1689 ALICE STREET OAKLAND, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 3 Level PuzzleParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 67Architect: Kotas Pantaleoni ArchitectsDeveloper: Simeon PropertiesGeneral Contractor: Barry Swenson Builder, James Shydlowski, J Hawk Construction Completion Date:2018 459 8TH STREET OAKLAND, CA 459 8TH STREET OAKLAND, CA Building Type: Residential Solution: 4 Level Puzzle with PitParking Levels: 4Number of Spaces: 44Architect: YHLA ArchitectsDeveloper: St. Regis PropertiesGeneral Contractor: Hawk DevelopmentCompletion Date:2018 49 CASE STUDY: AC TRANSIT PARK AND RIDE AT ARDENWOOD, FREMONT Team: AC Transit, MTC, CityLift, City of Fremont Goal: Increase the Ardenwood Park and Ride by 70 spaces for monthly reserved users Design: 4-Level Puzzle Lift with exterior skin Funding: Initial proposal was MTC would fund installation; AC Transit monthly parking fee set to break even on operating expense. In discussion with tech companies for private buses use park & ride and help fund Est. installation cost (union): $21K per space Est. monthly operating cost: $36 per space (servicing, utilities, cap reserve for motors)+ $28 prorated share of 24-hour guard/attendent Breakeven: $64 per month ($3.20 per business day) Training: 90 day initial training period 1x month ongoing One on-site attendant cross trained to assist Access technology (e.g. fobs, app) options available 50 TOWER HIVE PARKING STRUCTURE OAKLAND, CA 2335 BROADWAY ST., OAKLAND, CA Building Type: Mixed UseSolution: Fully Automated TowerParking Levels: 7Number of Spaces: 39Developer: Signature Development GroupArchitect: Flynn and AssociatesCompletion Date:2017 STAR TOWER LONG ISLAND CITY, NY 27-17 42nd RD LONG ISLAND CITY, NY Building Type: ResidentialSolution: AisleParking Levels: 5Number of Spaces: 32Developer: WangCompletion Date:2017 THE MINT PARKING TOWER SAN FRANCISCO, CA 418 JESSIE STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: TowerParking Levels: 12Number of Spaces: 24Developer: Martin Building CompanyCompletion Date:2018 14 WHITE ST NEW YORK, NY 19 E 16TH NO. 1 NEW YORK, NY Building Type: ResidentialSolution: TowerParking Levels: 9Number of Spaces: 9Developer: NAVA Architecture & DXA StudioCompletion Date:2018 55 AISLE 11701 SANTA MONICA BLVD. LOS ANGELES, CA 11701 SANTA MONICA BLVD., LOS ANGELES, CA Building Type: ResidentialSolution: Underground Aisle SystemParking Levels: 3Number of Spaces: 88Architect:R&ADeveloper: Markwood EnterprisesGeneral Contractor: Pacific West BuildersCompletion Date:2018 865 ROGERS AVE BROOKLYN, NY 865 ROGERS AVE BROOKLYN, NY Building Type: ResidentialSolution: Aisle SystemParking Levels: 2Number of Spaces: 18Developer: 865 Rogers Ave RealtyCompletion Date:2018 2335 BROADWAY, SUITE 100 OAKLAND, CA 94612 WWW.CITYLIFTPARKING.COM 844.388.0424 LOS ANGELES | MIAMI | CHICAGO | BOSTON v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE OF THE GRIFFIN | SWINERTON TEAM PARKING STRUCTURES FOR MEDICAL CENTERS 30 v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 31 GRIFFIN SWINERTON COMMUNITY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PARKING STRUCTURE VENTURA, CA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Adam Thunell 805.652.5005 ARCHITECT IDG Parkitects, Inc. NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS 571 DATE COMPLETED July 2016 DATE AWARDED Nov 2014 CONSTRUCTION COST $9,982,065 SUBCONSULTANTS Construction Manager: Stahl Companies • Provided project management services; established in 2000 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Design‐Build • Self‐Perform Concrete • Medical Campus • Retail Space • Sustainable, Green Features Swinerton provided full design‐build services on the 571‐stall Community Memorial Hospital Parking Structure. The 5 ½ ‐level, 184,000‐square‐foot Community Memorial Hospital Parking Structure serves patients and visitors of the new hospital and existing medical office buildings. A cast‐in‐place concrete long span post tension structure, Swinerton’s Orange County‐based Concrete Group self‐performed all the concrete work on the project. The exterior façade of the structure has a unique combination of architectural treatments, including: pre‐finished metal fins, framed perforated metal mesh, framed glass panels, and a metal panel system on the elevator tower. The parking structure includes roughly 1,400 square feet of retail storefront space on the lower level, creating a community space in front of the new hospital and the new adjacent park. Swinerton performed full design‐build services on the Community Memorial Hospital Parking Structure project, assisting with the entitlement process, design, and permitting. The parking structure will be submitted as part of the new hospital tower project under the LEED Certified level. It features many sustainable elements, including: electric vehicle charging stations, excess bike storage, and infrastructure for possible future photovoltaic rooftop panels. The project has an aggressive schedule, with completion needed before the opening of the new hospital. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 32 GRIFFIN SWINERTON CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL OF ORANGE COUNTY PARKING STRUCTURE & BRIDGE ORANGE, CA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER John Torres 714.532.8553 ARCHITECT IDG Parkitects, Inc. NUMBER OF STALLS 1,662 DATE COMPLETED Aug 2006 DATE AWARDED 2005 CONSTRUCTION COST $22,156,000 SUBCONSULTANTS Architect: IDG Parking Consultants • Founded in 1985; provided parking structure planning, design and architectural services PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Design‐build • Medical Campus This new CHOC parking structure is connected to the main Children’s Hospital of Orange County by a 500‐foot‐long elevated pedestrian bridge crossing a major six‐lane street. Swinerton provided design‐build services for this parking structure that provides 1,662 parking stalls on 9 above grade levels, for the employees of Children’s Hospital Orange County. The parking project also includes direct and secure access to the hospital campus via pedestrian bridge over LaVeta Avenue. The parking project was developed using the Design‐Build delivery method for the client and was completed on time and under budget. The project is a three‐bay, cast‐in‐place long‐span structure. It is designed to weave into the architecture of the medical campus and to reinforce human scale. Specific details to enhance security and circulation add to client satisfaction. The 522,000 square foot parking structure includes a security and service office. The structure has integral colored brick spandrels with burnished brick accents. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 33 GRIFFIN SWINERTON 200 15 ST. JUDE MEDICAL CENTER MOB PARKING STRUCTURE FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Jim Bostic 714.347.7667 ARCHITECT IDG Parkitects, Inc. NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS 389 DATE COMPLETED 2004 DATE AWARDED 2002 CONSTRUCTION COST $ million SUBCONSULTANTS Contech Engineered Solutions • Structure, stormwater solutions management PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Parking Structure • Self‐perform Concrete This parking structure is five stories with half of a level below‐grade and a capacity for 389 vehicles. Phase II of Swinerton’s work on St. Jude’s Medical Office Building included the demolition of an existing one‐story building and the construction of a new five‐level parking structure and two linear accelerator treatment rooms. The parking structure, which includes one traction elevator, is constructed of one half levels below grade, one level on grade and four elevated decks. Totalling at five stories, the parking structure contains 389 stalls to ensure ease of parking access for patients and employees. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 34 GRIFFIN SWINERTON - Precon KAISER SAN RAFAEL PARKING STRUCTURE SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NAME Kaiser Permanente – San Rafael Parking Structure Expansion CLIENT Kaiser Foundation Hospitals DESIGN -BUILDER Swinerton Builders SQUARE FOOTAGE 236,115 sq. ft. total 132,692 sq. ft. new NUMBER OF CARS 716 car structure 421 new spaces DATE COMPLETED September 2012 CONSTRUCTION COST $10,334,828 The design and construction of a four level horizontal expansion to an existing free standing parking garage. A seismic retrofit and code compliance retrofit were also done to the existing garage. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 35 GRIFFIN SWINERTON SUTTER HEALTH ROSEVILLE PARKING STRUCTURE ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER David Long 916.781.1203 ARCHITECT Stantec Consulting NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS 540 DATE COMPLETED April 2005 DATE AWARDED Aug 2004 CONSTRUCTION COST $10.6 million This three level parking structure houses 540 parking stalls. Included in the project was the relocation of the existing hospital helipad to a new helipad on the parking structure and an oversized elevator capable of gurney travel that extends to the helipad level. Completed as a design‐build project, the structure utilizes a hybrid combination of precast and cast‐in‐place concrete elements that provides an open feeling to the structure and is also economical. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 36 GRIFFIN SWINERTON VA PUGET SOUND HEALTHCARE SYSTEM PHASE 1 PARKING STRUCTURE AND MAIN ENTRY DRIVE SEATTLE, WA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Department of Veteran Affairs ARCHITECT Stantec | Design Partnership NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS 1,300 DATE COMPLETED March 2016 DATE AWARDED 2015 CONSTRUCTION COST $44,374,390 SUBCONSULTANTS Joint Venture: Absher Construction • 77 years in the industry; provided self‐ perform work including concrete PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Active Campus • Tight Urban Environment • Self‐Perform Concrete • Phased Construction The Seattle station was constructed between 1941 and 1951 to accommodate many of the returning war Veterans from World War II. Today the VA Puget Sound Health Care System serves the health care needs of more than 80,000 Veterans living in the Pacific Northwest. In order to continue to provide extraordinary care for our Nation’s heroes, the campus is undergoing an unprecedented phase of remodeling and expansion. Many of these changes are long overdue, including the Parking Structure and Main Entry Drive project. The project is a design‐bid‐build, four‐story, 1,300‐stall, cast‐in‐place parking structure with 343,000 square feet above ground and 66,000 square feet underground, plus the main entry drive. Work also includes relocation of major underground utility systems, extensive civil grading and retaining wall work, and construction of an emergency power duct bank. Swinerton formed a joint venture with Absher Construction for this project. The JV self‐performed the concrete scope of work which enabled the team to control and manage the project more tightly and ultimately deliver the parking structure and main entry drive three months ahead of schedule. