Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-01-23 City Council Agenda Packet 1 Special Meeting January 23, 2023 Materials submitted to the Board after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.CityofPaloAlto.org. CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Monday, January 23, 2023 Council Chambers & Hybrid 5:00 PM Amended Agenda Amended Agenda Items appear below in Red Pursuant to AB 361 Palo Alto City Council meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attend by teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose to participate from home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged if attending in person. The meeting will be broadcast on Cable TV Channel 26, live on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen Media Center https://midpenmedia.org. VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/362027238) Meeting ID: 362 027 238 Phone:1(669)900-6833 PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comments will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or an amount of time determined by the Chair. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutes after the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance to city.council@CityofPaloAlto.org and will be provided to the Council and available for inspection on the City’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subject line. PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted only by email to city.clerk@CityofPaloAlto.org at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received, the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strong cybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are not accepted. TIME ESTIMATES 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. 4 Special Meeting January 23, 2023 Materials submitted to the Board after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.CityofPaloAlto.org. CALL TO ORDER SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY (5:00 – 5:10 PM) AA1. Proclamation for Lunar New Year CLOSED SESSION (5:10 – 6:45 PM) 1. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY Subject: Written Liability Claim Against the City of Palo Alto by James Goodrich (Claim No. C22-0013) Authority: Government Code Section 54956.9(e)(3) 2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his Designees Pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (Ed Shikada, Kiely Nose, Sandra Blanch, Nicholas Raisch, Molly Stump, and Caio Arelleano) Employee Organization: Service Employees International Union, (SEIU) Local 521, Utilities Management and Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA)Palo Alto Peace Officer’s Association (PAPOA), Palo Alto Police Management Association (PMA), International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) local 1319, Palo Alto Fire Chiefs Association (FCA),; Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6 (a) STUDY SESSION (6:45 – 7:45 PM) 3. Presentation of the Annual Community Survey Results AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS PUBLIC COMMENT (7:45 – 8:05 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. CONSENT CALENDAR (8:05 – 8:10 PM) Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members. 4. Approval of a General Services Agreement Contract Number C23185605 with Linko Technology, Inc. for the Amount of $219,447 Over a Seven-Year Term for Pretreatment Program Software 5. Review and Acceptance of Annual Status Report on Development Impact Fees for Fiscal Year 2022 and Adoption of a Resolution Making Statutory Findings under Govt. Code section 66001 Title Updated 4 Special Meeting January 23, 2023 Materials submitted to the Board after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.CityofPaloAlto.org. 6. Approval of Contract Number C23186552 With Downtown Streets Team, Inc. for a Total Not-to-Exceed Amount of $160,477 for Fiscal Year 2023 for Workforce Development Services 7. Parks and Recreation Commission Recommendation to Adopt an Ordinance Amending PAMC Section 22.04.220 to Regulate Electric Bicycles and Electric Coasting Devices in Parks and Open Spaces 8. Acceptance of the Macias Gini & O’Connell Audit of the City of Palo Alto’s Financial Statements as of June 30, 2022 and the Management Letter; Approval of the FY 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR); and Amendments to the FY 2022 Budget in Various Funds, as Recommended by the Finance Committee 9. Adoption of a Resolution to Extend the Appointment of Adriane D. McCoy of Baker Tilly US, LLP as Interim City Auditor Through April 30, 2023 10. Approval of Contract with CivicPlus, LLC (C23186719) for CivicRec Recreation Management Software for a Period of Six Years in an Amount Not to Exceed $735,065 (Including a 5% Contingency for Additional Services Amount of $29,229) 11. Adopt a Resolution Establishing the Council Annual Calendar of Meetings, Breaks and Council Events for Calendar Year 2023 12. Approval of Recommendations on Process for 2023 Council Priority Setting Retreat CITY MANAGER COMMENTS (8:10 – 8:30 PM) ACTION ITEMS Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 13. PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 575 Los Trancos [21PLN-00196]: Adoption of a Record of Land Use Action Approving a Major Site and Design Application for the Construction of a new 7,245 Square Foot Single-Family Residence With a new 895 Square Foot Accessory Dwelling Unit and Associated Site Improvements, on a 5.38- Acre Site. Zoning District: Open Space (OS). Environmental Review: Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Title Updated (8:30 – 9:30 PM) 14. City Council discussion and direction regarding wage requirements for the contract for next Janitorial services (9:30 – 10:30 PM) 4 Special Meeting January 23, 2023 Materials submitted to the Board after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.CityofPaloAlto.org. A. Review and Provide Direction on Wage and Benefits Requirements for Inclusion in a New Janitorial Services Request for Proposal (RFP) B. Responsible Contracting Standards Colleague's Memo (Stone & Burt) COUNCIL MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS ADJOURNMENT INFORMATION REPORTS 15. City of Palo Alto's Energy Risk Management Report for the Second Half of Fiscal Year 2022 (January 1, 2022-June 30, 2022) 5 Special Meeting January 23, 2023 Materials submitted to the Board after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.CityofPaloAlto.org. PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to hybrid meetings via email, in person, teleconference, or by phone. 1. Written public comments may be submitted by email to city.council@cityofpaloalto.org. 2. In person public comments 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. 3. Spoken public comments using a computer or smart phone will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Council, click on the link below to access a Zoom-based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in- browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up-to-date browser: Chrome 30 , Firefox 27 , Microsoft Edge 12 , Safari 7 . Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. Or download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 4. Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Council. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. Click to Join Zoom Meeting ID: 362-027-238 Phone: 1(669)900-6833 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) 48 hours or more in advance. 1 5 3 5 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: STUDY SESSION Lead Department: City Manager Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Presentation of the 2022 City of Palo Alto Community Survey Results RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council receive the Report of Results for the 2022 City of Palo Alto Community Survey by Polco/National Research Center, Inc. (Polco). BACKGROUND The City has annually or biennially conducted a community survey to gain insights into residents’ perspectives about the community, including local amenities, services, public trust, resident participation, and other aspects of the community. Survey information is used to support budgeting, land use and strategic planning, and communication efforts with the community. Palo Alto has been surveying residents since 2003. This report was conducted starting October 2022 through December 2022. ANALYSIS Polco will present and discuss the survey results to the City Council, offering years of benchmarking and other city comparisons to explain information received. The City values community feedback and the information will be used by to evaluate programs and services, as well as inform performance metrics through the annual budget process. Palo Alto residents will continue to be surveyed annually, with the next survey to be completed in 2023. The National Community Survey is one method of many ways used to engage the community and to assess the quality of City services. This year, the response rate was lower than previous years (with a total of 398 surveys returned compared to 768 responses in 2021). On average, the total number of survey responses is about 750. Though lower, this year’s response rate of 12% is still statistically significant and tracks with the average range observed in other jurisdictions (of between 12%-20% response rate). One way staff hopes to increase response ITEM 3 Staff Report Item 3: Page 1 Packet Page 6 of 792 1 5 3 5 rates in the 2023 survey is to conduct the survey earlier in the fall around August/September after the summer recess. A few highlights in the Key Findings section based on respondent perspectives of the report include: •Residents rate the quality of life in Palo Alto highly. Residents continue to give high marks to their neighborhood as a place to live, raise children, and overall quality of life. About 9 in 10 residents rated each of these items positively. About 4 in 5 residents gave favorable ratings to Palo Alto as a place to work, which was higher than the national benchmark. •While residents value City services and events, civic participation has decreased. Palo Alto’s data reflects national trends that show more frequent use of City services and decreased resident involvement over time. In 2022, residents reported more frequent use of a number of City services in the last 12 months such as 72% reporting use of public libraries and their services. Nearly 3 in 5 residents indicated they contacted the City in the last 12 months. Though decreased, 6 out of 10 responding residents reported excellent or good opportunities to learn about City services through social media such as Facebook or Twitter. Similar to national benchmarks, perceptions of Palo Alto government welcoming resident involvement continue to decrease over time. •Residents value Palo Alto’s natural environment. Nearly 9 in 10 residents rated the overall quality of the natural environment in Palo Alto as excellent or good. Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, greenbelts, etc.) was rated positively by over 4 in 5 residents, higher than the national average. •Affordability and cost of living continue to be community concerns. Affordability- related measures such as cost of living and availability of affordable housing were much lower than the benchmark comparisons. The variety of housing options, rated positively by 1 in 5 residents was lower than the national average. •Residents are supportive of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. When asked to rate how important it is for Palo Alto to focus on reducing community greenhouse gas emissions in the coming two years, 7 in 10 residents indicated it to be essential or very important. Residents were also likely to make changes in their home, 3 in 5 residents indicated they were somewhat likely to replace their gas water heater with a heat pump water heater, and gas furnace with a heat pump HVAC system. The attached report includes information on trends over time, geographic and demographic comparisons, national benchmark comparisons, and verbatim responses to open-ended questions. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT ITEM 3 Staff Report Item 3: Page 2 Packet Page 7 of 792 1 5 3 5 Funding for the Polco contract was approved in the FY 2023 budget. No additional funding is requested at this time. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The National Community Survey is one method of many ways used to engage the community and to assess the quality of City services. The 2022 Palo Alto Community Survey process is a community feedback tool that helps the City Council and City staff understand community perspectives on current services and programs, as well as unmet needs and priorities. Staff continues to implement the existing community engagement workplan as discussed with Council in March 2022. In March 2023 staff plans to review, with Council, planned community engagement efforts implementing the Council priority workplans. In the coming year, staff will also work to gain additional input from the community on some of the civic participation options described in the Polco survey report. This could help inform future Council discussions on community engagement. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Council action on this item is not a project as defined by CEQA because the Community Survey is a continuing administrative or maintenance activity. CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(2). ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Palo Alto Community Survey 2022 Report of Results APPROVED BY: Ed Shikada, City Manager Report #: 2212-0456 ITEM 3 Staff Report Item 3: Page 3 Packet Page 8 of 792 City of Palo Alto Resident Survey June 2022 8001 Terrace Ave Middleton, WI 53562 info.polco.us • 608-709-8683 CITY OF PALO ALTO COMMUNITY SURVEY 2022 Report of Results January 2023 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 4 Packet Page 9 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Contents Detailed Survey Methods ............................................................................................................................ 3 Survey Information ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Survey Validity ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Selecting Survey Recipients ......................................................................................................................... 4 Survey Administration and Response ......................................................................................................... 7 Confidence Intervals ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Survey Processing (Data Entry) ................................................................................................................... 8 Survey Data Weighting ............................................................................................................................. 8 Survey Data Analysis and Reporting ......................................................................................................... 10 Trends Over Time ....................................................................................................................................... 10 Geographic and Demographic Comparisons ........................................................................................... 11 National Benchmark Comparisons ........................................................................................................... 11 Comparison Data .................................................................................................................................... 11 Interpreting the Results .......................................................................................................................... 11 Key Findings .............................................................................................................................................. 13 Appendix A: Results Tables ...................................................................................................................... 15 Appendix B: Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions from Probability Survey ........................... 87 Appendix C: Results to Open Participation Survey ................................................................................. 107 Appendix D: Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions from Open Participation Survey ............ 131 Appendix E: Communities Included in National Benchmark Comparisons ........................................... 138 Appendix F: Survey Materials ................................................................................................................. 141 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 5 Packet Page 10 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 3 Detailed Survey Methods Survey Information The 2022 Palo Alto Community Survey was conducted by Polco/National Research Center, Inc. (NRC). Results offer insight into residents’ perspectives about the community as a whole, including local amenities, services, public trust, resident participation, and other aspects of the community in order to support budgeting, land use and strategic planning, and communication with residents. Resident demographic characteristics permit comparison to the Census and American Community Survey estimates, and geographic location allows comparison of results for different subgroups of residents. The City of Palo Alto funded this research. Please contact Chantal Cotton Gaines, Deputy City Manager, City of Palo Alto, at chantal.gaines@cityofpaloalto.org, if you have any questions about the survey. Survey Validity The question of survey validity has two parts: 1) how can a community be confident that the results from those who completed the questionnaire are representative of the results that would have been obtained had the survey been administered to the entire population? and 2) how closely do the perspectives recorded on the survey reflect what residents really believe or do? To answer the first question, the best survey research practices were used for the resources spent to ensure that the results from the survey respondents reflect the opinions of residents in the entire community. These practices include: • Using a mail-out/mail-back methodology, which typically gets a higher response rate than phone for the same dollars spent. A higher response rate lessens the worry that those who did not respond are different than those who did respond. • Selecting households at random within the community to receive the survey to ensure that the households selected to receive the survey are representative of the larger community. • Over-sampling multi-family housing units to improve response from hard-to-reach respondents. • Selecting the respondent within the household using an unbiased sampling procedure; in this case, the “birthday method.” The cover letter included an instruction requesting that the respondent in the household be the adult (18 years old or older) who most recently had a birthday, irrespective of year of birth. • Contacting potential respondents three times to encourage response from people who may have different opinions or habits than those who would respond with only a single prompt. • Inviting response in a compelling manner (using appropriate letterhead/logos and a signature of a visible leader) to appeal to recipients’ sense of civic responsibility. • Providing a pre-addressed, postage-paid return envelope. • Weighting the results to reflect the demographics of the population. The answer to the second question about how closely the perspectives recorded on the survey reflect what residents really believe or do is more complex. Resident responses to surveys are influenced by a variety of factors. For questions about service quality, residents’ expectations for service quality play a role as well as the “objective” quality of the service provided, the way the resident perceives the entire community (that is, the context in which the service is provided), the scale on which the resident is asked to record his or her opinion and, of course, the opinion, itself, that a resident holds about the service. Similarly a resident’s report of certain behaviors is colored by what he or she believes is the socially desirable response (e.g., reporting tolerant behaviors toward “oppressed groups,” likelihood of voting for a tax increase for services to poor people, use of alternative modes of travel to work besides ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 6 Packet Page 11 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 4 the single occupancy vehicle), his or her memory of the actual behavior (if it is not a question speculating about future actions, like a vote), his or her confidence that he or she can be honest without suffering any negative consequences (thus the need for anonymity) as well as the actual behavior itself. How closely survey results come to recording the way a person really feels or behaves often is measured by the coincidence of reported behavior with observed current behavior (e.g., driving habits), reported intentions to behave with observed future behavior (e.g., voting choices) or reported opinions about current community quality with objective characteristics of the community (e.g., feelings of safety correlated with rates of crime). There is a body of scientific literature that has investigated the relationship between reported behaviors and actual behaviors. Well-conducted surveys, by and large, do capture true respondent behaviors or intentions to act with great accuracy. Predictions of voting outcomes tend to be quite accurate using survey research, as do reported behaviors that are not about highly sensitive issues (e.g., family abuse or other illegal or morally sanctioned activities). For self-reports about highly sensitive issues, statistical adjustments can be made to correct for the respondents’ tendency to report what they think the “correct” response should be. Research on the correlation of resident opinion about service quality and “objective” ratings of service quality vary, with some showing stronger relationships than others. NRC’s own research has demonstrated that residents who report the lowest ratings of street repair live in communities with objectively worse street conditions than those who report high ratings of street repair (based on road quality, delay in street repair, number of road repair employees). Similarly, the lowest rated fire services appear to be “objectively” worse than the highest rated fire services (expenditures per capita, response time, “professional” status of firefighters, breadth of services and training provided). Resident opinion commonly reflects objective performance data but is an important measure on its own. NRC principals have written, “If you collect trash three times a day but residents think that your trash haul is lousy, you still have a problem.” Selecting Survey Recipients “Sampling” refers to the method by which households were chosen to receive the survey. All households within the City of Palo Alto were eligible to participate in the survey. A list of all households within the zip codes serving Palo Alto was purchased from Go-Dog Direct based on updated listings from the United States Postal Service. Since some of the zip codes that serve Palo Alto households may also serve addresses that lie outside of the community, the exact geographic location of each housing unit was compared to community boundaries using the most current municipal boundary file (updated on a quarterly basis) and addresses located outside of Palo Alto boundaries were removed from consideration. Each address identified as being within City boundaries was further identified as being within one of six areas. To choose the 3,600 survey recipients, a systematic sampling method was applied to the list of households previously screened for geographic location. Systematic sampling is a procedure whereby a complete list of all possible households is culled, selecting every Nth one, giving each eligible household a known probability of selection, until the appropriate number of households is selected. Multi-family housing units were selected at a higher rate as residents of this type of housing typically respond at lower rates to surveys than do those in single-family housing units. Figure 1 displays a map of the households selected to receive the survey. In general, because of the random sampling techniques used, the displayed sampling density will closely mirror the overall housing unit density (which may be different from the population density). While the theory of probability assumes no bias in selection, there may be some minor variations in practice (meaning, an area with only 15% of the housing units might be selected at an actual rate that is slightly above or below that). ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 7 Packet Page 12 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 5 An individual within each household was selected using the birthday method. The birthday method selects a person within the household by asking the “person whose birthday has most recently passed” to complete the questionnaire. The underlying assumption in this method is that day of birth has no relationship to the way people respond to surveys. This instruction was contained in the cover letter accompanying the questionnaire. In addition to the scientific, random selection of households, a link to an online open participation survey was publicized and posted to the City of Palo Alto website. This opt-in survey was identical to the scientific survey and open to all City residents. Results from the open participation survey are separate from the address-based survey and can be found in Appendix C: Results to Open Participation Survey. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 8 Packet Page 13 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 6 Figure 1: Location of Survey Recipients by Area ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 9 Packet Page 14 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 7 Survey Administration and Response Selected households received mailings beginning on October 26, 2022. For 1,800 households, the first mailing was a postcard announcing the upcoming survey with a link to complete the survey online. The next mailing contained a letter from the City Manager inviting the household to participate, a questionnaire, and a postage-paid return envelope. For the remaining 1,800 households, the first mailing was a postcard with a link to complete the survey online, followed one week later by a reminder postcard with a link to the survey. The second postcard also asked respondents not to complete the survey a second time. The survey was available in English. All mailings included a URL through which the residents could choose to respond online. Completed surveys were collected over seven weeks. The online open participation survey was available to residents beginning November 16, 2022 and remained open through December 19, 2022. About 7% of the 3,600 surveys mailed were returned because the housing unit was vacant or the postal service was unable to deliver the survey as addressed. Of the remaining 3,357 households that received the survey, 398 completed the survey, providing an overall response rate of 12%. Of the 398 completed surveys, 282 were completed online. Additionally, responses were tracked by geographic subarea; response rates by area ranged from 10% to 14%. The response rates were/was calculated using AAPOR’s response rate #21 for mailed surveys of unnamed persons. Additionally, 116 residents completed the online opt-in survey. Confidence Intervals It is customary to describe the precision of estimates made from surveys by a “level of confidence” and accompanying “confidence interval” (or margin of error). A traditional level of confidence, and the one used here, is 95 percent. The 95 percent level of confidence can be any size and quantifies the sampling error or imprecision of the survey results because some residents’ opinions are relied on to estimate all residents’ opinions.2 The margin of error or confidence interval for the City of Palo Alto survey is no greater than plus or minus five percentage points around any given percent reported for the entire sample (398 completed surveys). For subgroups of responses, the margin of error increases because the number of responses for the subgroup is smaller. For subgroups of approximately 100 respondents, the margin of error is plus or minus 10 percentage points. For each of the six areas within Palo Alto, the margin of error rises to approximately plus or minus 15 percentage points since number of responses were 55 for Area 1, 76 for Area 2, 58 for Area 3, 64 for Area 4, 40 for Area 5 and 105 for Area 6. The margin of error for the six areas within Palo Alto is based off the smallest number of returned surveys per area; thus margin of error was calculated using the number of returned surveys from Area 5 (40). 1 See AAPOR’s Standard Definitions for more information: http://www.aapor.org/Standards-Ethics/Standard-Definitions-(1).aspx 2 A 95 percent level of confidence indicates that for every 100 random samples of this many residents, 95 of the confidence intervals created will include the “true” population response. This theory is applied in practice to mean that the “true” perspective of the target population lies within the confidence interval created for a single survey. For example, if 75 percent of residents rate a service as “excellent” or “good,” then the 4 percent margin of error (for the 95 percent level of confidence) indicates that the range of likely responses for the entire community is between 71 percent and 79 percent. This source of uncertainty is called sampling error. In addition to sampling error, other sources of error may affect any survey, including the nonresponse of residents with opinions different from survey responders. Differences in question wording, order, translation and data entry, as examples, can lead to somewhat varying results. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 10 Packet Page 15 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 8 Table 1: Survey Response Rates Number mailed Undeliverable Eligible Returned Response rate Area 1 412 18 394 55 14% Area 2 618 15 603 76 13% Area 3 438 14 424 58 14% Area 4 663 42 621 64 10% Area 5 389 19 370 40 11% Area 6 1080 135 945 105 11% Overall 3,600 243 3,357 398 12% Survey Processing (Data Entry) Upon receipt, completed surveys were assigned a unique identification number. Additionally, each survey was reviewed and “cleaned” as necessary. For example, a question may have asked a respondent to pick two items out of a list of five, but the respondent checked three; in this case, NRC would use protocols to randomly choose two of the three selected items for inclusion in the dataset. All surveys then were entered twice into an electronic dataset; any discrepancies were resolved in comparison to the original survey form. Range checks as well as other forms of quality control were also performed. NRC uses Polco, an online public engagement tool designed primarily for local governments, to collect online survey data. The Polco platform includes many features of online survey tools, but also includes elements tailored to the civic environment. For example, like NRC’s mailed surveys, surveys on Polco are presented with the City name, logo (or other image) and a description, so residents understand who is asking for input and why. Optionally, Polco can also verify respondents with local public data to ensure respondents are residents or voters. More generally, an advantage of online programming and data gathering is that it allows for more rigid control of the data format, making extensive data cleaning unnecessary. Survey Data Weighting Upon completion of data collection for both the scientific (probability) and nonscientific open participation online opt-in (non-probability) surveys, the demographics of each dataset were separately compared to those found in the 2010 Census and 2019 American Community Survey estimates for adults in the City of Palo Alto. The primary objective of weighting survey data is to make the survey respondents reflective of the larger population of the community. Both survey datasets were weighted independently to best match the Census. The characteristics used for weighting were housing tenure (rent or own), housing unit type (attached or detached), sex, and age. No adjustments were made for design effects. Results for the opt-in survey can be found in Appendix C: Results from Open Participation Survey. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 11 Packet Page 16 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 9 Table 2: Palo Alto, CA 2022 Weighting Table Characteristic Population Norm Unweighted Data Weighted Data Housing Rent home 45% 26% 44% Own home 55% 74% 56% Detached unit* 58% 68% 58% Attached unit* 42% 32% 42% Race and Ethnicity White 68% 69% 61% Not white 32% 31% 39% Not Hispanic 95% 95% 94% Hispanic 5% 5% 6% Sex and Age Female 52% 49% 51% Male 48% 51% 49% 18-34 years of age 22% 7% 21% 35-54 years of age 41% 25% 41% 55+ years of age 37% 68% 38% Females 18-34 10% 3% 10% Females 35-54 21% 13% 21% Females 55+ 20% 33% 20% Males 18-34 12% 4% 12% Males 35-54 20% 11% 20% Males 55+ 17% 35% 18% Area Area 1 13% 17% 14% Area 2 19% 17% 19% Area 3 13% 16% 15% Area 4 19% 15% 16% Area 5 9% 10% 10% Area 6 27% 25% 26% * U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2019 5-year estimates ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 12 Packet Page 17 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 10 Survey Data Analysis and Reporting The survey dataset was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). For the most part, the percentages presented in the reports represent the “percent positive.” The percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., “excellent” and “good,” “very safe” and “somewhat safe,” “essential” and “very important,” etc.), or, in the case of resident behaviors/participation, the percent positive represents the proportion of respondents indicating “yes” or participating in an activity at least once a month. On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in Appendix A. However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the reports. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item. When a table for a question that only permitted a single response does not total to exactly 100%, it is due to the common practice of percentages being rounded to the nearest whole number. Trends Over Time Trend tables display trends over time, comparing the 2022 ratings for the City of Palo Alto to the 12 previous iterations of survey results (going back to 2009) and displaying 2003 data, the year when surveying started. Trend data for Palo Alto represent important comparison data and should be examined for improvements or declines. Deviations from stable trends over time, especially, represent opportunities for understanding how local policies, programs or public information may have affected residents’ opinions. Meaningful differences between survey years have been noted within the following tables as being “higher” or “lower” if the differences are greater than approximately five percentage points3 between the 2022 and 2021 surveys; otherwise, the comparisons between 2022 and 2021 are noted as being “similar.” When comparing results over time, small differences (those with less than a 5 percent difference compared to 2021) are more likely to be due to random variation (attributable to chance over real change), while larger differences (those greater than 5 percent compared to 2021) may be due to a real shift in resident perspective. However, it is often wise to continue to monitor results over a longer period of time to rule out random variation due to chance in the sampling process. Sometimes small changes in question wording can explain changes in results as well. 3 While the percentages are reported as rounded whole numbers, meaningful differences are identified based on unrounded percentages with decimals in place. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 13 Packet Page 18 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 11 Geographic and Demographic Comparisons The geographic comparison tables on the following pages display differences in opinion of survey respondents by the six geographic subareas. Demographic comparisons display differences in opinion of survey respondents by race/ethnicity and sex. Responses have been summarized to show only the proportion of respondents giving a certain answer; for example, the percent of respondents who rated the quality of life as “excellent” or “good,” or the percent of respondents who participated in an activity at least once. It should be noted that when a table that does include all responses (not a single number) for a question that only permitted a single response does not total to exactly 100%, it is due to the common practice of percentages being rounded to the nearest whole number. The subgroup comparison tables contain the crosstabulations of survey questions by geographic area. Chi-square or ANOVA tests of significance were applied to these breakdowns of survey questions. A “p- value” of 0.05 or less indicates that there is less than a 5% probability that differences observed between groups are due to chance; or in other words, a greater than 95% probability that the differences observed in the selected categories of the sample represent “real” differences among those populations. As subgroups vary in size and each group (and each comparison to another group) has a unique margin of error, statistical testing is used to determine whether differences between subgroups are statistically significant. Each column in the following tables is labeled with a letter for each subgroup being compared. The “Overall” column, which shows the ratings for all respondents, also has a column designation of “(A)”, but no statistical tests were done for the overall rating. For each pair of subgroup ratings within a row (a single question item) that has a statistically significant difference, an uppercase letter denoting significance is shown in the cell with the larger column proportion. The letter denotes the subgroup with the smaller column proportion from which it is statistically different. Subgroups that have no uppercase letter denotation in their column and that are also not referred to in any other column were not statistically different. National Benchmark Comparisons Comparison Data NRC’s database of comparative resident opinion is comprised of resident perspectives gathered in surveys from over 600 communities whose residents evaluated the same kinds of topics as on the Palo Alto Community Survey. The surveys gathered for NRC’s database include data from communities that have been conducted by NRC, as well as citizen surveys unaffiliated with NRC. The comparison evaluations are from the most recent survey completed in each community; most communities conduct surveys every year or in alternating years. NRC adds the latest results quickly upon survey completion, keeping the benchmark data fresh and relevant, and the comparisons are to jurisdictions that have conducted a survey within the last five years. The communities in the database represent a wide geographic and population range. The City of Palo Alto chose to have comparisons made to the entire database. Interpreting the Results Ratings are compared for standard items in questions 1 through 12 when there are at least five communities in which a similar question was asked. Where comparisons are available, four columns ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 14 Packet Page 19 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 12 are provided in the table. The first column is Palo Alto’s average rating, converted to a 100-point scale. The second column is the rank assigned to Palo Alto’s rating among communities where a similar question was asked. The third column is the number of communities that asked a similar question. The final column shows the comparison of Palo Alto’s rating to the benchmark. Although responses to many of the evaluative questions were made on a four-point scale with 1 representing the best rating and 4 the worst, the benchmarks are calculated on a common scale where 0 is the worst possible rating and 100 is the best possible rating. In that final column, Palo Alto’s results are noted as being “higher” than the benchmark, “lower” than the benchmark, or “similar” to the benchmark, meaning that the average rating given by Palo Alto residents is statistically similar to or different (greater or lesser) than the benchmark. More extreme differences are noted as “much higher” or “much lower.” A rating is considered “similar” if it is within the standard range of 10 points; “higher” or “lower” if the difference between Palo Alto’s rating and the benchmark is greater than the standard range but less than twice the standard range; and “much higher” or “much lower” if the difference between Palo Alto’s rating and the benchmark is higher or lower by more than twice the standard range. Where benchmark ratings were not available, “NA” indicates that this information is not applicable (these were questions specific to Palo Alto and not asked in other communities). The 100-point scale is not a percent. It is a conversion of responses to an average rating. Each response option is assigned a value that is used in calculating the average score. For example, “very good”= 100, “good”= 75, “neither good nor bad”= 50, “bad”= 25, and “very bad”= 0. If everyone reported “very good,” then the average rating would be 100 on the 100-point scale. Likewise, if all respondents gave a “very bad” rating, the result would be 0 on the 100-point scale. If half the respondents gave a score of “very good” and half gave a score of “very bad,” the average would be 50, in the middle of the scale (like the center post of a teeter totter) or “neither good nor bad.” An example of how to convert survey frequencies into an average rating appears below. Table 3: Example of Converting Responses to the 100-point Scale How do you rate the community as a place to live? Response option Total with “don’t know” Step1: Remove “don’t know” responses Total without “don’t know” Step 2: Assign scale values Step 3: Multiply % by scale value Step 4: Sum to calculate average rating Very good 15% =15÷(100-2)= 15.3% 100 =15.3% x 100 = 15.3 Good 53% =53÷(100-2)= 54.1% 75 =54.1% x 75 = 40.6 Neither good nor bad 26% =26÷(100-2)= 26.5% 50 =26.5% x 50 = 13.3 Bad 3% =3÷(100-2)= 3.1% 25 =3.1% x 25 = 0.8 Very bad 0% =0÷(100-2)= 0% 0 =0% x 0 = 0 Don’t know 2% -- Total 100% 100% 70 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 15 Packet Page 20 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Page 13 Key Findings Residents rate the quality of life in Palo Alto highly. On par with previous years, Palo Alto residents continue to give high marks to their neighborhood as a place to live, raise children, and the overall quality of life in Palo Alto. About 9 in 10 residents rated each of these items positively. Further, each rating was similar to comparison communities, and Palo Alto as a place to raise children improved from 2021 to 2022. About 4 in 5 residents gave favorable ratings to Palo Alto as a place to work, which was higher than the national benchmark. One item, Palo Alto as a place to retire, decreased from 2021 to 2022. This rating was also lower than the national benchmark. Three-quarters of residents would recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks (similar to 2021 and to the national average). About 85% of residents indicated that they would be likely to remain in Palo Alto for the next five years, a rating higher than 2021 and similar to the benchmark. While residents value City services and events, civic participation has decreased. When compared to 2021, residents reported more frequent use of a number of city services in the last 12 months in 2022. The use of Palo Alto recreation centers or their services (47% used in the last 12 months), use of Palo Alto public libraries or their services (72%), attendance to City-sponsored events (45%), and use of the City’s website to conduct business or pay bills (60%) increased from 2021 to 2022. However, fewer residents in 2022 compared to 2021 reported attending a local public meeting (21%), watching (online or on television) a local public meeting (23%), and voting in their most recent local election (77%). Despite the decreases, each of these items was on par with national benchmarks. Residents are still contacting the City of Palo Alto for help or information often, with nearly 3 in 5 indicating they did so in the last 12 months. This was similar to 2021 and higher than the national average. However, the job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement continues to decrease over time. About 56% of residents rated this item positively in 2018 compared to 51% in 2021, and 46% in 2022. This rating, though, was similar to the national benchmark. Further, opportunities to learn about City services through social media website such as Twitter and Facebook decreased in 2022, with about 60% rating excellent or good. Similarly, public information services (non-Police/public safety) decreased from 75% in 2021 to 69% in 2022. Residents value Palo Alto’s natural environment. Nearly 9 in 10 residents rated the overall quality of the natural environment in Palo Alto as excellent or good, a rating similar to 2021 and the national benchmark. Almost all residents (94%) visited a neighborhood or City park in the last 12 months, similar to 2021. Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) was rated positively by over 4 in 5 residents, similar to 2021 and higher than the national average. Most residents rated the quality of Palo Alto open space (92% excellent or good) and City parks (93%) positively. The rating for Palo Alto open space was higher in 2022 compared to 2021. Palo Alto open space was rated much higher than the national benchmark, and City parks was rated higher. When asked about community focus in the coming two years, 4 in 5 residents rated it essential or very important to focus on the overall quality of the natural environment in Palo Alto, similar to 2021 and the national average. Residents were also asked to name one thing they believe the City does well and would want to maintain. The most popular answer was parks, open space, and the natural environment, which was mentioned by one-quarter of residents. Report of Results ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 16 Packet Page 21 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 14 Affordability and cost of living continue to be community concerns. Similar to past years, affordability-related measures, such as cost of living (5% excellent or good) and availability of affordable quality housing (6%), while similar to Palo Alto’s 2021 ratings, were much lower than the benchmark comparisons. The variety of housing options, rated positively by 1 in 5 residents, was lower than the national average. Rated positively by 2 in 5 residents, affordable high- speed internet was similar to the national benchmark. Residents are supportive of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. When asked to rate how important it is for Palo Alto to focus on reducing community greenhouse gas emissions in the coming two years, 7 in 10 residents indicated it to be essential or very important, a rating similar to 2021.The City also asked residents their likelihood of making changes in their home to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. When asked what the likelihood would be of replacing their gas water heater with a heat pump water heater when ready to replace the water heater, 3 in 5 residents indicated they would be at least somewhat likely to do so. Additionally, residents were asked the likelihood that they would replace their gas furnace with a heat pump HVAC system when ready to replace the furnace. About 3 in 5 residents indicated that they would be somewhat likely to make that change. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 17 Packet Page 22 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 15 Appendix A: Results Tables The following pages contain results for each question on the survey, the first set of results includes the “don’t know” responses, followed by results excluding the “don’t know” responses (where “don’t know” was an option), trends over time and geographic comparisons. For the questions in the survey where respondents could answer “don’t know,” the proportion of respondents giving this reply were not included for the comparisons over time and by geography. In other words, these tables display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item. For the basic frequencies, the percent of respondents giving a particular response is shown followed by the number of respondents (denoted with “N=”); the number of respondents is specific to each item, based on the actual number of responses received for the question or question item and based on the weighted data (weighted responses are rounded to the nearest whole number and may not exactly add up to the total number of responses). Generally, a small portion of respondents select “don’t know” for most survey items and, inevitably, some items have a larger “don’t know” percentage. Comparing responses to a set of items on the same scale can be misleading when the “don’t know” responses have been included. If two items have disparate “don’t know” percentages (2 percent versus 17 percent, for example), any apparent similarities or differences across the remaining response options may disappear once the “don’t know” responses are removed. Tables displaying trend data appear only for the years in which the questions were asked. Meaningful differences between survey years have been noted within the following tables as being “higher” or “lower” if the differences are greater than approximately five percentage points between the 2022 and 2021 surveys; otherwise, the comparison between 2022 and 2021 are noted as being “similar.” Geographic and demographic comparisons are made for questions 1 through 17 (some questions having multiple, non-scaled responses are not included). Chi-square or ANOVA tests of significance were applied to these breakdowns of survey questions. A “p-value” of 0.05 or less indicates that there is less than a 5% probability that differences observed between groups are due to chance; or in other words, a greater than 95% probability that the differences observed in the selected categories of the sample represent “real” differences among those populations. As subgroups vary in size and each group (and each comparison to another group) has a unique margin of error, statistical testing is used to determine whether differences between subgroups are statistically significant. Each column in the following tables is labeled with a letter for each subgroup being compared. The “Overall” column, which shows the ratings for all respondents, also has a column designation of “(A)”, but no statistical tests were done for the overall rating. For each pair of subgroup ratings within a row (a single question item) that has a statistically significant difference, an upper case letter denoting significance is shown in the cell with the larger column proportion. The letter denotes the subgroup with the smaller column proportion from which it is statistically different. Subgroups that have no upper case letter denotation in their column and that are also not referred to in any other column were not statistically different. For example, in Table 8 on page 18, respondents in Area 1 (A) gave significantly higher ratings to Palo Alto as a place to work than respondents in both Area 2 (B) and Area 4 (D), as denoted by the “B” and “D” listed in the cell of the ratings for Area 1. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 18 Packet Page 23 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 16 Question 1 Table 4: Question 1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Palo Alto as a place to live 38% N=151 50% N=196 12% N=47 0% N=1 0% N=0 100% N=395 Your neighborhood as a place to live 46% N=181 42% N=167 11% N=45 1% N=3 0% N=0 100% N=395 Palo Alto as a place to raise children 37% N=145 35% N=139 8% N=33 3% N=11 17% N=66 100% N=394 Palo Alto as a place to work 31% N=122 36% N=142 16% N=63 2% N=9 15% N=59 100% N=395 Palo Alto as a place to visit 29% N=113 38% N=150 26% N=103 4% N=16 3% N=13 100% N=396 Palo Alto as a place to retire 16% N=62 25% N=97 23% N=91 24% N=93 13% N=51 100% N=394 The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 28% N=110 60% N=236 11% N=44 1% N=4 0% N=0 100% N=394 Table 5: Question 1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Palo Alto as a place to live 38% N=151 50% N=196 12% N=47 0% N=1 100% N=395 Your neighborhood as a place to live 46% N=181 42% N=167 11% N=45 1% N=3 100% N=395 Palo Alto as a place to raise children 44% N=145 43% N=139 10% N=33 3% N=11 100% N=328 Palo Alto as a place to work 36% N=122 42% N=142 19% N=63 3% N=9 100% N=336 Palo Alto as a place to visit 30% N=113 39% N=150 27% N=103 4% N=16 100% N=382 Palo Alto as a place to retire 18% N=62 28% N=97 26% N=91 27% N=93 100% N=343 The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 28% N=110 60% N=236 11% N=44 1% N=4 100% N=394 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 19 Packet Page 24 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 17 Table 6: Question 1 - Historical Results Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Palo Alto: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Palo Alto as a place to live 95% 94% 95% 94% 95% 92% 95% 92% 91% 91% 89% 88% 88% Similar Your neighborhood as a place to live 88% 90% 91% 90% 90% 91% 92% 90% 91% 91% 90% 89% 88% Similar Palo Alto as a place to raise children 90% 91% 93% 93% 92% 90% 93% 87% 84% 84% 82% 82% 87% Higher Palo Alto as a place to work NA 87% 87% 89% 88% 89% 86% 87% 82% 82% 80% 82% 79% Similar Palo Alto as a place to visit NA NA NA NA NA NA 75% 74% 72% 71% 68% 70% 69% Similar Palo Alto as a place to retire 62% 64% 65% 68% 68% 56% 60% 52% 50% 51% 40% 52% 46% Lower The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 92% 91% 93% 94% 92% 94% 91% 91% 88% 85% 89% 84% 88% Similar Table 7: Question 1 - Benchmark Comparisons City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark Palo Alto as a place to live 75 171 349 Similar Your neighborhood as a place to live 78 111 302 Similar Palo Alto as a place to raise children 76 141 353 Similar Palo Alto as a place to work 71 61 345 Higher Palo Alto as a place to visit 65 104 302 Similar Palo Alto as a place to retire 46 312 349 Lower The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 72 167 374 Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 20 Packet Page 25 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 18 Table 8: Question 1 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Palo Alto as a place to live 96% E F 89% E 92% E 90% E 74% 84% 88% Your neighborhood as a place to live 92% 88% 89% 84% 81% 90% 88% Palo Alto as a place to raise children 86% E 90% E 94% E F 94% E F 65% 82% E 87% Palo Alto as a place to work 89% B D 71% 85% 72% 75% 82% 79% Palo Alto as a place to visit 73% 68% 72% 69% 59% 70% 69% Palo Alto as a place to retire 63% B D E 40% 52% 43% 30% 48% 46% The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 96% C E F 94% C E F 83% 92% E 76% 84% 88% Table 9: Question 1 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Palo Alto as a place to live 91% B 83% 89% 87% 88% Your neighborhood as a place to live 90% 85% 90% 86% 88% Palo Alto as a place to raise children 86% 90% 89% 86% 87% Palo Alto as a place to work 81% 76% 77% 81% 79% Palo Alto as a place to visit 67% 69% 76% B 61% 69% Palo Alto as a place to retire 53% B 39% 46% 47% 46% The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 91% 85% 90% 87% 88% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 21 Packet Page 26 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 19 Question 2 Table 10: Question 2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 20% N=80 52% N=203 20% N=80 8% N=31 0% N=0 100% N=393 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 38% N=150 46% N=181 14% N=55 2% N=7 0% N=0 100% N=393 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 45% N=174 43% N=168 11% N=45 1% N=2 0% N=0 100% N=389 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 47% N=184 40% N=157 9% N=35 1% N=5 3% N=13 100% N=393 Residents' connection and engagement with their community 18% N=71 42% N=162 28% N=110 7% N=27 5% N=21 100% N=391 Table 11: Question 2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 20% N=80 52% N=203 20% N=80 8% N=31 100% N=393 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 38% N=150 46% N=181 14% N=55 2% N=7 100% N=393 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 45% N=174 43% N=168 11% N=45 1% N=2 100% N=389 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 48% N=184 41% N=157 9% N=35 1% N=5 100% N=380 Residents' connection and engagement with their community 19% N=71 44% N=162 30% N=110 7% N=27 100% N=370 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 22 Packet Page 27 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 20 Table 12: Question 2 - Historical Results Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) NA NA NA NA NA NA 67% 63% 59% 65% 62% 76% 72% Similar Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto NA NA NA NA NA NA 92% 91% 94% 94% 91% 87% 84% Similar Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto NA 84% 84% 84% 88% 83% 88% 86% 84% 89% 87% 90% 88% Similar Health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto NA NA NA NA NA NA 88% 88% 85% 88% 84% 88% 90% Similar Residents' connection and engagement with their community NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 62% 63% Similar Table 13: Question 2 - Benchmark Comparisons City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 61 74 281 Similar Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 73 135 338 Similar Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 77 55 290 Similar Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 79 11 283 Higher Residents' connection and engagement with their community 58 45 173 Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 23 Packet Page 28 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 21 Table 14: Question 2 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 73% 80% E 75% 69% 61% 70% 72% Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 83% 89% C E 76% 86% 72% 89% C E 84% Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 95% E 92% E 88% E 84% E 70% 90% E 88% Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 95% E 90% 84% 93% 82% 90% 90% Residents' connection and engagement with their community 73% 60% 72% 59% 53% 61% 63% Table 15: Question 2 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 76% B 65% 76% 68% 72% Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 86% 83% 86% 83% 84% Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 88% 88% 86% 90% 88% Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 92% 87% 90% 89% 90% Residents' connection and engagement with their community 63% 62% 64% 63% 63% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 24 Packet Page 29 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 22 Question 3 Table 16: Question 3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Don't know Total Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 33% N=127 42% N=162 16% N=63 9% N=34 1% N=3 100% N=388 Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 53% N=206 29% N=112 7% N=28 9% N=35 3% N=12 100% N=392 Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 56% N=217 22% N=87 5% N=21 2% N=7 15% N=59 100% N=391 Table 17: Question 3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Total Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 33% N=127 42% N=162 16% N=63 9% N=34 100% N=386 Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 54% N=206 29% N=112 7% N=28 9% N=35 100% N=381 Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 65% N=217 26% N=87 6% N=21 2% N=7 100% N=332 Table 18: Question 3 - Historical Results Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks NA 90% 90% 91% 92% 89% 86% 80% 72% 75% 73% 74% 75% Similar Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years NA 87% 83% 87% 87% 87% 83% 80% 75% 76% 78% 78% 84% Higher Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 91% 92% 91% 92% Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 25 Packet Page 30 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 23 Table 19: Question 3 - Benchmark Comparisons City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 75 246 291 Similar Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 84 157 288 Similar *A benchmark comparison was not available for ''Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends''. Table 20: Question 3 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "very likely" or "somewhat likely" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 89% D E F 75% E 80% E 71% 56% 74% E 75% Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 98% B E F 79% 91% F 86% 77% 77% 84% Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 90% E 99% E 92% E 95% E 77% 91% E 92% Table 21: Question 3 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "very likely" or "somewhat likely" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 75% 74% 80% B 70% 75% Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 82% 86% 89% B 77% 84% Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 92% 92% 91% 93% 92% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 26 Packet Page 31 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 24 Question 4 Table 22: Question 4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate the job you feel the Palo Alto community does at each of the following. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Making all residents feel welcome 19% N=75 38% N=149 25% N=99 11% N=42 7% N=27 100% N=391 Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 18% N=72 30% N=117 24% N=92 22% N=88 6% N=23 100% N=391 Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 25% N=96 36% N=140 22% N=88 11% N=42 7% N=26 100% N=391 Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 10% N=40 25% N=97 27% N=106 15% N=60 23% N=88 100% N=391 Table 23: Question 4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the job you feel the Palo Alto community does at each of the following. Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Making all residents feel welcome 21% N=75 41% N=149 27% N=99 11% N=42 100% N=364 Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 19% N=72 32% N=117 25% N=92 24% N=88 100% N=369 Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 26% N=96 38% N=140 24% N=88 11% N=42 100% N=365 Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 13% N=40 32% N=97 35% N=106 20% N=60 100% N=303 Table 24: Question 4 - Historical Results Please rate the job you feel the Palo Alto community does at each of the following. Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2021 2022 Making all residents feel welcome 59% 62% Similar Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 52% 51% Similar Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 65% 65% Similar Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 47% 45% Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 27 Packet Page 32 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 25 Table 25: Question 4 - Benchmark Comparisons City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark Making all residents feel welcome 57 134 180 Similar Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 49 130 176 Similar Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 60 72 177 Similar Taking care of vulnerable residents 46 131 173 Similar Table 26: Question 4 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Making all residents feel welcome 66% E 65% E 71% E 65% E 39% 58% E 62% Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 49% 50% 58% D 39% 45% 58% D 51% Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 74% E 68% 74% E 58% 49% 62% 65% Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 64% D F 46% 54% 38% 41% 39% 45% Table 27: Question 4 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Making all residents feel welcome 59% 63% 64% 58% 62% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 28 Packet Page 33 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 26 Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 46% 57% A 47% 56% 51% Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 62% 68% 58% 72% A 65% Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 41% 51% 41% 51% 45% Question 5 Table 28: Question 5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 25% N=99 54% N=212 18% N=69 2% N=7 1% N=3 100% N=390 Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 18% N=70 40% N=156 33% N=130 8% N=33 0% N=0 100% N=389 Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 23% N=91 37% N=147 32% N=125 5% N=21 2% N=8 100% N=392 Employment opportunities 18% N=69 36% N=139 14% N=57 5% N=20 27% N=106 100% N=390 Shopping opportunities 29% N=115 43% N=166 23% N=88 5% N=18 1% N=3 100% N=390 Cost of living in Palo Alto 2% N=7 3% N=13 26% N=101 68% N=267 1% N=3 100% N=391 Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 29% N=114 46% N=180 20% N=80 3% N=13 1% N=4 100% N=392 Traffic flow on major streets 9% N=37 38% N=147 38% N=148 15% N=57 1% N=2 100% N=391 Ease of public parking 22% N=86 43% N=169 24% N=95 8% N=33 2% N=9 100% N=392 Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 22% N=87 49% N=192 21% N=84 6% N=23 1% N=3 100% N=390 Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 5% N=21 13% N=49 26% N=100 31% N=120 26% N=101 100% N=390 Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 28% N=108 39% N=151 16% N=64 5% N=18 12% N=47 100% N=387 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 29 Packet Page 34 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 27 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Ease of walking in Palo Alto 40% N=155 44% N=174 12% N=46 3% N=12 1% N=4 100% N=392 Variety of housing options 3% N=14 16% N=63 33% N=129 39% N=153 8% N=31 100% N=391 Availability of affordable quality housing 1% N=6 4% N=15 15% N=61 70% N=277 9% N=35 100% N=394 Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto 7% N=27 20% N=76 26% N=103 20% N=78 27% N=104 100% N=387 Availability of paths and walking trails 28% N=111 46% N=181 18% N=72 5% N=19 3% N=10 100% N=392 Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.) 28% N=110 42% N=167 18% N=72 3% N=11 9% N=34 100% N=393 Recreational opportunities 24% N=96 52% N=203 17% N=67 3% N=10 4% N=17 100% N=393 Availability of affordable quality mental health care 5% N=20 6% N=22 13% N=50 18% N=68 59% N=229 100% N=389 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 24% N=93 51% N=199 17% N=69 3% N=13 5% N=20 100% N=393 Table 29: Question 5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 26% N=99 55% N=212 18% N=69 2% N=7 100% N=387 Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 18% N=70 40% N=156 33% N=130 8% N=33 100% N=389 Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 24% N=91 38% N=147 33% N=125 6% N=21 100% N=384 Employment opportunities 24% N=69 49% N=139 20% N=57 7% N=20 100% N=285 Shopping opportunities 30% N=115 43% N=166 23% N=88 5% N=18 100% N=387 Cost of living in Palo Alto 2% N=7 3% N=13 26% N=101 69% N=267 100% N=388 Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 30% N=114 47% N=180 21% N=80 3% N=13 100% N=387 Traffic flow on major streets 9% N=37 38% N=147 38% N=148 15% N=57 100% N=388 Ease of public parking 22% N=86 44% N=169 25% N=95 9% N=33 100% N=383 Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 23% N=87 50% N=192 22% N=84 6% N=23 100% N=386 Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 7% N=21 17% N=49 35% N=100 41% N=120 100% N=289 Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 32% N=108 44% N=151 19% N=64 5% N=18 100% N=340 Ease of walking in Palo Alto 40% N=155 45% N=174 12% N=46 3% N=12 100% N=388 Variety of housing options 4% N=14 18% N=63 36% N=129 43% N=153 100% N=360 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 30 Packet Page 35 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 28 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Availability of affordable quality housing 2% N=6 4% N=15 17% N=61 77% N=277 100% N=359 Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto 9% N=27 27% N=76 36% N=103 28% N=78 100% N=283 Availability of paths and walking trails 29% N=111 47% N=181 19% N=72 5% N=19 100% N=382 Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.) 