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 37 GRIFFIN SWINERTON v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 38 GRIFFIN SWINERTON PVHS PARKING STRUCTURE & PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY FORT COLLINS. CO CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Brian Hood ARCHITECT Davis Partnership NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS 540 DATE COMPLETED 2009 DATE AWARDED 2008 CONSTRUCTION COST $11.2 million SUBCONSULTANTS Stresscon, Gerrard, Pierson’s Concrete, Boulder Steel, Douglass‐Colony Group, Air Comfort, Interstates, Trinity Mechanical PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Repeat Client • Pedestrian Bridge • Parking Structure Swinerton constructed a new parking structure and three pedestrian walkways for repeat client PVHS. This project consisted of a four‐story, 711 vehicle parking structure and three bridge sections linking the parking structure to a newly construction medical office building (also built by Swinerton) and the existing Poudre Valley Hospital. Building construction consisted of brick façade precast concrete structure on drilled concrete piers with double tee deck supports, structural steel bridges with decorative/architectural grilles and panels, state‐of‐the‐art securing and monitoring systems, elevators, and flat TPO roofing. Site improvements included demolition of surface parking, hard and soft landscaping, and transplantation and protection of the majority of existing site trees. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE OF THE GRIFFIN | SWINERTON TEAM OTHER PARKING STRUCTURES 39 v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 40 GRIFFIN SWINERTON 8TH & GRAND PARKING STRUCTURE LOS ANGELES, CA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Mike Alarcon 213.784.3007 ARCHITECT IDG Parkitects, Inc. NUMBER OF STALLS 174 DATE COMPLETED 2016 DATE AWARDED 2015 CONSTRUCTION COST $8,200,000 SUBCONSULTANTS Architect: IDG Parking Consultants • Founded in 1985; provided parking structure planning, design and architectural services PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Tight Urban Site • Ground‐Level Retail Space • Self‐Performed Concrete • 4,500 CYs of Concrete Concrete post‐tension parking structure. The new 100,000‐square‐foot parking structure stands four stories high with five levels; Levels 2–5 have 174 total parking stalls and Level 1/ground floor has 19,000 square feet of shell retail space. Set on a complex site, the project sits adjacent to property lines on all sides. Busy streets border two sides, an existing building is on one side, while another active construction site is on the other side. As a result, it took close coordination with all parties to ensure no disruption to others. The parking structure has EV stations on every level. Primarily open, it features decorative screening that provides plenty of natural light. For sustainability, the structure has a lighting control system equipped with daylight sensors. As it gets darker outside, the lighting sensors will gradually increase lighting throughout the evening. There is also motion sensors that recognize vehicles as they pull in, lighting the pathway only when necessary. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 41 GRIFFIN SWINERTON SAN DIEGO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT TERMINAL 2 PARKING PLAZA SAN DIEGO, CA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Brian Lahr / Ajay Babla 619.400.2400 ARCHITECT Watry Design and Gensler NUMBER OF STALLS 2,909 DATE COMPLETED In progress DATE AWARDED Sep 2015 CONSTRUCTION COST $98 Million SUBCONSULTANTS Architect: Gensler • Provided parking and structural design services; founded in 1965 Design and Structural: Watry Design • Provided parking and structural design services; founded in 1975 The new Terminal 2 Parking Plaza will serve as one of the gateways to the airport becoming the front door from Harbor Drive, and provide a high‐end user experience for a lot of travelers. The project is customized to reflect the widely appreciated San Diegan culture, and helps to create a unique travel experience for visitors. A Collaborative Design‐Build process is under way with the full Design‐Build Team including, Watry Design, Gensler, and Spurlock, co‐located at the airport with the Airport Authority under the leadership of Swinerton’s Design‐Build Parking Structure Experts. The team participates in regular bi‐weekly meetings, and maintains the Design Decision Logs for transparency, accuracy, and communication with the Owner. The project site is over 9 acres in size, and the Parking Plaza will be over 920,000 sf in total parking structure area, containing over 2,909 parking spaces across three levels. The Parking Plaza project includes off‐site improvements consisting of parking lot re‐configurations, utility relocations connection into the existing campus, and a Parking Guidance System that will direct incoming patrons to an open space and help them find their car upon return. The project has gone through extensive environmental review through the California Coastal Commission and the Design‐Build team is mitigating the environmental concerns through the design. To validate the extensive programming document, the team met with each stakeholder on a regular basis over the course of three months. By examining multiple foundation solutions, the Design Build team was able to save over $2 million in construction costs. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 42 GRIFFIN SWINERTON UCSD OSLER PARKING STRUCTURE & VISITOR’S CENTER LA JOLLA, CA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Mark Rowland 858.822.0725 ARCHITECT Watry Design Inc. & Gensler NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS 1,303 DATE COMPLETED In Progress DATE AWARDED May 2016 CONSTRUCTION COST $32,165,000 SUBCONSULTANTS Design and Structural: Watry Design • Provided parking and structural design services; founded in 1975 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Parking Structure • Self‐performed Concrete • Tight Site on Occupied Campus • Goals of the project include Parksmart Silver equivalent sustainable best prac‐ tices. UCSD envisioned a new gateway at the entrance to the campus, featuring a parking structure and a reimagined visitor’s center. However, they were looking for a design that went far beyond the number of stalls, structural efficiency and gross square footage associated with a parking structure to enrich the campus experience. The Swinerton/Watry Design/Gensler team’s design build solution was selected to deliver the University’s vision. The design not only enhances the route to the School of Medicine, but also provides a platform to enhance connectivity to the surrounding community, buildings and campus. Lobby “portals” announce visitor’s arrival into the structure and the campus through glass‐backed elevator towers and projecting canopies while a new pedestrian plaza provides a welcoming porch. A reimagined Visitor Center provides an all‐inclusive transportation hub and information center. The architectural design establishes connections to the campus and enhance the visitors experience. The Western and Southern facades dissolve the bulk of the building into the Eucalyptus grove along Gilman Drive through the use of a multilayered facade system that captures and transforms the shadows of the adjacent trees onto a modulated, curving concrete mass. Over that, a panel system comprised of angled, perforated metal planks provides an additional level of abstraction, physically screening the structure and casting varied shadows onto the concrete. The Northern and Eastern faces of the building present a refined and more formal and orderly character to respond to the discrete characteristics of the School of Medicine. Generous light wells at the perimeter and center of the structure emulate the canyon landscape south of the site and bring light and air into the center of the building. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 43 GRIFFIN SWINERTON THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO MEMORIAL PARKING GARAGE SACRAMENTO, CA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Kirk Thompson 916.264.8431 ARCHITECT Gordon H. Chang & Partners, Inc NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS 1,085 DATE COMPLETED 2013 DATE AWARDED 2011 CONSTRUCTION COST $21 million SUBCONSULTANTS Architect: Harbison‐Mahony‐Higgins Builders, Inc., a wholly‐owned subsidiary of Swinerton. • Provided parking structure planning, design and architectural services PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Parking Structure • Pre‐cast Panels and Brick Veneer This 10‐story, 1,085‐stall parking garage includes 20,000 square feet of restaurant and office/retail space on the ground floor. The design includes long‐span post‐tension, a cast‐in‐place structure with architectural precast panels and brick veneer. The stair towers at each end of the building are accentuated with buttressed forms. A rotunda at the corner indicates the pedestrian access and acts as a transition from the large, vertical scale of the parking garage to the residential scale of the adjacent neighborhood and its nearby performing arts center. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 44 GRIFFIN SWINERTON JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT TERMINAL C PARKING STRUCTURE SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Larry Serafini 949.252.5171 ARCHITECT Walker Parking Consultants NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS 2,018 DATE COMPLETED Dec 2010 DATE AWARDED 2008 CONSTRUCTION COST $36.5 million SUBCONSULTANTS Design Architect: ROSSETTI • Delivered architectural design expertise; 48 years of experience Structural Engineer: Integrated Design Services (IDS) • Over 50 years of experience; provided design of terminal structure, mechanical and electrical systems, seismic upgrades, renovation, and value engineering services MEP Engineer: Syska Hennessy Group • Founded in 1928; Syska provided full‐ service MEP services. Landscape Architect: Lynn Capouya Landscape Architects • Provided landscape architecture expertise; 38 years in the industry PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Tight site on an occupied campus • Completed in virtual design & • construction software • Self performed concrete • 4 elevator shafts • Pedestrian bridge New parking structure to accomodate 2,000 cars with four passenger elevators. This parking structure will be the parking structure to accomodate the additional traffic from the new terminal. It is completely clad in Precast Concrete panels. This new struc‐ture will be one of the first parking structures built in California utilizing a Buckling Restrained Brace (BRB) structural system. The new Parking Structure C is a post‐tensioned concrete structure housing 2,018 parking spaces and is located at the south end of the John Wayne Airport in the heart of Orange County, California. The 725,000‐square‐ foot structure is clad in precast concrete panels, matching the other parking structures at the airport and uses a diagonal parking, double helix circulation layout. A bridge forms the pedestrian link between the parking structure and Terminal C. Four passenger elevators in CMU elevator shafts adjacent to the terminal link and accommodate vertical pedestrian circulation. The main vehicular entrance to the parking structure connects to an elevated roadway via a concrete bridge; a second entrance ties into a lower road. Express ramping is utilized for internal vehicular vertical circulation. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 45 GRIFFIN SWINERTON JPL WEST ARROYO PARKING STRUCTURE PASADENA, CA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Randy Wager 818.354.7259 ARCHITECT IDG Parkitects NUMBER OF STALLS 1,436 DATE COMPLETED 2014 DATE AWARDED 2012 CONSTRUCTION COST $18,911,000 SUBCONSULTANTS Structural Engineer: Jessen‐Wright • Founded in 1996; provided structural design expertise Civil Engineer: Land Design Consultants • Over 100 years of experience; provided land planning, civil engineering, and surveying expertise Traffic Consultants: LSA Associates • 46 years of experience; provided land use, transportation and mobility consulting PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • New Construction • Design‐Build • Self‐Perform Concrete The project consists of a 5‐story, cast‐in‐place and post‐tensioned concrete parking structure, both on and above grade. The 1,436‐stall structure provided JPL with a net 1,211 new parking stalls. The Class A structure has a Level of Service (LOS) A due to convenient vehicular access and exit design, parking geometrics that include wide drive aisles and all standard stalls, increased floor to floor heights for accessibility access throughout, ramps that slope to a maximum of 5%, way finding provided with signage for pedestrian travel and vehicular flow, pedestrian stair and elevator nodes located at the appropriate locations for user convenience and reduced travel distance, natural light on all sides as well as accessible stalls provided at the ground level and directly adjacent to elevator nodes on other levels. Scope also included significant ancillary roadway work, including widening of approximately 1,000 feet of private road. Improvements to surrounding hardscape were made as well as the demolition of existing buildings and the City of Pasadena‐owned East Arroyo parking lot. To reduce the energy consumption of the structure, the design incorporated time clock and photocell overrides for the lighting systems to reduce energy consumption by using natural light. The design also provided for future Photovoltaic roof system pre‐designed for net zero operation costs. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 46 GRIFFIN SWINERTON OLD TOWN NEWHALL PARKING STRUCTURE SANTA CLARITA, CA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Hoon Hahn 661.259.2489 ARCHITECT Watry Design, Inc. NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS 376 DATE COMPLETED In progress DATE AWARDED July 2016 SQUARE FOOTAGE 152,000 CONSTRUCTION COST $14,184,856 SUBCONSULTANTS Design and Structural: Watry Design • Provided parking and structural design services; founded in 1975 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Design‐Build • Public Property • Historic Neighborhood The parking structure is part of a larger development consisting of both a mixed‐use residential project and a new theatre as a part of the district’s revitalization plan. Swinertons is self‐performing all of the structural concrete on the new seven‐ level parking structure, with one level below‐grade and six levels above‐grade. Totaling roughly 152,000 square feet, the structure will hold 376 vehicles. It will feature extensive architecture on the exterior, which will consist of precast stone bases, storefront mullions, fabric and metal awnings, steel‐stud framed elements with integral‐colored plaster, architectural foam cornices, and decorative fin elements. This will allow it to seamlessly blend into the Old Town Newhall neighborhood and the adjacent mixed‐use developments, creating an upscale impression on residents and guests. The structure will also feature a gated entry for resident’s convenience and safety. Additionally, the structure is being designed with energy efficiency standards in mind that will equate to a LEED Silver Certification level. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 47 GRIFFIN SWINERTON VIEJAS HOTEL AND PARKING STRUCTURE ALPINE, CALIFORNIA CLIENT Viejas Enterprises ARCHITECT Hotel ‐ JCJ Architecture Parking ‐ Stricker Cato Murphy Architects SQUARE FOOTAGE Hotel ‐ 96,436 Parking Structure ‐ 264,000 CONSTRUCTION COST $56,600,000 DATE COMPLETED 2013 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Design‐Build • Self‐Perform Concrete • Utility Relocations • Parking Structure • Pedestrian Bridges REFERENCE Jim Wild Viejas Enterprises 619.312.5810 jwild@viejas.com Swinerton provided design‐build construction services for this 150‐key, five‐ story, three‐star finish hotel casino, and associated parking structure. This project construction included the hotel, lobby area, swimming pool and spa amenities, an expansion into the buffet seating area to coordinate with a new casino entry/porte cochere, site utility relocations, 4‐story parking structure, 2‐pedestrian bridges, and 2 elevator towers. The parking structure accommodates 850 cars with two pedestrian bridges connecting to the hotel and casino. The bridges consist of a full conditioned steel truss structure 13’ wide with carpeting and stone flooring. The two elevator towers housing three elevators consisted of a mix of stucco and stone veneer skin where the elevators fronts are stainless steel. Specific challenges included a fast‐tracked schedule and budget constraints, as well as work being completed in an operating casino. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 48 GRIFFIN SWINERTON CACHE CREEK CASINO RESORT, NORTH PARKING BROOKS, CALIFORNIA CLIENT Rumsey Band of Wintun Indians ARCHITECT HNA/Pacific SQUARE FOOTAGE 647,335 CONSTRUCTION COST $37,000,000 DATE COMPLETED 2010 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Design‐Build • Parking Structure This four‐story, 2,000‐car parking garage uses a structural system of precast moment frame columns with poured‐in‐place, post‐tensioned slabs and beams. The height for each level is designed to accommodate handicapped vans. Separate levels for valet parking and gated parking sections accommodate the casino’s special clients. Designed to complement the adjoining casino, the parking structure features pedestrian bridges at each level which connect to the casino’s elevator tower. Patrons are then delivered directly onto the casino floor, providing them a positive entry experience. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 49 GRIFFIN SWINERTON IRVINE METROLINK TRANSPORTATION PARKING STRUCTURE IRVINE, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Manuel Gomez, PE, Public Works Director (949) 724‐7509 SQUARE FOOTAGE 490,000 STALLS 1,500 CONSTRUCTION COST $26,800,000 The Irvine Transportation Center Parking Structure, located in the Spectrum area of Irvine, is a three‐story structure providing 1,500 parking spaces on four levels encompassing 490,000 square feet. The $26.8 million project was funded by the OCTA, Caltrans, and the Federal Transit Administration. It is currently served by Amtrak and Metrolink passenger rail services, as well as being a hub for express, local and rail‐feeder bus services operated by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). The parking facility brought much needed relief to South Orange County, where 675,000 passengers come and go each year ‐ making it the busiest of any station in the county. Griffin Structures served as Construction Manager for this project which was designed, built within budget, and completed five weeks ahead of schedule. The project received an award from the American Public Works Association as well as a CalTrans Excellence in Transportation award. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 50 GRIFFIN SWINERTON ORANGE METROLINK TRANSPORTATION CENTER & PARKING STRUCTURE ORANGE, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Ms. Lora Cross, Project Manager (714) 560‐5788 STALLS 375 Griffin Structures has been selected as Project Manager to provide preconstruction and construction management services for the new Orange Transportation Center and Parking Structure. The project consists of two, multi‐level parking structures of approximately 900 combined spaces and Transit Oriented Development in the heart of the City’s historic Old Town. The facility is anticipated to include mixed‐use development consisting of both retail and residential uses. The structure arises from the 2005 OCTA authorization of Metrolink system expansion, including commuter rail service at the Orange Transportation Center (OTC). Current capacity is 375 stalls and the projected requirement is 900 stalls. This future demand requires an upgrade to a multi‐level parking structure, including significant below‐grade construction. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 51 GRIFFIN SWINERTON CITY OF TUSTIN / OCTA TUSTIN METROLINK PARKING STRUCTURE TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Mr. Doug Stack, Public Works Director (714) 573‐3150 SQUARE FEET 247,600 STALLS 825 Griffin Structures, Inc. provided construction management for the 247,600‐square‐ foot, 825 stall, five‐level Metrolink Parking Structure that features a unique, segregated drive aisle, which expedites entering and exiting the site, as well as a distinct “kiss & ride” area; ample bus dock section; and designated pedestrian paths. The on‐grade parking on the backside of the structure provides valuable parking stalls while at the same time preventing the necessity and cost of relocating utilities. Additionally, on‐grade parking is located next to the track, which doubles as a fire lane. To provide way finding for transit riders accessing the station from Jamboree Road, the site includes a second tower, which also provides a grounding sense of symmetry. Embracing sustainability, the design incorporates LED lighting, drought resistant landscaping and a solar option that provides enough energy to power the structure’s lighting and elevators. Each of these measures also substantially reduces maintenance costs. The design team also evaluated cost offsetting measures, such as outdoor advertising space, leasing coffee and snack kiosks and providing a location for a cell phone tower. This project is also the recipient of the 2011 American Concrete Institute Award. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 52 GRIFFIN SWINERTON BREA SUPERBLOCK 1 PARKING STRUCTURE IRVINE, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Steve Kooyman, City Engineer (714) 990‐7657 STALLS 476 CONSTRUCTION COST $8,900,000 Currently under construction at the corner of Birch Street and South Orange Avenue, the new, cast‐in‐place concrete, post‐tension structure will feature 476 stalls on three and a half levels. The east façade of the parking structure is designed to create a reduced presence towards the senior housing along South Orange Avenue. The ground level will house various support areas such as bicycle parking, trash compactor, wash area, storage room, an office, electrical room, and future photovoltaic room. Additional components of the project include LED lighting, elevators, signage, landscaping, 15 electrical vehicle parking stalls on the fourth level, and a speed ramp. The $8.9 million structure is scheduled to open in January 2018 to serve Brea’s downtown entertainment district. Griffin Structures is providing construction management services for this new design‐build parking structure. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 53 GRIFFIN SWINERTON FULLERTON TRANSPORTATION CENTER PARKING STRUCTURE FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Mr. Donald Hoppe, PE, Director of Engineering (714) 738‐6864 STALLS 813 Griffin Structures served as the Construction Manager for the expansion of the Fullerton Transportation Center Parking Facility project. The multi‐level, 813‐stall facility adds much needed capacity to the heavily used Metrolink/Amtrak station. The project, located at the southwest corner of Harbor Boulevard and Santa Fe Avenue addresses the a parking shortage and provides additional spaces to serve the growing parking demand at Fullerton Station. The project also includes a video surveillance system; ticket kiosks; car‐counting systems; bio‐filtration and photo voltaic systems; installation of a new traffic signal at the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Santa Fe Avenue and pedestrian crosswalk on Harbor Boulevard; undergrounding of existing overhead utilities along the project’s frontage on Santa Fe; and on‐ and off‐site grading, landscaping, signage, lighting, and street improvements. The project was honored with an award from the Southern California Chapter of the American Public Works Association. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 54 GRIFFIN SWINERTON WESTMINSTER POLICE DEPARTMENT PARKING STRUCTURE WESTMINSTER, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Chief Kevin Baker, Westminster Police Department (714) 548‐3200 STALLS 632 Griffin Structures served as Program and Construction Manager for the Westminster Police Department Parking Structure project. The new 590 stall Parking Structure facility provides parking to the Westminster Police Department and the City for community parking. Additionally, this parking structure serves as support for a 410KW photo‐voltaic (PV) system installed on it’s top level, which provides enough power to support the parking structure and nearly all of the Police Department Headquarters electric needs. This installation helped the Police Department Headquarters reduce its carbon footprint and achieve a LEED Platinum rating. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 55 GRIFFIN SWINERTON WATSONVILLE CIVIC CENTER PARKING STRUCTURE WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Carlos Palacios, former City Manager of Watsonville, Deputy County Administrator, Santa Cruz County (831) 454‐3402 STALLS 500 The Watsonville Civic Plaza Parking Structure is a 500 stall parking facility with access from various corresponding levels of the adjacent City Courthouse, Library, and City Hall building. The entire $48 million complex is being delivered by Griffin Structures as an Integrated Project Delivery. The project was financed by a combination of EDA grants, City general funds, County Court capital allocation of fee revenue, and Redevelopment Bonds. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 56 GRIFFIN SWINERTON LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY / SENIOR CENTR & SUBTERRANEAN PARKING LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Mr. Ken Frank, former City Manager (949) 497‐1815 STALLS 71 CONSTRUCTION COST $12,000,000 including community center This $12 million project began with detailed programming and planning for the Laguna Beach Senior Center under contract to the Laguna Beach Seniors, Inc., a private not‐for‐profit corporation. The project evolved into turn‐key program management for the Laguna Beach Senior Center, the City of Laguna Beach Community Center, and an associated underground common parking garage. The entire project sits above a 71‐space garage, which includes handicap spaces as well as room for small buses to enter and discharge passengers next to a wheelchair‐ accessible elevator. This lower lobby area also can be reached via a walkway from the street. This project is the recipient of a Gold Nugget Award of Merit and an APWA Project of the Year award. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 57 GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN TOWERS SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Name Phone Number STALLS 1,800 This project is a Class `A’ office property comprised of twin 12‐story towers connected by a three‐story glass atrium pavilion located near the intersection of the 405 and 55 freeways with direct proximity to John Wayne Airport. The project also includes ancillary retail space and an 1,800 space six‐level parking structure. Total square footage is approximately 550,000 square feet v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 58 GRIFFIN SWINERTON CITY OF WEST HOLLYWOOD KINGS ROAD PARKING STRUCTURE WEST HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA CLIENT PROJECT MANAGER Name Phone Number STALLS 250 This mixed‐use project consists of a 250‐space above‐grade parking structure with 5,000 g.s.f. ground floor retail fronting on Santa Monica Boulevard in the City of West Hollywood. This project was subject of considerable public scrutiny. In addition to managing the planning, design, budget, and schedule, Griffin Structures, Inc., instituted a stakeholders participatory program with the Community at Large to ensure project acceptance. The parking structure was conventionally and publicly bid, and the low awarded bid was within two percent (2%) of Griffin Structure’s project budget estimate. v12-B GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON GRIFFIN SWINERTON 59 GRIFFIN SWINERTON RELEVANT PARKING PROJECTS - SMITH GROUP CACHE CREEK CASINO RESORT, NORTH PARKING BROOKS, CALIFORNIA CLIENT Rumsey Band of Wintun Indians ARCHITECT HNA/Pacific SQUARE FOOTAGE 647,335 CONSTRUCTION COST $37,000,000 DATE COMPLETED 2010 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS • Design‐Build • Parking Structure This four‐story, 2,000‐car parking garage uses a structural system of precast moment frame columns with poured‐in‐place, post‐tensioned slabs and beams. The height for each level is designed to accommodate handicapped vans. Separate levels for valet parking and gated parking sections accommodate the casino’s special clients. Designed to complement the adjoining casino, the parking structure features pedestrian bridges at each level which connect to the casino’s elevator tower. Patrons are then delivered directly onto the casino floor, providing them a positive entry experience. CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR August 27, 2018 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California City of Palo Alto Sales Tax Digest Summary Fourth Quarter Sales (October - December 2017) The following files are attached for this informational report for which no action is required. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Sales Tax Highlights (PDF) Attachment B: MuniServices Sales Tax Digest Summary (PDF) Attachment C: Economic Categories and Segments (PDF) Attachment D: MuniServices Economic News and Trends (PDF) Department Head: Harriet Richardson, City Auditor Page 2 Informational Report to the City Council BACKGROUND Sales and use tax represents $31.5 million, or 15 percent, of projected General Fund revenue in the City’s adopted operating budget for fiscal year 2018. This revenue includes sales and use tax for the City of Palo Alto and pool allocations from the state and Santa Clara County.1 We contract with MuniServices LLC (MuniServices) for sales and use tax recovery services and informational reports. We use the recovery services and informational reports to help identify misallocation of tax revenue owed to the City, and to follow up with the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (formerly the State Board of Equalization) to ensure that the City receives identified revenues. We include sales and use tax recovery information in our quarterly reports to the Policy and Services Committee. The California Revenue and Taxation Code, Section 7056, requires that sales and use tax data remain confidential. Therefore, the City may not disclose amounts of tax paid, fluctuations in tax amounts, or any other information that would disclose the operations of a business. This report, including the attached Sales Tax Digest Summary, includes certain modifications and omissions to maintain the required confidentiality of taxpayer information. MuniServices prepares the Sales Tax Digest Summary and Economic & News Trends report (Attachments B and D), which we share with the Administrative Services Department (ASD) for use in revenue forecasting and budgeting. The Economic Categories and Segments are shown in Attachment C. Sales tax information is reported on a calendar‐year basis. DISCUSSION The Sales Tax Digest Summary covers fourth quarter sales for calendar year 2017, which are reported as part of the City’s fiscal year 2018 revenue. In May 2018, ASD should receive information from the state on aggregate sales and use tax receipts for the first quarter of 2018. Following are some highlights of the sales and use tax information: Palo Alto’s overall sales and use tax revenue (cash receipts) for the fourth quarter of 2017 increased by $430,000, or 5.4 percent, including pool allocations, compared to the fourth quarter of 2016. For all Santa Clara County jurisdictions, sales and use tax revenue for the fourth quarter of 2017 increased by $7.0 million, or 6.2 percent, compared to the fourth quarter of 2016. Statewide, most regions in California experienced an increase in sales and use tax revenue for the year ending in December 2017, with a one‐year statewide increase of 3.6 percent. Palo Alto’s sales and use tax revenue totaled $30.0 million for the year ending in December 2017, an increase of 5.4 percent from $28.4 million during the prior one‐year period. 1 See definitions of state and county pools on page 3. Office of the City Auditor Sales Tax Highlights – Fourth Quarter Sales (October – December 2017) Attachment A Office of the City Auditor | Sales Tax Highlights 2 Excluding pool allocations and adjusting for prior‐period and late payments, Palo Alto’s sales and use tax revenue for the fourth quarter of 2017 increased by 4.1 percent compared to the fourth quarter of 2016. The annual increase was 1.3 percent compared to the prior year. Economic Influences on Sales and Use Tax The Economic News & Trends report discusses economic influences, including national and state economic trends, auto, retail, e‐commerce, restaurant and grocery trends, that may affect the City’s sales and use tax revenue. Preliminary estimates from the California Employment Development Department show that the March 2018 unemployment rate, which is not seasonally adjusted, was 2.6 percent in Santa Clara County and 2.2 percent in Palo Alto. Economic Category Analysis MuniServices’ analysis of economic categories for the year ending December 2017 shows: Economic category Percent of Palo Alto’s sales and use tax revenue Percent Increase (Decrease) compared to prior year General retail 32.8% (6.6%) Food products 19.1% 1.0% Business‐to‐business 22.5% 18.4% Construction 2.2% (33.5%) Miscellaneous 23.4% 4.5% The following chart shows sales and use tax revenue by geographic area: Palo Alto’s Sales and Use Tax Revenue by Geographic Area For the Year Ending December 2017 (Amounts include tax estimates and exclude county pool allocations) Stanford Shopping Center $5.6 million, 23% Stanford Research Park $3.9 million, 16% Downtown/University Avenue $3.6 million, 15% California Ave/Park Blvd/Lambert Ave $1.4 million, 6% Town & Country $0.6 million, 3% All Other Areas $9.5 million, 38% Attachment A Office of the City Auditor | Sales Tax Highlights 3 DEFINITIONS In California, either sales tax or use tax may apply to a transaction, but not both. The sales and use tax rate in Palo Alto was 9.0 percent during the fourth quarter of 2017. Sales tax – imposed on all California retailers; applies to all retail sales of merchandise (tangible personal property) in the state. Use tax – generally imposed on consumers of merchandise (tangible personal property) that is used, consumed, or stored in this state; purchases from out‐of‐state retailers when the retailer is not registered to collect California tax or does not collect California tax for some other reason; and leases of merchandise (tangible personal property). Countywide/statewide pools – mechanisms used to allocate local tax that cannot be identified with a specific place of sale or use in California. Local tax reported to the pool is distributed to the local jurisdiction each calendar quarter using a formula that relates to the direct allocation of local tax to each jurisdiction for a given period. Examples of taxpayers who report use tax allocated through the countywide pool include: Construction contractors who consume materials used when improving real property and whose job site is regarded as the place of business California or out‐of‐state sellers who ship goods directly to consumers in the county from inventory located outside the state Auctioneers, catering trucks, itinerant vendors, and vending machine operators and other permit holders who operate in more than one local jurisdiction but are unable to readily identify the particular jurisdiction where the taxable transaction takes place Respectfully submitted, Harriet Richardson City Auditor Sources: MuniServices California Department of Tax and Fee Administration California Employment Development Department City of Palo Alto Fiscal Year 2018 Adopted Operating Budget Audit staff: Lisa Wehara Attachment A City of Palo Alto Sales Tax Digest Summary Collections through March 2018 Sales through December 2017 (2017Q4) www.MuniServices.com (800)800-8181 Page 1 California Overview The percent change in cash receipts from the prior year was 3.6% statewide, 3.9% in Northern California and 3.5% in Southern California. The period’s cash receipts include tax from business activity during the period, payments for prior periods and other cash adjustments. When we adjust for non-period related payments, we determine the overall business activity increased for the year ended 4th Quarter 2017 by 3.1% statewide, 3.0% in Southern California and 2.9% in Northern California. City of Palo Alto For the year ended 4th Quarter 2017, sales tax cash receipts for the City increased by 5.4% from the prior year. On a quarterly basis, sales tax revenues increased by 5.4% from 4th Quarter 2016 to 4th Quarter 2017. The period’s cash receipts include tax from business activity during the period, payments for prior periods and other cash adjustments. Excluding state and county pools and adjusting for anomalies (payments for prior periods) and late payments, local sales tax increased by 1.3% for the year ended 4th Quarter 2017 from the prior year. On a quarterly basis, sales tax activity increased by 4.1% in 4th Quarter 2017 compared to 4th Quarter 2016. Regional Overview This seven-region comparison includes estimated payments and excludes net pools and adjustments. % of Total / % Change City of Palo Alto California Statewide S.F. Bay Area Sacramento Valley Central Valley South Coast Inland Empire North Coast Central Coast General Retail 32.8 / -6.6 27.7 / 1.1 25.7 / -0.9 26.8 / 1.4 30.8 / 4.8 28.4 / 0.5 26.8 / 3.5 27.5 / -1.3 29.8 / -7.4 Food Products 19.1 / 1.0 21.1 / 3.6 22.4 / 2.7 17.5 / 5.2 16.5 / 4.1 22.6 / 3.7 17.6 / 4.3 18.4 / 1.4 30.9 / -5.7 Construction 2.2 / -33.5 9.7 / 4.8 9.9 / 5.0 12.5 / 8.0 12.0 / 5.8 8.5 / 5.6 10.6 / 0.2 14.3 / 8.3 8.6 / -12.9 Business to Business 22.5 / 18.4 16.5 / 3.4 19.5 / 0.8 13.7 / 7.0 13.3 / 14.6 16.2 / 2.5 16.3 / 5.0 8.1 / 2.1 6.0 / -6.3 Miscellaneous/Other 23.4 / 4.5 25.1 / 5.3 22.6 / 6.4 29.5 / 8.9 27.3 / 6.9 24.3 / 3.3 28.6 / 5.1 31.7 / 6.5 24.7 / 8.4 Total 100.0 / 1.3 100.0 / 3.1 100.0 / 2.2 100.0 / 4.8 100.0 / 6.3 100.0 / 2.5 100.0 / 4.0 100.0 / 3.1 100.0 / -3.7 City of Palo Alto State Wide S.F. Bay Area Sacramento Valley Central Valley South Coast Inland Empire North Coast Central Coast Largest Segment Restaurants Restaurants Restaurants Restaurants Department Stores Department Stores Restaurants Auto Sales - New Restaurants % of Total / % Change 16.8 / 0.6 15.1 / 4.0 16.0 / 2.6 16.7 / 4.4 13.0 / 3.1 16.4 / 55.9 11.6 / 4.4 12.2 / 5.3 21.9 / -6.7 2nd Largest Segment Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Service Stations Auto Sales - New Service Stations Auto Sales - New % of Total / % Change 15.9 / 3.2 11.2 / 2.7 11.2 / 5.6 11.1 / 0.6 10.8 / 5.9 11.8 / 28.5 10.9 / 2.1 11.1 / 13.6 11.7 / 20.9 3rd Largest Segment Leasing Department Stores Department Stores Department Stores Restaurants Restaurants Department Stores Restaurants Misc. Retail % of Total / % Change 9.7 / 53.3 9.2 / 2.3 7.5 / 1.6 8.9 / 1.6 10.8 / 4.2 9.8 / 47.4 10.1 / 3.0 10.8 / 2.1 10.1 / -6.2 *** Not specified to maintain confidentiality of tax information CITY OF PALO ALTO ECONOMIC CATEGORY ANALYSIS FOR YEAR ENDED 4th QUARTER 2017 ECONOMIC SEGMENT ANALYSIS FOR YEAR ENDED 4th QUARTER 2017 BENCHMARK YEAR 2017Q4 COMPARED TO BENCHMARK YEAR 2016Q4 Attachment B City of Palo Alto www.MuniServices.com (800)800-8181 Page 2 Gross Historical Sales Tax Performance by Benchmark Year and Quarter (Before Adjustments) $- $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 BENCHMARK YEAR QUARTERLY Net Cash Receipts for Benchmark Year 4th Quarter 2017: $29,978,035 *Benchmark year (BMY) is the sum of the current and 3 previous quarters (2017Q4 BMY is sum of 2017 Q4, Q3, Q2, Q1) Restaurants 14% Leasing 8% Department Stores 7% Miscellaneous Retail 6% Electronic Equipment 5% Food Markets 1% Recreation Products 1% All Other 40% Net Pools & Adjustments 18% Attachment B City of Palo Alto www.MuniServices.com (800)800-8181 Page 3 TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies Palo Alto’s Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents the year ended 4th Quarter 2017. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 52.6% of Palo Alto’s total sales and use tax revenue. Anderson Honda Lucile S.Packard Chldrn Hospit Tesla Lease Trust Apple Stores Macy's Department Store Tesla Motors Audi Palo Alto Magnussen's Toyota Tiffany & Company Bloomingdale's Neiman Marcus Department Store Urban Outfitters Bon Appetit Management Co.Nordstrom Department Store Usb Leasing Fry's Electronics Shell Service Stations Varian Medical Systems Hewlett-Packard Space Systems Loral Volvo Cars Palo Alto Houzz Shop Stanford University Hospital Wilkes Bashford Integrated Archive Systems Sales Tax from Largest Non-Confidential Economic Segments $- $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 $4,000,000 $4,500,000 Restaurants Leasing Department Stores Miscellaneous Retail Electronic Equipment Food Markets Recreation Products Benchmark Year 2017Q4 Benchmark Year 2016Q4 Attachment B City of Palo Alto www.MuniServices.com (800)800-8181 Page 4 Historical Analysis by Calendar Quarter Economic Category % 2017Q4 2017Q3 2017Q2 2017Q1 2016Q4 2016Q3 2016Q2 2016Q1 2015Q4 2015Q3 2015Q2 General Retail 31.3% 2,635,136 1,860,347 1,952,490 1,684,023 2,784,731 1,983,231 2,141,794 1,673,846 2,526,551 1,935,178 2,009,743 Miscellaneous/Other 22.3% 1,881,732 1,602,213 1,301,138 1,392,756 1,621,044 1,727,134 1,617,307 1,413,133 1,491,158 1,609,541 1,564,157 Food Products 14.3% 1,206,578 1,184,645 1,189,257 1,192,662 1,235,801 1,213,382 1,194,369 1,126,103 1,166,195 1,146,174 1,167,014 Business To Business 18.6% 1,569,619 1,448,336 1,284,056 1,240,962 1,004,883 1,027,730 1,140,526 974,162 1,428,210 888,609 833,370 Net Pools & Adjustments 13.5% 1,136,075 1,374,372 1,210,511 1,631,125 1,351,709 831,377 1,313,745 1,072,794 1,226,261 1,060,979 1,039,250 Total 100.0% 8,429,140 7,469,913 6,937,452 7,141,528 7,998,168 6,782,854 7,407,741 6,260,038 7,838,375 6,640,481 6,613,534 Economic Segments % 2017Q4 2017Q3 2017Q2 2017Q1 2016Q4 2016Q3 2016Q2 2016Q1 2015Q4 2015Q3 2015Q2 Miscellaneous/Other 45.0% 3,791,527 3,233,434 2,986,873 2,910,133 2,939,228 3,027,081 2,973,047 2,607,097 3,237,983 2,720,241 2,549,852 Restaurants 12.5% 1,054,073 1,049,565 1,058,606 1,043,747 1,071,053 1,068,101 