31% N=110 46% N=167 20% N=72 3% N=11 100% N=360 Recreational opportunities 25% N=96 54% N=203 18% N=67 3% N=10 100% N=376 Availability of affordable quality mental health care 12% N=20 14% N=22 31% N=50 43% N=68 100% N=161 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 25% N=93 53% N=199 18% N=69 4% N=13 100% N=373 Table 30: Question 5 - Historical Results Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 85% 80% Lower Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 66% 58% Lower Vibrancy of downtown/commercial areas NA NA NA NA NA NA 77% 76% 73% 73% 71% 72% 62% Lower Employment opportunities 33% 51% 52% 56% 68% 68% 69% 66% 70% 74% 73% 68% 73% Higher Shopping opportunities NA 70% 70% 71% 69% 73% 82% 79% 80% 82% 79% 78% 73% Lower Cost of living in Palo Alto NA NA NA NA NA NA 11% 8% 7% 8% 8% 6% 5% Similar Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto NA 92% 90% 92% 92% 90% 92% 88% 86% 86% 83% 78% 76% Similar Traffic flow on major streets 36% 38% 46% 47% 40% 36% 34% 35% 31% 30% 33% 49% 47% Similar Ease of public parking NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 38% 36% 33% 32% 59% 67% Higher Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 55% 60% 65% 66% 62% 51% 55% 52% 44% 44% 42% 70% 72% Similar Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto NA 52% 63% 62% 64% 71% 65% 36% 26% 28% 29% 30% 24% Lower ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 31 Packet Page 36 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 29 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 84% 79% 81% 77% 81% 78% 78% 77% 74% 78% 74% 79% 76% Similar Ease of walking in Palo Alto NA 82% 85% 83% 82% 84% 84% 83% 80% 86% 83% 86% 85% Similar Variety of housing options NA 39% 37% 37% 29% 26% 27% 20% 17% 18% 13% 27% 21% Lower Availability of affordable quality housing 6% 17% 15% 14% 12% 13% 11% 8% 6% 6% 5% 9% 6% Similar Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto NA 57% 55% 53% 57% 56% 44% 51% 49% 42% 50% 38% 36% Similar Availability of paths and walking trails NA 74% 75% 75% 75% 77% 71% 74% 73% 76% 77% 76% 76% Similar Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 78% 78% 79% 78% 79% 77% Similar Recreational opportunities NA 78% 80% 81% 81% 81% 77% 80% 77% 81% 75% 77% 79% Similar Availability of affordable quality mental health care NA NA NA NA NA NA 63% 53% 46% 52% 38% 44% 26% Lower Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities NA 74% 74% 73% 77% 69% 81% 79% 77% 81% 74% 71% 78% Higher ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 32 Packet Page 37 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 30 Table 31: Question 5 - Benchmark Comparisons City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 68 57 287 Similar Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 56 89 173 Similar Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 60 75 270 Similar Employment opportunities 63 17 304 Higher Shopping opportunities 66 38 295 Higher Cost of living in Palo Alto 13 279 283 Much lower Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 67 139 342 Similar Traffic flow on major streets 47 169 316 Similar Ease of public parking 60 87 264 Similar Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 63 143 303 Similar Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 30 181 264 Similar Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 67 22 305 Higher Ease of walking in Palo Alto 74 28 306 Higher Variety of housing options 27 268 288 Lower Availability of affordable quality housing 10 305 311 Much lower Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto 39 263 299 Lower Availability of paths and walking trails 67 129 308 Similar Fitness opportunities 68 98 276 Similar Recreational opportunities 67 93 297 Similar Availability of affordable quality mental health care 32 224 266 Lower Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 67 47 293 Higher ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 33 Packet Page 38 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 31 Table 32: Question 5 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 88% E 87% E 76% 80% E 64% 81% E 80% Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 56% 64% 54% 54% 54% 61% 58% Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 63% 75% D E 66% D 46% 50% 64% D 62% Employment opportunities 79% 72% 71% 74% 61% 77% 73% Shopping opportunities 76% 74% 77% 71% 60% 73% 73% Cost of living in Palo Alto 3% 4% 4% 2% 4% 10% D 5% Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 89% E F 78% E 80% E 76% 60% 72% 76% Traffic flow on major streets 50% 50% 41% 47% 38% 51% 47% Ease of public parking 60% 69% E 68% 65% 50% 75% E 67% Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 78% E 80% E 72% 72% E 54% 71% E 72% Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 19% 24% 24% 12% 22% 33% D 24% Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 61% 85% A E 76% 80% A 67% 77% A 76% Ease of walking in Palo Alto 83% 90% D E 88% D 71% 76% 92% D E 85% Variety of housing options 17% 23% 27% 19% 12% 24% 21% Availability of affordable quality housing 10% E 6% 7% 5% 0% 5% 6% Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto 38% 32% 47% 37% 30% 35% 36% Availability of paths and walking trails 79% 76% 83% 75% 69% 75% 76% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 34 Packet Page 39 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 32 Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.) 87% E 74% 75% 85% 69% 73% 77% Recreational opportunities 83% E 79% E 72% 86% E 60% 85% E 79% Availability of affordable quality mental health care 29% 25% 39% D E 7% 10% 34% D 26% Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 72% 81% E 72% 86% E 59% 85% A C E 78% Table 33: Question 5 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 81% 79% 84% 77% 80% Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 59% 56% 62% 53% 58% Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 61% 64% 67% B 57% 62% Employment opportunities 76% 72% 71% 77% 73% Shopping opportunities 74% 72% 78% B 68% 73% Cost of living in Palo Alto 5% 6% 7% 4% 5% Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 80% 74% 79% 74% 76% Traffic flow on major streets 49% 47% 43% 54% A 47% Ease of public parking 71% 64% 65% 70% 67% Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 74% 71% 72% 73% 72% Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 23% 27% 27% 23% 24% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 35 Packet Page 40 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 33 Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 75% 79% 79% 74% 76% Ease of walking in Palo Alto 88% 81% 87% 84% 85% Variety of housing options 17% 27% A 20% 23% 21% Availability of affordable quality housing 3% 9% A 5% 7% 6% Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto 36% 36% 39% 35% 36% Availability of paths and walking trails 77% 77% 80% 73% 76% Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.) 79% 77% 82% 74% 77% Recreational opportunities 84% B 75% 80% 80% 79% Availability of affordable quality mental health care 26% 27% 20% 37% A 26% Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 77% 80% 81% 76% 78% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 36 Packet Page 41 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 34 Question 6 Table 34: Question 6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 5% N=21 12% N=46 15% N=58 19% N=74 48% N=184 100% N=383 K-12 education 34% N=132 33% N=129 7% N=29 2% N=6 24% N=94 100% N=389 Adult educational opportunities 19% N=73 36% N=138 12% N=46 1% N=3 33% N=128 100% N=389 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 13% N=50 44% N=172 26% N=100 4% N=17 12% N=48 100% N=388 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 16% N=64 36% N=141 25% N=99 10% N=39 12% N=47 100% N=389 Opportunities to learn about City services through social media websites such as Twitter and Facebook 9% N=36 23% N=90 19% N=72 5% N=20 44% N=171 100% N=389 Table 35: Question 6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 11% N=21 23% N=46 29% N=58 37% N=74 100% N=199 K-12 education 45% N=132 44% N=129 10% N=29 2% N=6 100% N=295 Adult educational opportunities 28% N=73 53% N=138 18% N=46 1% N=3 100% N=261 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 15% N=50 51% N=172 29% N=100 5% N=17 100% N=340 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 19% N=64 41% N=141 29% N=99 11% N=39 100% N=342 Opportunities to learn about City services through social media websites such as Twitter and Facebook 17% N=36 41% N=90 33% N=72 9% N=20 100% N=218 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 37 Packet Page 42 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 35 Table 36: Question 6 - Historical Results Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Availability of affordable quality child care/preschool 25% 32% 25% 35% 27% 31% 49% 49% 39% 47% 37% 44% 34% Lower K-12 education NA NA NA 92% 92% 94% 95% 92% 90% 91% 91% 90% 88% Similar Adult educational opportunities NA NA NA NA NA NA 89% 83% 78% 82% 77% 83% 81% Similar Opportunities to participate in social events and activities NA 80% 74% 76% 74% 74% 71% 74% 70% 72% 65% 62% 65% Similar Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 73% 78% 79% 78% 80% 76% 76% 68% 72% 72% 72% 59% 60% Similar Opportunities to learn about City services through social media websites such as Twitter and Facebook NA NA NA 63% 63% 71% 73% 75% 68% 76% 67% 71% 58% Lower Table 37: Question 6 - Benchmark Comparisons* City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark Availability of affordable quality child care/preschool 36 235 277 Lower K-12 education 77 39 280 Higher Adult educational opportunities 69 13 273 Higher Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 58 115 284 Similar Opportunities to participate in community matters 61 74 283 Similar Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 56 128 301 Similar Table 38: Question 6 - Geographic Subgroup Results ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 38 Packet Page 43 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 36 Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 36% 44% 29% 22% 38% 32% 34% K-12 education 79% 83% 92% E 93% A E 74% 97% A B E 88% Adult educational opportunities 79% 79% 77% 78% 82% 88% 81% Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 69% 73% E 61% 67% 50% 64% 65% Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 69% D 56% 70% D E 48% 47% 64% 60% Opportunities to learn about City services through social media websites such as Twitter and Facebook 46% 64% 53% 75% A F 59% 50% 58% Table 39: Question 6 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 27% 41% A 33% 35% 34% K-12 education 94% B 81% 86% 92% 88% Adult educational opportunities 81% 79% 82% 80% 81% Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 66% 66% 70% 63% 65% Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 66% B 53% 56% 66% 60% Opportunities to learn about City services through social media websites such as Twitter and Facebook 62% 59% 66% B 50% 58% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 39 Packet Page 44 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 37 Question 7 Table 40: Question 7 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. No Yes Total Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their services 53% N=208 47% N=186 100% N=393 Visited a neighborhood park or City park 6% N=25 94% N=369 100% N=394 Used Palo Alto public libraries or their services 28% N=109 72% N=286 100% N=394 Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Palo Alto 76% N=299 24% N=94 100% N=393 Attended a City-sponsored event 55% N=215 45% N=178 100% N=393 Participated in a club 78% N=307 22% N=84 100% N=391 Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 12% N=46 88% N=348 100% N=394 Done a favor for a neighbor 24% N=95 76% N=299 100% N=394 Used the City’s website to conduct business or pay bills 40% N=157 60% N=237 100% N=394 Used the Utilities website to conduct business or pay bills 31% N=120 69% N=271 100% N=391 Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person, phone, email or web) for help or information 42% N=164 58% N=227 100% N=391 Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person, phone, email or web) to express your opinion 79% N=310 21% N=80 100% N=390 Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.) 79% N=313 21% N=81 100% N=394 Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting 77% N=303 23% N=90 100% N=393 Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto 55% N=216 45% N=177 100% N=393 Voted in your most recent local election 23% N=91 77% N=301 100% N=392 Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving 57% N=222 43% N=169 100% N=391 Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 40% N=157 60% N=234 100% N=391 Walked or biked instead of driving 12% N=46 88% N=348 100% N=394 Observed a code violation or other hazard in Palo Alto (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 60% N=233 40% N=156 100% N=389 Household member was a victim of a crime in Palo Alto 88% N=344 12% N=48 100% N=392 Reported a crime to the police in Palo Alto 85% N=334 15% N=58 100% N=392 Stocked 14 days’ worth of supplies in case of a major disaster where you have no electricity, water, internet, or telephone service 66% N=261 34% N=132 100% N=393 *This question did not have a “don’t know” option. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 40 Packet Page 45 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 38 Table 41: Question 7 - Historical Results* Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months (percent “yes”). Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their services NA 63% 60% 60% 65% 58% 63% 65% 63% 63% 65% 39% 47% Higher Visited a neighborhood park or City park NA 94% 94% 91% 95% 94% 91% 94% 93% 91% 94% 94% 94% Similar Used Palo Alto public libraries or their services NA 82% 76% 74% 77% 77% 68% 76% 73% 75% 78% 62% 72% Higher Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Palo Alto NA NA NA NA 40% NA 30% 30% 31% 30% 30% 24% 24% Similar Attended a City-sponsored event NA NA NA NA NA NA 50% 57% 51% 55% 52% 30% 45% Higher Participated in a club NA 33% 31% 31% 38% 29% 27% 34% 30% 29% 31% 17% 22% Higher Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors NA NA NA NA NA NA 91% 89% 88% 92% 90% 88% 88% Similar Done a favor for a neighbor NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 78% 76% Similar Used the City’s website to conduct business or pay bills NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 53% 60% Higher Used the Utilities website to conduct business or pay bills NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 69% 69% Similar Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in- person, phone, email or web) for help or information NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 55% 58% Similar Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person, phone, email or web) to express your opinion NA NA NA NA NA NA 17% 15% 17% 20% 21% 25% 21% Similar Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.) NA 28% 27% 27% 25% 28% 22% 22% 21% 24% 25% 26% 21% Lower Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting NA 28% 28% 27% 21% 24% 16% 18% 14% 16% 12% 29% 23% Lower ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 41 Packet Page 46 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 39 Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months (percent “yes”). Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto NA 56% 51% 45% 54% 50% 40% 46% 45% 47% 47% 37% 45% Higher Voted in your most recent local election NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 83% 77% Lower Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 34% 43% Higher Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 41% 60% Higher Walked or biked instead of driving NA NA NA NA NA NA 85% 87% 87% 84% 88% 86% 88% Similar Did NOT observe a code violation or other hazard in Palo Alto NA NA NA NA NA NA 70% 67% 67% 62% 63% 60% 60% Similar Household member was NOT the victim of a crime in Palo Alto NA 89% 91% 91% 91% 94% 92% 93% 91% 90% 93% 86% 88% Similar Did NOT report a crime to the police in Palo Alto NA NA NA NA NA NA 87% 87% 86% 85% 87% 79% 85% Higher Stocked 14 days’ worth of supplies in case of a major disaster where you have no electricity, water, internet, and telephone service NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 26% 49% 34% Lower *Some questions were re-worded in the Historical Results table to reflect the positive rating of 'yes.' ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 42 Packet Page 47 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 40 Table 42: Question 7 - Benchmark Comparisons City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark Contacted Palo Alto for help or information 58 35 318 Higher Contacted Palo Alto elected officials to express your opinion 21 70 276 Similar Attended a local public meeting 21 107 279 Similar Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting 23 144 260 Similar Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto 45 45 281 Higher Voted in your most recent local election 77 90 174 Similar Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving 43 32 252 Much higher Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 60 9 273 Higher Walked or biked instead of driving 88 8 277 Much higher ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 43 Packet Page 48 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 41 Table 43: Question 7 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent "yes" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their services 47% 49% 49% 48% 40% 48% 47% Visited a neighborhood park or City park 87% 100% A F 94% 95% 91% 92% 94% Used Palo Alto public libraries or their services 69% 86% A E F 80% E F 76% 59% 64% 72% Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Palo Alto 22% 26% 21% 22% 32% 23% 24% Attended a City-sponsored event 49% 48% 41% 40% 32% 52% E 45% Participated in a club 20% 14% 18% 28% B 19% 27% B 22% Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 88% 95% D 94% D 82% 86% 85% 88% Done a favor for a neighbor 78% 69% 78% 76% 89% B F 73% 76% Used the City’s website to conduct business or pay bills 57% 59% 50% 66% 67% 62% 60% Used the Utilities website to conduct business or pay bills 71% 71% 59% 76% C 70% 69% 69% Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person, phone, email or web) for help or information 53% 74% A C D F 51% 54% 69% 52% 58% Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person, phone, email or web) to express your opinion 14% 26% 19% 18% 31% A 19% 21% Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.) 