1,068,502 1,005,688 1,029,733 1,019,505 1,045,011 Miscellaneous Retail 8.3% 701,369 419,279 452,135 435,757 1,002,389 581,831 681,345 469,360 714,151 478,994 479,298 Department Stores 7.6% 642,666 458,066 510,561 392,565 641,541 491,433 546,629 435,470 714,831 553,325 595,374 Apparel Stores 7.0% 585,892 440,005 449,402 372,033 553,250 398,170 444,383 337,880 519,318 397,534 428,100 Service Stations 1.8% 148,906 147,499 159,371 119,552 130,396 138,155 144,735 123,004 140,758 173,082 181,582 Food Markets 1.5% 128,671 117,256 112,566 131,676 145,179 126,755 109,108 104,676 116,778 113,092 106,818 Business Services 1.9% 157,861 173,439 75,722 43,548 102,095 47,066 65,510 51,647 76,156 51,885 120,003 Recreation Products 1.0% 82,100 56,998 76,514 61,392 61,328 72,885 60,737 52,422 62,406 71,844 68,246 Net Pools & Adjustments 13.5% 1,136,075 1,374,372 1,055,702 1,631,125 1,351,709 831,377 1,313,745 1,072,794 1,226,261 1,060,979 1,039,250 Total 100.0% 8,429,140 7,469,913 6,937,452 7,141,528 7,998,168 6,782,854 7,407,741 6,260,038 7,838,375 6,640,481 6,613,534 *Net Pools & Adjustments reconcile economic performance to periods’ net cash receipts. The historical amounts by calendar quarter: (1) include any prior period adjustments and payments in the appropriate category/segment and (2) exclude businesses no longer active in the current period. Attachment B City of Palo Alto www.MuniServices.com (800)800-8181 Page 5 Quarterly Analysis by Economic Category, Total and Segments: Change from 2016Q4 to 2017Q4 Ge n e r a l R e t a i l Foo d P r o d u c t s Con s t r u c t i o n Bu s i n e s s t o Bu s i n e s s Mi s c / O t h e r 201 7 / 4 T o t a l 201 6 / 4 T o t a l % C h g Lar g e s t G a i n Sec o n d L a r g e s t Ga i n Lar g e s t D e c l i n e Sec o n d L a r g e s t De c l i n e Campbell -3.7% 3.8% 5.7% -18.8% -24.0% 2,470,029 2,563,410 -3.6%Restaurants Business Services Office Equipment Furniture/Appliance Cupertino 3.4% 10.1% -60.6% 25.4% -14.2% 9,437,048 7,942,209 18.8%Business Services Food Processing Eqp Office Equipment Bldg.Matls-Whsle Gilroy -2.4% 4.5% 4.0% 23.2% -16.6% 4,302,514 4,021,877 7.0%Auto Sales - New Service Stations Apparel Stores Department Stores Los Altos -3.2% 2.0% 22.3% 40.0% -0.8% 655,243 642,319 2.0%Restaurants Office Equipment Food Processing Eqp Furniture/Appliance Los Gatos -4.1% 1.5% 22.1% -13.7% -11.5% 1,733,713 1,784,620 -2.9%Service Stations Bldg.Matls-Retail Miscellaneous Other Business Services Milpitas -2.2% 3.3% -2.5% 35.8% 23.5% 6,110,432 5,539,071 10.3%Office Equipment Heavy Industry Business Services Light Industry Morgan Hill -1.5% 4.4% 18.1% 30.0% 54.0% 2,161,964 1,954,455 10.6%Auto Sales - New Bldg.Matls-Whsle Recreation Products Chemical Products Mountain View -3.9% 4.2% 30.1% 18.0% -42.7% 4,516,789 4,291,080 5.3%Business Services Bldg.Matls-Whsle Office Equipment Recreation Products Palo Alto -6.7% 2.3% -42.0% 13.5% 66.6% 7,293,063 7,003,235 4.1%Leasing Auto Sales - New Miscellaneous Retail Business Services San Jose 2.6% 4.6% 3.6% 3.0% -12.8% 41,186,979 39,644,799 3.9%Department Stores Heavy Industry Office Equipment Apparel Stores Santa Clara -13.9% 0.2% 3.9% 19.8% -58.3% 12,243,704 11,623,504 5.3%Office Equipment Electronic Equipment Miscellaneous Retail Health & Government Santa Clara Co.-12.3% -14.0% -28.2% 155.0% -39.2% 239,462 270,288 -11.4%Business Services Service Stations Restaurants Miscellaneous Retail Saratoga -4.2% 8.9% 10.6% -12.2% 25.5% 7,179,320 7,332,315 -2.1%Auto Sales - New Restaurants Electronic Equipment Office Equipment Sunnyvale -0.2% 5.9% 27.4% 213.6% 0.5% 1,112,223 962,788 15.5%Bldg.Matls-Whsle Heavy Industry Auto Sales - Used Furniture/Appliance Attachment B City of Palo Alto www.MuniServices.com (800)800-8181 Page 6 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016Q4 2017Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017Q4 El Camino Real 1,102,757 1,105,340 1,090,236 1,088,571 1,140,412 1,188,495 1,210,148 1,258,506 1,282,296 1,261,233 1,241,270 1,227,629 1,254,855 Town and Country 629,346 637,224 644,288 636,497 639,830 642,372 632,157 645,939 634,372 629,484 629,271 621,657 630,914 Midtown 188,251 192,122 194,028 195,907 192,190 193,066 207,568 206,960 206,327 201,948 206,422 206,079 204,816 East Meadow Area 104,735 117,701 172,602 166,805 161,897 173,019 185,564 192,748 191,467 199,789 194,377 197,617 206,026 Charleston Center 87,413 88,622 89,612 90,642 91,711 91,991 92,121 91,914 92,495 92,258 92,657 93,005 92,696 City of Palo Alto - Selected Geographic Areas of the City Benchmark Year 4th Quarter 2017 $- $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016Q4 2017Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017Q4 El Camino Real Town and Country Midtown East Meadow Area Charleston Center *Benchmark year (BMY) is the sum of the current and 3 previous quarters (2017Q4 BMY is sum of 2017 Q4, Q3, Q2, Q1) Attachment B City of Palo Alto www.MuniServices.com (800)800-8181 Page 7 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016Q4 2017Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017Q4 Stanford Shopping Ctr 5,726,273 5,769,236 5,775,751 5,765,715 5,670,796 5,501,966 5,464,490 5,371,067 5,309,725 5,425,743 5,487,406 5,515,681 5,608,672 Stanford Research Park 3,304,003 3,082,331 2,869,143 2,411,043 2,953,900 2,924,944 3,119,427 3,257,664 2,999,685 3,177,058 3,371,781 3,595,493 3,898,022 Downtown 3,220,248 3,251,198 3,318,323 3,351,331 3,399,758 3,445,331 3,672,532 3,838,501 4,144,463 4,202,364 3,990,498 3,938,441 3,646,422 San Antonio 2,495,915 2,504,156 2,465,311 2,483,850 2,476,949 2,517,603 2,451,491 2,414,093 2,448,764 2,420,850 2,174,308 2,219,389 2,161,989 California Avenue 1,120,996 1,113,385 1,108,904 1,106,175 1,097,493 1,091,796 1,090,901 1,073,085 1,048,035 1,034,377 1,050,195 1,035,739 1,026,218 City of Palo Alto - Selected Geographic Areas of the City Benchmark Year 4th Quarter 2017 0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016Q4 2017Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 Stanford Shopping Ctr Downtown #REF!San Antonio California Avenue 0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016Q4 2017Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017Q4 Stanford Shopping Ctr Downtown San Antonio California Avenue $- $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,000 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016Q4 2017Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017Q4 Stanford Shopping Ctr Stanford Research Park Downtown San Antonio California Avenue *Benchmark year (BMY) is the sum of the current and 3 previous quarters (2017Q4 BMY is sum of 2017 Q4, Q3, Q2, Q1) Attachment B City of Palo Alto www.MuniServices.com (800)800-8181 Page 8 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016Q4 2017Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017Q4 Valley Fair 7,455,179 7,588,546 7,273,028 7,282,265 7,248,371 7,228,310 7,063,549 7,053,562 6,851,598 6,714,146 6,660,544 6,491,644 6,467,039 Stanford Shopping Ctr 5,726,273 5,769,236 5,775,751 5,765,715 5,670,796 5,501,966 5,464,490 5,371,067 5,309,725 5,425,743 5,487,406 5,515,681 5,608,672 Oakridge Mall 4,040,521 4,159,367 4,236,080 4,215,653 4,158,194 4,075,061 3,871,802 3,909,043 3,831,354 3,625,692 3,650,856 3,626,031 3,626,802 Santana Row 2,565,665 2,634,908 2,706,867 2,735,522 2,834,796 2,807,754 2,754,804 2,933,889 3,005,007 3,047,779 3,057,404 3,090,796 2,709,157 Hillsdale 2,450,278 2,494,792 2,513,866 2,470,404 2,434,086 2,410,095 2,363,729 2,363,729 2,251,467 2,197,768 2,167,994 2,125,369 2,098,448 City of Palo Alto - Regional Shopping Mall Comparison Benchmark Year 4th Quarter 2017 $- $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,000 $8,000,000 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016Q4 2017Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017Q4 Valley Fair Stanford Shopping Ctr Oakridge Mall Santana Row Hillsdale *Benchmark year (BMY) is the sum of the current and 3 previous quarters (2017Q4 BMY is sum of 2017 Q4, Q3, Q2, Q1) Attachment B Economic Categories and Segments Economic Category Economic Segment Description Business to Business - sales of tangible personal property from one business to another business and the buyer is the end user. Also includes use tax on certain purchases and consumables. Business Services Advertising, banking services, copying, printing and mailing services Chemical Products Manufacturers and wholesalers of drugs, chemicals, etc. Electronic Equipment Manufacturers of televisions, sound systems, sophisticated electronics, etc. Energy Sales Bulk fuel sales and fuel distributors and refiners Heavy Industry Heavy machinery and equipment, including heavy vehicles, and manufacturers and wholesalers of textiles and furniture and furnishings Leasing Equipment leasing Light Industry Includes, but is not limited to, light machinery and automobile, truck, and trailer rentals Office Equipment Businesses that sell computers, and office equipment and furniture, and businesses that process motion pictures and film development Construction Building Materials – Retail Building materials, hardware, and paint and wallpaper stores Building Materials - Wholesale Includes, but is not limited to, sheet metal, iron works, sand and gravel, farm equipment, plumbing materials, and electrical wiring Food Products Food Markets Supermarkets, grocery stores, convenience stores, bakeries, delicatessens, health food stores Food Processing Equipment Processing and equipment used in mass food production and packaging Liquor stores Stores that sell alcoholic beverages Restaurants Restaurants, including fast food and those in hotels, and night clubs Attachment C Economic Categories and Segments Economic Category Economic Segment Description General Retail – all consumer focused sales, typically brick and mortar stores Apparel Stores Men’s, women’s, and family clothing and shoe stores Department Stores Department, general, and variety stores Drug Stores Stores where medicines and miscellaneous articles are sold Florist/Nursery Stores where flowers and plants are sold Furniture/Appliance Stores where new and used furniture, appliances, and electronic equipment are sold Miscellaneous Retail Includes, but is not limited to, stores that sell cigars, jewelry, beauty supplies, cell phones, and books; newsstands, photography studios; personal service businesses such as salons and cleaners; and vending machines Recreation Products Camera, music, and sporting goods stores Miscellaneous/Other Miscellaneous/Other Includes but not limited to health services, government, nonprofit organizations, non- store retailers, businesses with less than $20,000 in annual gross sales, auctioneer sales, and mortuary services and sales Transportation Auto Parts/Repair Auto parts stores, vehicle and parts manufacturing facilities, and vehicle repair shops Auto Sales - New New car dealerships Auto Sales - Used Used car dealerships Miscellaneous Vehicle Sales Sale and manufacture of airplanes and supplies, boats, motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, trailers and supplies Service stations Gas stations, not including airport jet fuel Attachment C ECONOMIC NEWS & TRENDS April 27, 2018 Attachment D HIGHLIGHTS Economic Indicators GDP: Real GDP increased at an annual rate of 2.3% in 1Q2018 (advance estimate); was 2.9% in 4Q2017; 3.2% in 3Q2017, 3.1% in 2Q2017, 1.4% in 1Q2017, and 2.1% in 4Q2016). The increase reflects positive contributions from nonresidential fixed investment, personal consumption expenditures, exports, private inventory investment, federal government spending, and state and local government spending. California’s GDP for 3Q2017: 3.4%. Real GDP by state growth for the 3Q2017 ranged from 5.7% in Delaware to 0.5% in South Dakota. Digital Economy: 6.5% of U.S. GDT or $1.2 trillion in 2016; 5.6% average annual growth from 2006 to 2016; outpaced overall U.S. economic growth of 1.5%; 3.9% of total U.S. employment. Consumer Confidence: The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index® increased in April, following a decline in March. Consumers’ assessment of current conditions improved with consumers rating both business and labor market conditions quite favorably; this suggests that the economy will continue expanding at a solid pace. Interest Rates: The Federal Reserve raised interest rates for the first time in 2018, citing strength in the economy. Inflation: Expected to head up this year; unemployment in the last year dropped to a 17-year low yet inflation continues to run below the Fed’s 2% target. US / China Trade: Some Chinese businesses are canceling or slowing plans to invest in the American market because of U.S. threats to restrict investment. Some businesses are feeling the effects; exports from small businesses to China had tripled in the past 15 years. U.S. consumers may feel the effect on the Administration’s proposed tariffs on Chinese imports to include a 25% levy on TV’s and related components. U.S. and California Economic Outlook U.S Outlook: Continued US growth: 2017: 2.5%, 2018: 2.5 to 2.8%; domestic spending will continue; oil prices will be steady in the $55-$70 barrel range; inflation is low but rising; policy uncertainty. California and Local Outlook: Growth constrained by limited increases in labor force; leading sectors are construction, consumer-serving sectors, tourism, health care, and defense / aerospace; housing shortages (owner occupied rentals) (Beacon Economics, April, 2018) Housing U.S. homeownership was up in 2017 for the first time in 13 years; to 64.2% in 4Q2017 from 63.7% a year earlier. Sales of Existing Single-Family Homes in California: 423,990 in March up 0.3% from February and 1.6% from March 2017. California median home in March was $565,830, up 8.1% from a year ago; the peak was $594,530 in May 2007. The lowest was $245,230 in February of 2009 (-59% from the peak). Alameda, Marin, San Mateo, Santa Clara, San Diego, and Orange counties are a new peak at $955,000, $1,392,500, $1,615,000, $1,454,500, $625,400, and $824,450, respectively. Employment California’s unemployment rate reached a record low of 4.3% in February. The U.S. unemployment rate was at 4.1% for the sixth consecutive month in March. Forecast: Ending 2018 at 3.9% down from 4.1% at end of 2017. (Kiplinger) The number of Americans applying for unemployment benefits week of April 16, 2018 fell to the lowest level since December 6, 1969. (WSJ) California WARN Notices & Permanent Closures Dec 2017: 33 notices / 13 closures; Jan 2018: 76 notices/ 30 closures; Feb 2018: 44 notices/ 18 closures; Mar 2018: 41 notices/ 22 closures; As of Apr 25: 56 notices/ 25 closures. Attachment D HIGHLIGHTS Fuel Gasoline Prices: AAA shows (April 25, 2018) the national average at $2.78.2 per gallon. California’s average is $3.591. The Energy Information Administration’s shows this is the highest level on record for the month of April and exceeds typical summer demand measurements. Increases from one year ago: California (+55 cents). California Auto Sales Rose 1% in January 2018 to 1.2 million. New registrations for 2017 were above 2 million (third consecutive year); market declined slightly in 2017 but annual total exceeded 2009 levels by nearly 100%. The CNCDA 2018 forecast is 2.01 million units. Retail Retail Outlook in 2018: Tax cuts, an improved economy and a consumer that is less cautious about spending will make 2018 a better year for retailers. Retail sales are on track to match or exceed the healthy 4.2% gain they made in 2017. Holiday 2017 Retail Sales Between November 1 and December 24: Up 4.9% for 2017. This is the largest year- over-year increase since 2011. Online shopping also saw large gains of 18.1% compared to 2016. (Mastercard) On-Line Sales 4Q2017: Percent of Retail Sales Increased 3.2% for 4Q2017 from 3Q2017. Total E-Commerce Sales for 4Q2017: $119.0 billion. Total Retail Sales for 4Q2017: est. at $1,204.3 billion, an increase of 2.7% from 3Q2017. E-Commerce Sales for 2016 and 2017: 2017 increased 4.4% from 2016. E-commerce sales in 2017 accounted for 8.9% of total sales; 2016 accounted for 8% of total sales. California’s e-commerce sales comprise approximately 13-14% of the total sales, based on California’s portion of the national economy. An estimated 40% of the U.S. online spending goes to Amazon. Groceries and Restaurants Grocery Among Fastest-Growing Retail Segments: 674 stores are expected to open in 2018. The other two fastest growing segments are mass merchandisers and dollar stores, and convenience stores. Online grocery spending is projected to grow to 20% of the market, or $100 billion, by 2025. Amazon now delivers orders to parked vehicles. U.S. Food Stamp Program Proposed Reduction - Impact on Grocers: The Trump Administration is proposing reducing program budget by $130 billion over a decade, which is 20% reduction of the current annual allotment. The grocery sector is bracing for a possible loss of billions of dollars in purchases. Food Away From Home: From March 2017 to Mar 2018 (2.5%); Mar 2018 (.1); Feb 2018 (.2); Jan 2018 (-.4%). Food at Home: From March 2017 to Mar 2018 (.4%); Mar 2018 (.1); Feb 2018 (-.2); Jan 2018 (.1%). Restaurants: Driving success in a new era of competition: More than 620,000 eating and drinking establishments. Imperatives defining industry in 2018: Embrace the experience, drive employee engagement, dominate delivery, compete with non-traditional players, and operational excellence and compliance. (Deloitte) Hospitality Industry Outlook Travel is a $1-trillion US industry. Spending will grow by 5% in 2018. Revenue drivers include consumer spending, airline competition, corporate travel, the move from products to experience. (Deloitte) Hotel rates will rise modestly, up 2.4% from 2017. (Kiplinger) Retail Space Destination centers are the super-sized versions of the future. Values centers share the customers’ values. Innovation centers are digitally-powered. “Retaildential” centers redefine living over the store. Attachment D SECTION 1: U.S. ECONOMY Consumer Price Index (CPI) (March 2018 From Preceding Month) U.S. CPI for March 2018: Decreased 0.1% in Mar. Gasoline: From Mar 2017 to Mar 2018 (11.1%); Mar 2018 (-4.9); Feb 2018 (-.9); Jan 2018 (5.7%); Dec 2017 (.8%). New Vehicles: From March 2017 to Mar 2018 (-1.2%); Mar 2018 (.0); Feb 2018 (-.5); Jan 2018 (-.1%); Dec 2017 (.5%). Used Cars & Trucks: From March 2017 to Mar 2018 (.4%); Mar 2018 (-.3); Feb 2018 (-.3); Jan 2018 (.4%); Dec 2017 (.7%). Apparel: Mar 2018 (-.6); Feb 2018 (1.5); Jan 2018 (1.7%); Dec 2017 (-.3%). Cigarettes: From Mar 2017 to Mar 2018 (5.9%); Mar 2018 (-.4); Feb 2018 (.2); Jan 2018 (.2%). Alcohol: Mar 2018 (.1); Feb 2018 (.2); Jan 2018 (.0%). Wine: From Mar 2017 to Mar 2017: Wine At Home (.9%); Wine Away From Home: (2%). Cable and Satellite TV Service: From Mar 2017 to Mar 2018 (2.7%). Wireless Telephone Service From March 2017 to Mar 2018 (-2.4%); Mar 2018 (.2); Feb 2018 (-.5); Jan 2018 (-.2). Lodging Away from Home: From March 2017 to Mar 2018 (2.4%); Mar 2018 (2.3); Feb 2018 (.0); Jan 2018 (- 2.0%). Shelter: From March 2017 to Mar 2018 (3.3%). Services Sector for 4Q2017/ Contributions to Percentage Change in GDP from 4Q2017 www.census.gov/services/index.html (March 8, 2018) ; https://bea.gov/newsreleases/international/trade/tradnewsrelease.htm (April 5, 2018) 4Q2017 Total Revenue: An increase of 2.2% from 3Q2017 and up 5% from 4Q2016. Personal Consumption Expenditures: Up 2.1% from 3Q2017. Exports and Imports: Exports increased 5.9%; Imports increased 9.1%, year-to-date from February. Utilities: Decrease of 7.6% from 3Q2017 and up 3.0% from the 4Q2016. Transportation and Warehousing: Decrease of 1.2% from 3Q2017; and up 3% from 4Q2016. Arts, Entertainment and Recreation: Decrease of 4.6% from 3Q2017; and up 3.7% from 4Q2016. Real Estate and Rental and Leasing: Increase 1.2% from 3Q2017; and up 6.5% from 4Q2016. Accommodations: Decrease 11.9% from 3Q2017 and up 0.7% from the 4Q2016. Other Services: Includes auto and electronic repair, personal and laundry services: Increase 11% from 3Q2017 and up 9.9% from 4Q2016. E-Commerce 4Q2017 https://www.census.gov/retail/mrts/www/data/pdf/ec_current.pdf (Next release is on May 17, 2018) 4Q2017 Percent of Retail Sales: Increase of 3.2% for 4Q2017 from 3Q2017. Total E-Commerce Sales for 4Q2017: $119.0 billion. Total Retail Sales for 4Q2017: An increase of 2.7% from 3Q2017. Total E Commerce Sales for 4Q2017: Accounted for 9.1% of total sales. Total E-Commerce Sales for 2016 and 2017: 2017 up 16% from 2016. Total retail sales in 2017 up 4.4% from 2016. E-commerce sales in 2017 was for 8.9% of total sales. California: E-commerce sales comprise approximately 13-14% of the total sales, based on California’s portion of the national economy. Amazon: Estimated 40% of U.S. online spending goes to Amazon. Amazon offering deliveries to parked cars for Prime members. Walmart: Website plans for an upscale redesign; online sales represents 3.6% of its U.S. sales. Luxury: By 2025, online will represent 25% of luxury goods. Attachment D SECTION 2: CALIFORNIA ECONOMY https://www.sco.ca.gov/Files-EO/04-18summary.pdf http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Economics/Economic_and_Revenue_Updates/documents/2018/Apr-18.pdf Personal Income: California grew by 4.1% in 2017 following growth of 3.7% in 2016. U.S. personal income growth was 3.1% in 2017 and 2.4% in 2016. Retail Sales and Use Tax for March: $17 million below the month’s forecast of $1.724 billion. Year-to-date, sales tax revenues are $26 million below forecast. SECTION 3: HOME SALES https://www.car.org/marketdata/data/countysalesactivity (March 2018) https://www.car.org/aboutus/mediacenter/newsreleases/2018releases/march2018homesales (April 17, 2018) Sales of Existing Single-Family Homes in California for March: 423,990 in March up 0.3% from February and 1.6% from March 2017. California Median Home Price in March: The statewide median home price in March was $565,830, up 8.1% from a year ago; the peak was $594,530 in May of 2007; and lowest at $245,230 in February of 2009 (-59% from the peak. Alameda, Marin, San Mateo, Santa Clara, San Diego, and Orange counties are a new peak price at $955,000, $1,392,500, $1,615,000, $1,454,500, $625,400, and $824,450, respectively. Interest Rates Rising: Rising interest rates figure to dent the mortgage refinance market in 2018. Refinancing: The average interest rate on a 30-year fixed- rate loan has hit 4.44%. Refinancing to keep declining in popularity as rates keep rising and make refinancing a less attractive option. For the year overall; will make up only 30% of total mortgage originations, the lowest in 18 years. (Kiplinger) SECTION 4: AUTO SALES / TRENDS California Car Sales https://www.cncda.org/wp-content/uploads/California-Covering-4Q-2017-1.pdf California, January 2018: Rose 1% in January to 1.2 million. New Registrations for 2017: Above 2 million for the third consecutive year; market declined slightly in 2017 but annual total exceeded 2009 levels by nearly 100%. CNCDA 2018 Forecast: 2.01 million units. Total Cars 2016 to 2017: California (-10.3%); US (-11%). Light Trucks 2016 to 2017: California (7.4%); US (4.4%). 