10% 24% 23% 18% 31% A 20% 21% Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting 21% 20% 20% 16% 23% 31% D 23% Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto 38% 52% 45% 47% 39% 45% 45% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 44 Packet Page 49 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 42 Percent "yes" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Voted in your most recent local election 89% C E 75% 69% 81% 65% 78% 77% Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving 31% 44% 33% 48% 49% 49% A C 43% Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 59% 67% C E 50% 70% C E 44% 60% 60% Walked or biked instead of driving 78% 87% 91% A 91% A 93% A 90% A 88% Observed a code violation or other hazard in Palo Alto (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 32% 48% C 31% 55% A C E F 34% 38% 40% Household member was a victim of a crime in Palo Alto 21% C D F 19% D F 9% 7% 9% 9% 12% Reported a crime to the police in Palo Alto 15% 21% D 12% 8% 17% 16% 15% Stocked 14 days’ worth of supplies in case of a major disaster where you have no electricity, water, internet, or telephone service 32% 37% 31% 34% 39% 32% 34% Table 44: Question 7 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent "yes" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their services 44% 51% 51% 44% 47% Visited a neighborhood park or City park 94% 94% 92% 95% 94% Used Palo Alto public libraries or their services 70% 77% 76% 69% 72% Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Palo Alto 24% 23% 26% 22% 24% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 45 Packet Page 50 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 43 Percent "yes" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Attended a City-sponsored event 45% 46% 45% 48% 45% Participated in a club 22% 20% 28% B 16% 22% Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 90% 85% 87% 89% 88% Done a favor for a neighbor 77% 72% 79% 71% 76% Used the City’s website to conduct business or pay bills 53% 68% A 63% 57% 60% Used the Utilities website to conduct business or pay bills 63% 78% A 67% 72% 69% Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person, phone, email or web) for help or information 57% 57% 59% 57% 58% Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person, phone, email or web) to express your opinion 24% B 13% 25% B 16% 21% Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.) 21% 22% 22% 19% 21% Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting 21% 22% 24% 21% 23% Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto 42% 48% 53% B 38% 45% Voted in your most recent local election 84% B 66% 80% 73% 77% Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving 44% 44% 34% 54% A 43% Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone 55% 66% A 65% 56% 60% Walked or biked instead of driving 90% 88% 86% 91% 88% Observed a code violation or other hazard in Palo Alto (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 43% 35% 42% 39% 40% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 46 Packet Page 51 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 44 Percent "yes" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Household member was a victim of a crime in Palo Alto 12% 13% 9% 17% A 12% Reported a crime to the police in Palo Alto 17% 11% 14% 16% 15% Stocked 14 days’ worth of supplies in case of a major disaster where you have no electricity, water, internet, or telephone service 40% B 24% 32% 36% 34% Question 8 Table 45: Question 8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Please rate the following categories of Palo Alto government performance. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 6% N=22 39% N=150 33% N=128 10% N=38 13% N=50 100% N=389 The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 4% N=15 33% N=129 37% N=147 14% N=55 12% N=46 100% N=391 The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement 6% N=25 26% N=103 29% N=114 9% N=33 30% N=115 100% N=389 Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 5% N=18 36% N=141 34% N=132 13% N=50 13% N=49 100% N=389 Generally acting in the best interest of the community 5% N=20 40% N=155 32% N=125 9% N=35 14% N=56 100% N=392 Being honest 8% N=31 30% N=116 28% N=108 6% N=23 29% N=111 100% N=389 Being open and transparent to the public 7% N=27 32% N=124 24% N=96 10% N=40 26% N=104 100% N=391 Informing residents about issues facing the community 9% N=34 33% N=128 31% N=121 9% N=35 18% N=71 100% N=388 Treating all residents fairly 9% N=37 26% N=102 25% N=98 11% N=43 28% N=110 100% N=390 Treating residents with respect 13% N=50 40% N=156 21% N=82 4% N=17 22% N=84 100% N=389 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 47 Packet Page 52 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 45 Table 46: Question 8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the following categories of Palo Alto government performance. Excellent Good Fair Poor Total The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 6% N=22 44% N=150 38% N=128 11% N=38 100% N=338 The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 4% N=15 37% N=129 42% N=147 16% N=55 100% N=345 The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement 9% N=25 37% N=103 41% N=114 12% N=33 100% N=274 Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 5% N=18 41% N=141 39% N=132 15% N=50 100% N=340 Generally acting in the best interest of the community 6% N=20 46% N=155 37% N=125 10% N=35 100% N=336 Being honest 11% N=31 42% N=116 39% N=108 8% N=23 100% N=278 Being open and transparent to the public 10% N=27 43% N=124 33% N=96 14% N=40 100% N=287 Informing residents about issues facing the community 11% N=34 40% N=128 38% N=121 11% N=35 100% N=318 Treating all residents fairly 13% N=37 37% N=102 35% N=98 15% N=43 100% N=280 Treating residents with respect 16% N=50 51% N=156 27% N=82 6% N=17 100% N=305 Table 47: Question 8 - Historical Results Please rate the following categories of Palo Alto government performance: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto NA 58% 62% 66% 67% 66% 66% 65% 58% 61% 58% 53% 51% Similar The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 54% 53% 57% 55% 59% 54% 50% 48% 40% 45% 42% 40% 42% Similar The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement 65% 56% 57% 57% 58% 55% 54% 61% 50% 56% 56% 51% 46% Lower Overall confidence in Palo Alto government NA NA NA NA NA NA 52% 53% 44% 49% 46% 49% 47% Similar Generally acting in the best interest of the community NA NA NA NA NA NA 54% 53% 44% 51% 45% 50% 52% Similar Being honest NA NA NA NA NA NA 58% 62% 55% 61% 56% 55% 53% Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 48 Packet Page 53 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 46 Please rate the following categories of Palo Alto government performance: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Being open and transparent to the public NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 50% 53% Similar Informing residents about issues facing the community NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 55% 51% Similar Treating all residents fairly NA NA NA NA NA NA 57% 53% 47% 56% 51% 57% 50% Lower Treating residents with respect NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 67% 68% Similar Table 48: Question 8 - Benchmark Comparisons City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 49 203 354 Similar The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 43 261 322 Similar The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement 48 192 318 Similar Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 46 187 286 Similar Generally acting in the best interest of the community 49 182 289 Similar Being honest 52 156 281 Similar Being open and transparent to the public 50 91 178 Similar Informing residents about issues facing the community 50 81 183 Similar Treating all residents fairly 49 183 287 Similar Treating residents with respect 59 91 175 Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 49 Packet Page 54 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 47 Table 49: Question 8 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent "excellent" or "good". Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 50% 45% 60% E 48% 35% 58% E 51% The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 38% 39% 47% 42% 32% 46% 42% The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement 49% 42% 59% F 57% F 37% 38% 46% Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 44% 46% E 55% E 54% E 26% 47% E 47% Generally acting in the best interest of the community 51% 50% 64% F 63% 44% 46% 52% Being honest 47% 54% 55% 48% 45% 60% 53% Being open and transparent to the public 58% E 46% 63% E 49% 33% 59% E 53% Informing residents about issues facing the community 44% 36% 60% B 50% 47% 63% A B 51% Treating all residents fairly 59% 39% 66% B D E 39% 36% 57% B 50% Treating residents with respect 81% B E 56% 77% B E 70% E 40% 73% B E 68% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 50 Packet Page 55 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 48 Table 50: Question 8 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent "excellent" or "good". Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 60% B 40% 53% 49% 51% The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 43% 38% 46% 37% 42% The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement 49% 43% 50% 43% 46% Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 46% 48% 55% B 40% 47% Generally acting in the best interest of the community 55% 48% 56% 49% 52% Being honest 58% 49% 55% 53% 53% Being open and transparent to the public 58% 48% 51% 56% 53% Informing residents about issues facing the community 55% 47% 55% 49% 51% Treating all residents fairly 50% 49% 50% 50% 50% Treating residents with respect 72% 62% 66% 71% 68% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 51 Packet Page 56 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 49 Question 9 Table 51: Question 9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total The City of Palo Alto 15% N=60 53% N=209 23% N=90 4% N=15 5% N=18 100% N=392 The State Government 7% N=27 47% N=183 31% N=122 9% N=36 6% N=24 100% N=392 The Federal Government 5% N=19 39% N=153 35% N=137 15% N=58 6% N=25 100% N=392 Table 52: Question 9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Total The City of Palo Alto 16% N=60 56% N=209 24% N=90 4% N=15 100% N=374 The State Government 7% N=27 50% N=183 33% N=122 10% N=36 100% N=368 The Federal Government 5% N=19 42% N=153 37% N=137 16% N=58 100% N=367 Table 53: Question 9 - Historical Results Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 The City of Palo Alto 87% 80% 80% 83% 88% 84% 83% 85% 81% 86% 82% 73% 72% Similar State Government 38% 23% 27% 26% 41% 33% NA 47% 46% 54% 46% 52% 57% Higher The Federal Government 32% 41% 43% 41% 50% 37% 48% 46% 46% 36% 33% 27% 47% Higher ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 52 Packet Page 57 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 50 Table 54: Question 9 - Benchmark Comparisons City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark Quality of services provided by the City of Palo Alto 61 200 348 Similar Quality of services provided by the Federal Government 45 45 270 Similar Table 55: Question 9 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) The City of Palo Alto 77% 69% 71% 79% 65% 70% 72% The State Government 57% 52% 56% 59% 61% 59% 57% The Federal Government 53% 47% 37% 41% 39% 55% C 47% Table 56: Question 9 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) The City of Palo Alto 78% B 66% 73% 72% 72% The State Government 63% B 51% 65% B 50% 57% The Federal Government 51% 43% 53% 42% 47% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 53 Packet Page 58 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 51 Question 10 Table 57: Question 10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Traffic enforcement 9% N=35 39% N=150 25% N=96 14% N=55 13% N=51 100% N=388 Traffic signal timing 12% N=46 36% N=140 32% N=122 17% N=67 3% N=12 100% N=387 Street repair 12% N=46 34% N=132 33% N=127 20% N=78 2% N=7 100% N=389 Street cleaning 25% N=97 55% N=213 15% N=57 3% N=13 2% N=8 100% N=389 Street tree maintenance 25% N=96 48% N=188 18% N=71 5% N=21 3% N=12 100% N=388 Sidewalk maintenance 16% N=60 44% N=168 26% N=101 11% N=44 3% N=13 100% N=386 Land use, planning, and zoning 5% N=20 23% N=91 24% N=93 24% N=92 24% N=93 100% N=390 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 7% N=27 28% N=107 21% N=80 12% N=46 33% N=127 100% N=387 Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) 30% N=116 46% N=178 13% N=50 2% N=8 8% N=32 100% N=385 Building and planning application processing services 3% N=12 14% N=56 11% N=43 21% N=81 50% N=193 100% N=384 Affordable high-speed internet access 10% N=39 23% N=90 28% N=110 19% N=75 19% N=74 100% N=388 Electric utility 27% N=104 51% N=198 16% N=61 4% N=16 3% N=11 100% N=389 Gas utility 23% N=90 48% N=188 14% N=56 2% N=9 12% N=46 100% N=390 Utility payment options 35% N=136 44% N=172 12% N=46 1% N=2 8% N=32 100% N=388 Drinking water 44% N=172 44% N=172 6% N=25 2% N=7 3% N=13 100% N=390 Sewer services 32% N=123 47% N=182 11% N=44 1% N=4 9% N=35 100% N=387 Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) 23% N=88 44% N=172 16% N=63 3% N=12 14% N=55 100% N=389 Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e-waste) 36% N=141 47% N=181 12% N=46 3% N=10 3% N=10 100% N=389 Police services 18% N=69 37% N=145 7% N=28 2% N=7 36% N=140 100% N=389 Crime prevention 11% N=42 38% N=146 19% N=72 8% N=33 25% N=96 100% N=389 Animal control 18% N=70 32% N=124 10% N=37 2% N=7 38% N=148 100% N=387 Ambulance or emergency medical services 20% N=76 28% N=107 5% N=19 2% N=6 46% N=179 100% N=387 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 54 Packet Page 59 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 52 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Fire emergency services 24% N=94 32% N=123 4% N=15 1% N=2 39% N=151 100% N=386 Fire prevention and education 16% N=60 34% N=129 9% N=33 3% N=11 40% N=152 100% N=385 Palo Alto open space 52% N=201 35% N=136 6% N=25 1% N=5 5% N=18 100% N=383 City parks 48% N=184 43% N=167 6% N=23 1% N=4 2% N=9 100% N=386 Recreation programs or classes 21% N=82 30% N=117 12% N=47 2% N=7 35% N=134 100% N=387 Recreation centers or facilities 23% N=88 33% N=125 13% N=51 2% N=7 29% N=113 100% N=384 Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs) 41% N=158 31% N=117 5% N=18 1% N=4 23% N=87 100% N=384 Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment, accessibility) 43% N=166 33% N=128 3% N=12 1% N=4 19% N=74 100% N=383 Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks) 38% N=148 35% N=134 5% N=20 1% N=5 20% N=79 100% N=386 Art programs and theater 24% N=93 38% N=147 7% N=27 1% N=2 30% N=117 100% N=387 City-sponsored special events 10% N=38 35% N=134 14% N=55 1% N=6 39% N=151 100% N=384 City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 13% N=51 46% N=175 21% N=82 4% N=14 16% N=62 100% N=384 Public information services (Police/public safety) 12% N=44 41% N=156 17% N=65 4% N=15 27% N=103 100% N=383 Public information services (non-Police/public safety) 11% N=43 40% N=151 20% N=78 2% N=9 26% N=100 100% N=380 Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.) 