2017 Electric Vehicle Market in California: 2.6%; Hybrid/ Electric is 9.4%. Used Car Registrations in 2017/ California: Small increase of 1.2%. Used light truck increased 3.7%; cars were down .4%. Older Vehicle Market Share in 2017/ California: 4 to 6 years old increased 49.6%. Electric Vehicles: Electric vehicle sales grew 30% in 2017. Governor Brown in January signed an executive order to put five million zero-emission vehicles on California’s roads by 2030. Attachment D SECTION 5: RETAILER UPDATES, TRENDS AND INFLUENCES Retail Outlook in 2018: Tax cuts, an improved economy and an American consumer that is less cautious about spending will make 2018 a better year for retailers. Retail sales are on track to match or exceed the healthy 4.2% gain they made in 2017. Holiday 2017 Retail Sales Between November 1 and December 24: Up 4.9% for 2017, setting a record for dollars spent. This is the largest year-over-year increase since 2011. Online shopping also saw large gains of 18.1% compared to 2016. (Mastercard) Convenience Continues to Expand: The number of convenience stores reached a new high of 154,958, up 0.3% or 423 units in 2017, from the 2016 year-end total of 54,535 at the end of 2016. (NACS). Black Friday 2017: Consumers spent more than $5 billion on Black Friday, 16.9% more than in 2016. Physical stores dominated sales; more than 145 million adults spent time at malls and shopping centers and spent an average of $377.50 (https://retailleader.com) Gen Zers Enjoy Malls: Americans under 22 prefer buying at physical stores rather than ordering from websites. They like to experience shopping, but not downtown or at outlets. Just hanging out at the mall is apparently as much fun for them as it was for teens in the 1980s. Mother’s Day 2018: Spending to reach $23.1 billion Apparel: Mar 2018 (-.6); Feb 2018 (1.5); Jan 2018 (1.7%); Dec 2017 (-.3%). Upscale Uniforms: The future of the office fashion. Period from November 1, 2017 to April 25, 2018; http://www.edd.ca.gov/Jobs_and_Training/warn/WARN-Report-for-7-1- 2017-to-04-25-2018.pdf (Updated April 27, 2018) Albertsons: To acquire Rite Aid stores not sold to Walgreens Applebee’s: To close 60-80 restaurants in 2018 following the closure of 100 in 2017 Ashley HomeStores: To open 800th store (Tijuana) Backstage: (Macy’s off-price unit): Plans to expand with 100 stores Batteries Plus Bulbs: Plans to open 47 stores in 2018 Best Buy: Increase holiday sales by 9%; ramped up electronic toys after Toys R Us announced closure Black Bear Diner: Adding 19 locations Blaze Pizza: Plans to develop 400 additional locations including some in the U.S. Build a Bear: Closed in Anaheim (EDD WARN report) Burgerim: Expanding in the Sacramento area and Bay California Tortilla: Will grow brand in new states in 2018 Chipotle: Plans store upgrades and slower expansion Costco: Reports that 40% of new member signups are Millennials Curry Up: Largest Indian fast casual expanding CVS: Launching private label hoping to compete with Sephora and Ulta Dave and Busters: Expanding; filling large empty store spaces Dicks: Pulls assault rifles from stores Dollar Tree: In 3Q2017 opened 169 stores; ended with 14,744 stores Dogtopia: 40 new stores in 2018; on pace to reach 400 by 2021 Dunkin’ Donuts: Plans to add 1,000 new locations by end of 2020; will have 18,000 in the U.S. Family Christian: 240 closures Future Perfect: New showroom in Los Angeles Fred Meyer Jewelers: Closing many mall stores Gamestop: 100 store closures Gander Outdoors: Camping World to re-open 69 stores GNC: Closing up to 200 stores in 2018 Go! Go! Curry: Japanese comfort food plans to expand GoPro, Inc.: Layoffs in San Mateo (EDD WARN report) Grocery Outlet: 25 new stores planned H&M: Closing 170 stores in 2018 HelloFresh: Aims to eclipse Blue Apron Home Depot: Buys The Company Store, a catalog and e- commerce retailer of home goods and textiles; Indochino: Ready-to-wear suits opening 4 new stores including a San Diego location JC Penny: Eliminated 360 jobs in response to simplifying operations and as more people shop online Jersey Mike’s: Plans to open 200 restaurants in 2018; aiming to have 2000 stores in the U.S. by 2020 Jimboy’s Tacos: Expanding in Northern California Attachment D K-Mart: Closed in Cudahy, Redding, Ontario (EDD WARN report) Kohls: Increase holiday sales by 6.3% compared with a 2.3% decline a year earlier Land of Nod: Owned by Crate and Barrel - Closed the Land of Nod brick-and-mortar stores in January Lands’ End: Plans to open 60 new stores in the next five years Loves: Travel stop. Plans to open 40 new locations in 2018 Macys Corporate Services: Closed in Redondo Beach (EDD WARN report) Macys: Closed in Laguna Hills, Los Angeles, San Francisco (EDD WARN report) Mattel, Inc.: Layoff’s in El Segundo (EDD WARN report) Mattress Firm: Will close 200 stores by mid-2019 McDonalds: To invest $2.4 billion on upgrades in 2018 Modern Market: Acquired by Butterfly Nestle: Closed in Glendale and Oakland (EDD WARN report) Nekter Juice Bar: 100th restraunt to open in Anaheim Hills New Seasons Market: Closed in Sunnyvale; will not open in SF, Carmel and Emeryville New Leaf Community Markets: New location in Aptos Nine West: Will close all 70 stores Nordstrom: Revamping some of its 122 stores. Much of the company’s success comes from opening Rack off- price stores and e-commerce Old Navy: To open 60 stores in 2018 Papa John’s International: No longer will be the official pizza of the NFL P.F. Changs: Closed in Burbank (EDD WARN report) Planet Fitness: More agreements signed; brick and mortar spaces give expansion opportunity Reserve: Starbuck’s high-end stores plans 1,000 stores with fuller service of food and beverages. Several CA locations - future California locations unknown. Rituals: Shoppers experiment with products; expands to California Sam’s Club: Closed in Rowland Heights, Sacramento, San Fernando, Stanton (EDD WARN report); shrinking stores to compete and hopes for more affluent shoppers. In January 2018, Wal-Mart chain closed 63 U.S. Sam’s Clubs locations Shake Shack: Expects to open 32 to 35 new restaurants in 2018; will open more airport locations Soft Surroundings: Women’s apparel. Opening a location in California Smart & Final: Replaces Ralphs in north Torrance Sears: Closed in Brea, Citrus Heights, El Cajon, Fairfield, Roseville Westminster (EDD WARN report) Starbucks: Closed on-line business Subway: Closing about 500 stores Take 5 Oil: Will add dozens of stores in 2018 T-Mobile: Expanding footprint by opening new stores Target: Plans to increase small-format stores; closing 12 underperforming stores (none in California) Teriyaki Madness: Fresh Asian fast casual targeting Los Angeles for expansion; plans for 20-25 additional locations TGI Fridays: Closed in Oxnard, Brea (EDD WARN report) Toys “R” Us: Announced closing 200 more stores due to bankruptcy Tractor Supply Company: Opening store 1700; operates in 49 states Tuesday Morning: In Spring will have five closures, 19 relocations and one expansion, seven openings Walmart: Investing $145 million to renovate 34 California stores; adding FedEx offices to 500 locations Wendy’s: Rolling out smaller model called Smart 55 Wetzel’s Pretzels: New store opening pipeline Warby Parker: Aims to run nearly 100 stores this year - other internet based retailers are similarly opening more brick and mortar locations 7-Eleven: Closed on the acquisition of approximately 1,030 Sunoco LP convenience stores in 17 states Attachment D SECTION 6: RESTAURANT AND FOOD INDUSTRY / ECONOMIC INDICATORS Restaurants as Economic Engine: Industry’s share of the food dollar is 48%.; Industry sales constitute 4% of the U.S. GDP. For every dollar spent in restaurants, $2 is generated in sales for other industries. (National Restaurant Association) Restaurant Franchises: Poised for growth in 2018, with output increasing by around 6%, eclipsing 2017’s 5% rise. Food: From March 2017 to Mar 2018 (1.3%); Mar 2018 (.1); Feb 2018 (.0); Jan 2018 (.2%); Dec 2017 (.2%) SECTION 7: GROCERY INDUSTRY Ace Hardware: Kroger rumored to be in talks to add Ace stores within its stores (not in CA) Aldi: Opened Southern California location in La Habra Albertsons: To purchase Rite Aid stores not sold to Walgreens Amazon Go: Plans to open up to six stores by 2019 Brandless: Everything is $3 Bristol Farms: Prototype store in Woodland Hills Erewhon: Organic store opened fourth in California Grocery Outlet: Plans 25 store expansion Island Pacific: Closing six California locations Lucky: New concept store; first opening in Dublin “Managed”: Asian American chain and online; opens in El Monte Mother’s Market: Expanding with new locations in Los Angeles New Seasons: Closing Sunnyvale; will not open in San Francisco, Carmel and Emeryville New Leaf Community Markets: New location in Aptos Raley’s: Extends E-Commerce Stater Brothers: To open first Pasadena store this Fall; opens in Norco Vallarta Supermarket: Opened 50th store location in Pasadena Walmart: Using DoorDash for on-line grocery delivery Whole Foods 365 Store: Concord and Long Beach locations to open Whole Foods: Free two-hour delivery of natural and organic products, includes Sacramento and San Diego Kohls: To add Aldi groceries to stores Source: http://www.theshelbyreport.com/ (from November 1, 2017 to April 27, 2018 Attachment D