17% N=66 48% N=186 14% N=54 2% N=8 18% N=71 100% N=384 Table 58: Question 10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Traffic enforcement 10% N=35 45% N=150 29% N=96 16% N=55 100% N=337 Traffic signal timing 12% N=46 37% N=140 33% N=122 18% N=67 100% N=375 Street repair 12% N=46 34% N=132 33% N=127 20% N=78 100% N=382 Street cleaning 26% N=97 56% N=213 15% N=57 4% N=13 100% N=381 Street tree maintenance 26% N=96 50% N=188 19% N=71 6% N=21 100% N=376 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 55 Packet Page 60 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 53 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Sidewalk maintenance 16% N=60 45% N=168 27% N=101 12% N=44 100% N=373 Land use, planning, and zoning 7% N=20 31% N=91 31% N=93 31% N=92 100% N=296 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 10% N=27 41% N=107 31% N=80 18% N=46 100% N=260 Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) 33% N=116 50% N=178 14% N=50 2% N=8 100% N=352 Building and planning application processing services 6% N=12 29% N=56 22% N=43 42% N=81 100% N=191 Affordable high-speed internet access 12% N=39 29% N=90 35% N=110 24% N=75 100% N=314 Electric utility 27% N=104 52% N=198 16% N=61 4% N=16 100% N=378 Gas utility 26% N=90 55% N=188 16% N=56 3% N=9 100% N=343 Utility payment options 38% N=136 48% N=172 13% N=46 1% N=2 100% N=356 Drinking water 46% N=172 46% N=172 7% N=25 2% N=7 100% N=377 Sewer services 35% N=123 52% N=182 12% N=44 1% N=4 100% N=353 Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) 26% N=88 51% N=172 19% N=63 4% N=12 100% N=334 Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e-waste) 37% N=141 48% N=181 12% N=46 3% N=10 100% N=379 Police services 28% N=69 58% N=145 11% N=28 3% N=7 100% N=249 Crime prevention 14% N=42 50% N=146 25% N=72 11% N=33 100% N=293 Animal control 29% N=70 52% N=124 16% N=37 3% N=7 100% N=239 Ambulance or emergency medical services 37% N=76 51% N=107 9% N=19 3% N=6 100% N=208 Fire emergency services 40% N=94 53% N=123 6% N=15 1% N=2 100% N=235 Fire prevention and education 26% N=60 56% N=129 14% N=33 5% N=11 100% N=233 Palo Alto open space 55% N=201 37% N=136 7% N=25 1% N=5 100% N=366 City parks 49% N=184 44% N=167 6% N=23 1% N=4 100% N=377 Recreation programs or classes 32% N=82 46% N=117 19% N=47 3% N=7 100% N=252 Recreation centers or facilities 32% N=88 46% N=125 19% N=51 3% N=7 100% N=271 Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs) 53% N=158 39% N=117 6% N=18 1% N=4 100% N=297 Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment, accessibility) 54% N=166 41% N=128 4% N=12 1% N=4 100% N=310 Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks) 48% N=148 43% N=134 7% N=20 2% N=5 100% N=307 Art programs and theater 34% N=93 55% N=147 10% N=27 1% N=2 100% N=270 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 56 Packet Page 61 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 54 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total City-sponsored special events 16% N=38 58% N=134 23% N=55 2% N=6 100% N=233 City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 16% N=51 54% N=175 26% N=82 4% N=14 100% N=322 Public information services (Police/public safety) 16% N=44 56% N=156 23% N=65 6% N=15 100% N=280 Public information services (non-Police/public safety) 15% N=43 54% N=151 28% N=78 3% N=9 100% N=281 Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.) 21% N=66 59% N=186 17% N=54 3% N=8 100% N=313 Table 59: Question 10 - Historical Results* Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Traffic enforcement 64% 61% 64% 61% 66% 64% 62% 60% 60% 60% 53% 65% 55% Lower Traffic signal timing NA 56% 56% 52% 47% 53% 53% 47% 50% 49% 45% 59% 50% Lower Street repair 50% 42% 43% 40% 42% 47% 55% 51% 57% 55% 46% 56% 46% Lower Street cleaning 75% 73% 76% 79% 80% 76% 80% 75% 77% 78% 72% 83% 82% Similar Street tree maintenance 62% 72% 69% 70% 71% 66% 80% 73% 71% 75% 72% 75% 76% Similar Sidewalk maintenance 50% 53% 51% 51% 53% 56% 62% 62% 61% 65% 61% 63% 61% Similar Land use, planning and zoning 41% 47% 49% 45% 51% 36% 43% 40% 37% 40% 39% 40% 38% Similar Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 55% 50% 53% 56% 61% 57% 62% 59% 52% 56% 55% 52% 51% Similar Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 83% 83% Similar Building and planning application processing services NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 44% 43% 35% Lower Affordable high-speed internet access NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 39% 41% Similar Electric utility NA 83% 79% 85% 84% 80% 72% 87% 86% 87% 83% 77% 80% Similar Gas utility NA 81% 80% 82% 86% 81% 88% 88% 87% 89% 84% 78% 81% Similar Utility payment options NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 85% 86% 87% Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 57 Packet Page 62 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 55 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Drinking water 82% 81% 84% 86% 83% 88% 89% 88% 87% 88% 87% 88% 91% Similar Sewer services 84% 81% 82% 84% 82% 84% 89% 88% 88% 88% 85% 87% 87% Similar Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) 65% 73% 74% 74% 75% 69% 80% 71% 75% 81% 71% 83% 78% Lower Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e- waste) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 85% 87% 85% Similar Police services 89% 84% 87% 88% 86% 86% 87% 88% 88% 93% 89% 78% 86% Higher Crime prevention NA 73% 79% 81% 74% 75% 80% 79% 80% 81% 78% 67% 64% Similar Animal control 79% 78% 76% 72% 78% 76% 80% 80% 77% 80% 75% 82% 81% Similar Ambulance or emergency medical services 95% 91% 94% 93% 96% 93% 97% 95% 96% 96% 93% 93% 88% Lower Fire emergency services 96% 95% 93% 92% 96% 93% 95% 97% 97% 97% 94% 94% 93% Similar Fire prevention and education NA 80% 79% 76% 80% 82% 85% 85% 85% 87% 84% 82% 81% Similar Palo Alto open space NA NA NA NA NA NA 82% 84% 81% 86% 83% 86% 92% Higher City parks 90% 92% 90% 94% 91% 93% 92% 93% 91% 94% 91% 91% 93% Similar Recreation programs or classes 83% 85% 82% 81% 87% 87% 87% 84% 84% 87% 81% 83% 79% Similar Recreation centers or facilities 77% 80% 81% 75% 85% 80% 84% 86% 81% 86% 82% 82% 79% Similar Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 92% 93% Similar Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment, accessibility) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 92% 94% 95% Similar Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks) 60% 73% 75% 72% 88% 81% 88% 83% 82% 86% 88% 86% 92% Higher Art programs and theater NA 79% 78% 81% 82% 82% 69% 80% 78% 82% 76% 82% 89% Higher City-sponsored special events NA NA NA NA NA NA 75% 75% 73% 75% 77% 72% 74% Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 58 Packet Page 63 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 56 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2003 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 City website (cityofpaloalto.org) NA 55% 73% 67% 70% 69% 88% 69% 66% 72% 65% 69% 70% Similar Public information services (Police/public safety) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 77% 74% 71% Similar Public information services (non-Police/public safety) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 75% 75% 69% Lower Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.) 78% 79% 77% 76% 81% 79% 81% 74% 77% 84% 77% 79% 80% Similar *Prior to 2022, “Fire emergency services” was “Fire services”. Table 60: Question 10 - Benchmark Comparisons City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark Traffic enforcement 50 259 337 Similar Traffic signal timing 48 183 282 Similar Street repair 46 174 331 Similar Street cleaning 68 47 295 Higher Sidewalk maintenance 55 130 291 Similar Land use, planning, and zoning 38 236 298 Similar Code enforcement 48 149 330 Similar Preservation of natural areas 71 13 274 Higher Affordable high-speed internet access 43 130 169 Similar Utility payment options 75 2 261 Higher Drinking water 78 15 292 Higher Sewer services 73 61 295 Similar Storm water management 67 84 310 Similar Police services 70 196 364 Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 59 Packet Page 64 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 57 City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark Crime prevention 56 236 336 Similar Animal control 69 36 307 Similar Ambulance or emergency medical services 74 196 303 Similar Fire services 77 194 327 Similar Fire prevention and education 67 164 292 Similar Palo Alto open space 82 2 265 Much higher City parks 80 33 308 Higher Recreation programs or classes 70 55 302 Similar Recreation centers or facilities 69 55 286 Similar Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees 66 204 351 Similar Table 61: Question 10 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Traffic enforcement 56% 56% 62% D 39% 47% 63% D 55% Traffic signal timing 60% C E 57% E 40% 46% 37% 52% 50% Street repair 50% D 43% 63% B D E 29% 33% 54% D E 46% Street cleaning 76% 88% 85% 76% 74% 84% 82% Street tree maintenance 77% D 81% D E 85% D E 61% 63% 78% D 76% Sidewalk maintenance 57% 58% 77% A B D 49% 57% 65% D 61% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 60 Packet Page 65 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 58 Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Land use, planning, and zoning 35% 34% 51% 32% 37% 37% 38% Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 58% D 45% 55% D 28% 50% 64% B D 51% Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) 87% 91% D E 86% 77% 73% 82% 83% Building and planning application processing services 48% D 41% 45% D 17% 28% 29% 35% Affordable high-speed internet access 51% C 37% 27% 46% 32% 48% C 41% Electric utility 85% D 86% D 77% 69% 72% 83% D 80% Gas utility 88% D E 87% D E 78% 70% 71% 83% 81% Utility payment options 90% D 90% D 85% 76% 85% 90% D 87% Drinking water 99% D E 95% E 89% 87% 81% 92% E 91% Sewer services 88% E 89% E 89% E 88% E 68% 89% E 87% Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) 76% 84% E 77% 72% 59% 84% E 78% Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e-waste) 91% E 86% E 89% E 84% E 66% 88% E 85% Police services 87% 85% 92% 84% 75% 88% 86% Crime prevention 62% 63% 62% 58% 67% 70% 64% Animal control 88% 85% 80% 77% 76% 80% 81% Ambulance or emergency medical services 96% D 87% 92% D 74% 82% 91% D 88% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 61 Packet Page 66 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 59 Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Fire emergency services 97% E 93% E 99% D E 86% 78% 96% E 93% Fire prevention and education 85% 86% 86% 72% 72% 83% 81% Palo Alto open space 96% 94% 92% 89% 90% 91% 92% City parks 98% D 94% 96% 88% 88% 94% 93% Recreation programs or classes 83% 76% 77% 83% 71% 79% 79% Recreation centers or facilities 79% 79% 75% 84% 73% 79% 79% Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs) 89% 93% 97% E 94% 85% 94% 93% Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment, accessibility) 95% 97% E 94% 93% 86% 97% E 95% Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks) 96% E 93% E 88% 93% E 79% 94% E 92% Art programs and theater 87% 93% E 82% 92% E 76% 94% C E 89% City-sponsored special events 73% E 64% 85% B E 80% E 46% 82% B E 74% City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 76% E 70% 68% 89% B C E F 54% 62% 70% Public information services (Police/public safety) 81% E 76% E 75% 71% 54% 68% 71% Public information services (non-Police/public safety) 82% E 70% 71% 68% 52% 67% 69% Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.) 83% 84% 82% 74% 75% 80% 80% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 62 Packet Page 67 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 60 Table 62: Question 10 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Traffic enforcement 54% 55% 59% 51% 55% Traffic signal timing 48% 51% 53% 46% 50% Street repair 47% 44% 44% 48% 46% Street cleaning 86% B 77% 82% 81% 82% Street tree maintenance 73% 79% 71% 80% 76% Sidewalk maintenance 59% 65% 54% 69%A 61% Land use, planning, and zoning 35% 40% 45%B 30% 38% Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 52% 51% 48% 55% 51% Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) 85% 82% 84% 83% 83% Building and planning application processing services 30% 42% 33% 37% 35% Affordable high-speed internet access 41% 42% 42% 42% 41% Electric utility 90% B 67% 77% 83% 80% Gas utility 91% B 70% 78% 85% 81% Utility payment options 92% B 80% 82% 92% A 87% Drinking water 97% B 84% 88% 94% A 91% Sewer services 91% B 81% 82% 91% A 87% Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) 83% B 70% 75% 80% 78% Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e-waste) 90% B 80% 83% 87% 85% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 63 Packet Page 68 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 61 Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Police services 90% B 78% 79% 92% A 86% Crime prevention 69% 60% 64% 65% 64% Animal control 90% B 73% 80% 83% 81% Ambulance or emergency medical services 94% B 78% 84% 92% 88% Fire emergency services 97% B 84% 90% 95% 93% Fire prevention and education 90% B 71% 77% 86% 81% Palo Alto open space 97% B 86% 92% 91% 92% City parks 97% B 88% 94% 92% 93% Recreation programs or classes 86% B 72% 79% 80% 79% Recreation centers or facilities 85% B 73% 81% 76% 79% Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs) 94% 91% 94% 92% 93% Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment, accessibility) 97% B 92% 96% 94% 95% Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks) 95% 89% 94% 91% 92% Art programs and theater 93% 87% 92% 87% 89% City-sponsored special events 82% B 67% 76% 74% 74% City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 71% 72% 70% 72% 70% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 64 Packet Page 69 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 62 Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Public information services (Police/public safety) 75% 68% 71% 74% 71% Public information services (non-Police/public safety) 73% 66% 70% 70% 69% Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.) 84% 77% 82% 79% 80% Question 11 Table 63: Question 11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto Utilities’ services: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Reliability of utility services 44% N=165 41% N=155 10% N=37 2% N=8 3% N=10 100% N=375 Affordability of utility services 17% N=65 40% N=152 33% N=126 5% N=19 5% N=17 100% N=380 Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services 39% N=145 31% N=117 7% N=26 5% N=17 19% N=69 100% N=375 Utilities online customer self-service features 22% N=84 37% N=138 9% N=33 4% N=16 28% N=107 100% N=378 Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business 20% N=75 40% N=151 13% N=50 5% N=20 21% N=79 100% N=375 Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 17% N=64 31% N=118 15% N=57 8% N=30 29% N=107 100% N=376 Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay 17% N=66 42% N=160 23% N=88 5% N=18 12% N=46 100% N=378 Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website 21% N=80 36% N=136 13% N=50 5% N=20 24% N=91 100% N=378 Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 17% N=64 42% N=159 14% N=52 3% N=11 24% N=92 100% N=378 Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 20% N=77 36% N=135 10% N=37 3% N=12 31% N=116 100% N=378 Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff 20% N=76 35% N=130 9% N=32 2% N=8 35% N=131 100% N=377 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 65 Packet Page 70 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 63 Table 64: Question 11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto Utilities’ services: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Reliability of utility services 45% N=165 42% N=155 10% N=37 2% N=8 100% N=365 Affordability of utility services 18% N=65 42% N=152 35% N=126 5% N=19 100% N=362 Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services 48% N=145 38% N=117 9% N=26 6% N=17 100% N=305 Utilities online customer self-service features 31% N=84 51% N=138 12% N=33 6% N=16 100% N=271 Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business 25% N=75 51% N=151 17% N=50 7% N=20 100% N=296 Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 24% N=64 44% N=118 21% N=57 11% N=30 100% N=268 Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay 20% N=66 48% N=160 26% N=88 5% N=18 100% N=332 Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website 28% N=80 48% N=136 18% N=50 7% N=20 100% N=287 Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 22% N=64 56% N=159 18% N=52 4% N=11 100% N=286 Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 30% N=77 52% N=135 14% N=37 5% N=12 100% N=262 Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff 31% N=76 53% N=130 13% N=32 3% N=8 100% N=246 Table 65: Question 11 - Historical Results Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto Utilities' services: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2017 2018 2021 2022 Reliability of utility services 96% 94% 93% 88% Lower Affordability of utility services 64% 59% 58% 60% Similar Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services 81% 79% 84% 86% Similar Utilities online customer self-service features NA 78% 86% 82% Similar Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business 83% 75% 80% 76% Similar Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 63% 59% 62% 68% Similar Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay 68% 62% 66% 68% Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 66 Packet Page 71 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 64 Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto Utilities' services: Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2017 2018 2021 2022 Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website 65% 61% 72% 75% Similar Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 76% 70% 80% 78% Similar Ease of contacting Utilities department staff NA 75% 84% 81% Similar Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff NA 76% 83% 84% Similar Table 66: Question 11 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Reliability of utility services 83% 81% 94% B 87% 83% 93% B 88% Affordability of utility services 58% 72% D E 58% 51% 45% 64% E 60% Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services 89% 81% 82% 85% 79% 93% B 86% Utilities online customer self-service features 87% 82% 82% 76% 83% 83% 82% Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business 82% D E 80% D E 82% D E 62% 57% 81% D E 76% Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 72% D 69% D 72% D 48% 53% 78% D E 68% Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay 73% D 67% 68% D 50% 62% 78% D 68% Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website 73% 78% 81% 71% 74% 75% 75% Value of Palo Alto Utilities' customer communications 71% 77% 89% A E 82% 67% 80% 78% Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 86% 76% 90% 83% 81% 77% 81% Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff 86% 85% 88% 79% 82% 81% 84% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 67 Packet Page 72 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 65 Table 67: Question 11 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Reliability of utility services 91% B 83% 87% 89% 88% Affordability of utility services 63% 58% 56% 66% 60% Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services 90% 82% 85% 88% 86% Utilities online customer self-service features 83% 84% 81% 85% 82% Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business 84% B 68% 77% 76% 76% Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 68% 68% 64% 72% 68% Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay 71% 67% 63% 74% A 68% Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website 73% 79% 73% 79% 75% Value of Palo Alto Utilities' customer communications 82% 77% 81% 79% 78% Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 81% 81% 78% 85% 81% Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff 87% 83% 85% 84% 84% *There are no benchmark data available for Question 11 as this question is unique to Palo Alto. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 68 Packet Page 73 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 66 Question 12 Table 68: Question 12 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Palo Alto community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Total Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 50% N=186 34% N=126 14% N=52 1% N=5 100% N=369 Overall economic health of Palo Alto 40% N=152 41% N=152 18% N=66 1% N=5 100% N=375 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 54% N=207 32% N=124 11% N=43 2% N=9 100% N=382 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 45% N=170 38% N=144 16% N=59 1% N=5 100% N=378 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 28% N=108 38% N=144 29% N=109 5% N=18 100% N=379 Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 31% N=118 43% N=162 23% N=87 3% N=12 100% N=379 Residents' connection and engagement with their community 23% N=85 45% N=172 27% N=103 5% N=19 100% N=380 Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions 41% N=156 30% N=113 23% N=88 7% N=26 100% N=383 Increasing local solar generation capacity within city boundaries 39% N=151 24% N=91 28% N=106 9% N=34 100% N=382 Increasing electric storage capacity within city boundaries 35% N=131 32% N=119 26% N=96 8% N=29 100% N=375 Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information 18% N=67 35% N=132 32% N=119 16% N=59 100% N=378 Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues 29% N=110 39% N=149 23% N=86 10% N=37 100% N=381 *This question did not have a “don’t know” option. Table 69: Question 12 - Historical Results Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Palo Alto community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 80% 80% 82% 75% 78% 81% 84% Similar Overall economic health of Palo Alto 80% 78% 82% 76% NA 85% 81% Similar Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 84% 82% 80% 80% 81% 83% 87% Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 69 Packet Page 74 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 67 Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Palo Alto community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Percent positive 2022 rating compared to 2021 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 81% 81% 84% 79% 78% 85% 83% Similar Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 65% 61% 65% 62% NA 66% 66% Similar Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 71% 67% 70% 67% NA 70% 74% Similar Residents’ connection and engagement with their community 72% 71% 73% 70% NA 66% 68% Similar Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions NA NA NA 58% 64% 67% 70% Similar Increasing local solar generation capacity within city boundaries NA NA NA 57% 55% 62% 63% Similar Increasing electric storage capacity within city boundaries NA NA NA NA 50% 61% 67% Higher Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information NA NA NA NA 45% 46% 53% Higher Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues NA NA NA NA 63% 64% 68% Similar Table 70: Question 12 - Benchmark Comparisons City of Palo Alto rating Rank Number of jurisdictions for comparison Comparison to benchmark Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 78 14 261 Higher Overall economic health of Palo Alto 73 247 261 Lower Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 80 164 261 Similar Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 76 69 261 Similar Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 63 220 261 Similar Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts 67 150 261 Similar Residents' connection and engagement with their community 62 200 261 Similar *Benchmark comparisons were not available for a number of items in this question as these were unique to Palo Alto. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 70 Packet Page 75 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 68 Table 71: Question 12 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 86% 81% 84% 79% 79% 91% 84% Overall economic health of Palo Alto 89% 81% 81% 78% 76% 81% 81% Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 97% B D E F 82% 95% B D 80% 83% 85% 87% Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 81% 94% A D E F 82% 81% 75% 82% 83% Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 63% 71% 66% 69% 70% 62% 66% Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 83% C 75% 66% 71% 66% 77% 74% Residents' connection and engagement with their community 78% B E 55% 70% 73% B 57% 71% B 68% Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions 74% 70% 64% 74% 70% 71% 70% Increasing local solar generation capacity within city boundaries 61% 60% 58% 70% 69% 64% 63% Increasing electric storage capacity within city boundaries 76% C 66% 52% 61% 65% 74% C 67% Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information 55% 58% 57% 50% 45% 51% 53% Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues 69% 72% 68% 62% 54% 73% E 68% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 71 Packet Page 76 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 69 Table 72: Question 12 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "excellent" or "good" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 86% 83% 84% 86% 84% Overall economic health of Palo Alto 82% 79% 87% B 75% 81% Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 84% 88% 85% 88% 87% Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 85% 82% 86% 82% 83% Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 68% 66% 74% B 58% 66% Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 66% 85% A 77% 71% 74% Residents' connection and engagement with their community 64% 73% 76% B 59% 68% Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions 76% 68% 83% B 59% 70% Increasing local solar generation capacity within city boundaries 65% 65% 73% B 54% 63% Increasing electric storage capacity within city boundaries 63% 72% 74% B 60% 67% Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information 53% 53% 62% B 45% 53% Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues 67% 69% 77% B 61% 68% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 72 Packet Page 77 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 70 Question 13 Table 73: Question 13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents With “Don’t Know” Responses In a typical week, how likely are you to: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Don't know Total Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple) 34% N=130 21% N=79 17% N=63 29% N=110 0% N=2 100% N=384 Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors 56% N=215 30% N=116 7% N=25 7% N=29 0% N=0 100% N=385 Table 74: Question 13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Without "Don't Know" Responses In a typical week, how likely are you to: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Total Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple) 34% N=130 21% N=79 17% N=63 29% N=110 100% N=383 Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors 56% N=215 30% N=116 7% N=25 7% N=29 100% N=385 Table 75: Question 13 - Historical Results In a typical week, how likely are you to: Percent positive (e.g., very/somewhat likely) 2022 rating compared to 2021 2017 2018 2021 2022 Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams volunteer your time, attend church/temple) 52% 56% 47% 55% Higher Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors 85% 88% 82% 86% Similar ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 73 Packet Page 78 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 71 Table 76: Question 13 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "very likely" or "somewhat likely" Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple) 58% 58% 47% 64% E 42% 54% 55% Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors 91% 92% D 81% 80% 82% 86% 86% Table 77: Question 13 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "very likely" or "somewhat likely" Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple) 54% 56% 67% B 44% 55% Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors 87% 85% 83% 90% 86% There are no benchmark data available for Question 13 as this question is unique to Palo Alto. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 74 Packet Page 79 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 72 Question 14 Table 78: Question 14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What mode of transportation do you use most for your typical daily needs for getting around town? Percent Number Driving 67% N=256 Walking 16% N=63 Biking 15% N=58 Bus 1% N=4 Train 0% N=0 Free shuttle 0% N=0 Taxi 0% N=0 Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 0% N=1 Carpooling 1% N=2 Total 100% N=385 Table 79: Question 14 - Historical Results What mode of transportation do you use most for your typical daily needs for getting around town? Percent selecting each response 2022 rating compared to 2021 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Driving 77% 73% 76% 71% 67% Similar Walking 13% 13% 11% 14% 16% Similar Biking 8% 11% 10% 13% 15% Similar Bus 1% 1% 0% 1% 1% Similar Train 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% Similar Free shuttle 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% Similar Taxi 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Similar Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% Similar Carpooling 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% Similar *There are no benchmark data available for Question 14 as this question is unique to Palo Alto. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 75 Packet Page 80 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 73 Question 15 Table 80: Question 15 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents In a typical week, how likely are you to: Very convenient Somewhat convenient Somewhat inconvenient Very inconvenient Total Walking 34% N=127 31% N=117 22% N=82 12% N=45 100% N=371 Biking 46% N=167 34% N=122 9% N=32 12% N=43 100% N=363 Bus 7% N=25 26% N=97 32% N=116 35% N=128 100% N=366 Train 9% N=33 33% N=121 26% N=93 32% N=115 100% N=362 Free shuttle 14% N=48 34% N=119 29% N=102 23% N=78 100% N=347 Taxi 8% N=29 23% N=82 31% N=107 38% N=132 100% N=350 Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 37% N=136 37% N=134 16% N=59 9% N=34 100% N=363 Carpooling 11% N=38 30% N=110 29% N=106 30% N=108 100% N=362 *This question did not have a “don’t know” option. Table 81: Question 15 - Historical Results If you did not have access to a car for your usual daily transportation around town, how convenient (based on time and proximity) would you consider each of the following methods of getting around? Percent positive (e.g., very/somewhat convenient) 2022 rating compared to 2021 2015 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Walking 92% 94% 92% 69% 76% 66% Lower Biking 76% 75% 75% 77% 83% 80% Similar Bus 53% 50% 52% 33% 33% 33% Similar Train 68% 66% 60% 41% 39% 43% Similar Free shuttle 78% 75% 74% 46% 45% 48% Similar Taxi 26% 27% 24% 35% 30% 31% Similar Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 52% 62% 66% 83% 77% 74% Lower Carpooling 52% 45% 49% 33% 26% 41% Higher ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 76 Packet Page 81 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 74 Table 82: Question 15 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "very" or "somewhat" likely Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Walking 76% B D 55% 58% 48% 82% B C D 76% B C D 66% Biking 67% 86% A 81% 83% A 83% 77% 80% Bus 26% 22% 34% 39% B 51% A B 35% 33% Train 33% 35% 34% 46% 63% A B C 48% 43% Free shuttle 44% 46% 38% 55% 51% 53% 48% Taxi 34% 26% 30% 36% 27% 34% 31% Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 82% E 70% 76% 75% 62% 77% 74% Carpooling 37% 37% 32% 54% B C 48% 40% 41% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 77 Packet Page 82 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 75 Table 83: Question 15 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "very" or "somewhat" likely Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Walking 66% 65% 67% 65% 66% Biking 81% 81% 80% 80% 80% Bus 30% 40% 38% 31% 33% Train 39% 47% 47% 38% 43% Free shuttle 48% 49% 47% 50% 48% Taxi 28% 37% 30% 35% 31% Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 71% 76% 75% 73% 74% Carpooling 37% 49% A 47% 37% 41% There are no benchmark data available for Question 15 as this question is unique to Palo Alto. Question 16 Table 84: Question 16 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with "Don't Know" Responses If you plan to purchase a new car within the next two years, what is the likelihood of it being: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Don't know Total All-electric 47% N=158 17% N=59 14% N=48 16% N=55 6% N=20 100% N=339 Plug-in hybrid 25% N=84 36% N=119 13% N=43 19% N=65 7% N=23 100% N=334 Hydrogen fuel cell 3% N=10 6% N=20 15% N=49 55% N=175 20% N=65 100% N=319 Other 11% N=25 7% N=16 3% N=7 16% N=36 62% N=139 100% N=223 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 78 Packet Page 83 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 76 Table 85: Question 16 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses If you plan to purchase a new car within the next two years, what is the likelihood of it being: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Total All-electric 49% N=158 19% N=59 15% N=48 17% N=55 100% N=319 Plug-in hybrid 27% N=84 38% N=119 14% N=43 21% N=65 100% N=311 Hydrogen fuel cell 4% N=10 8% N=20 19% N=49 69% N=175 100% N=254 Other 30% N=25 19% N=16 8% N=7 43% N=36 100% N=84 Table 86: Question 16 - Historical Results If you plan to purchase a new car within the next two years, what is the likelihood of it being: Percent rating positively (e.g., very/somewhat likely) 2022 rating compared to 2021 2016 2017 2018 2021 2022 Plug-in hybrid 59% 62% 62% 61% 65% Similar All-electric 65% 71% 67% 76% 68% Lower Hydrogen fuel cell 10% 14% 11% 14% 12% Similar Other NA NA NA NA 48% NA *Prior to 2022, “All-electric” was “Electric” and “Hydrogen fuel cell” was “Fuel cell”. Table 87: Question 16 - Geographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "very" or "somewhat" likely Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) All-electric 63% 74% 64% 69% 65% 68% 68% Plug-in hybrid 74% E 67% 64% 78% E F 50% 59% 65% Hydrogen fuel cell 11% 6% 13% 16% 15% 13% 12% Other 31% 40% 67% 71% 90% A B F 37% 48% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 79 Packet Page 84 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 77 Table 88: Question 16 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "very" or "somewhat" likely Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) All-electric 71% 64% 69% 69% 68% Plug-in hybrid 62% 68% 71% B 60% 65% Hydrogen fuel cell 9% 12% 18% B 8% 12% Other 46% 46% 38% 53% 48% There are no benchmark data available for Question 16 as this question is unique to Palo Alto. Question 17 Table 89: Question 17 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with "Don't Know" Responses Palo Alto is committed to addressing climate change by engaging in strategies that reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs). Space heating is the largest source of GHG in most Palo Alto homes, followed by water heating. What is the likelihood of you… Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Don't know Total Replacing your gas water heater with a heat pump water heater when you are ready to replace the water heater? 23% N=87 17% N=65 8% N=29 19% N=72 33% N=122 100% N=374 Replacing your gas furnace with a heat pump HVAC system (that provides heating and cooling) when you are ready to replace the furnace? 25% N=92 17% N=62 9% N=34 18% N=66 32% N=119 100% N=372 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 80 Packet Page 85 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 78 Table 90: Question 17 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Palo Alto is committed to addressing climate change by engaging in strategies that reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs). Space heating is the largest source of GHG in most Palo Alto homes, followed by water heating. What is the likelihood of you… Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Total Replacing your gas water heater with a heat pump water heater when you are ready to replace the water heater? 34% N=87 26% N=65 11% N=29 29% N=72 100% N=252 Replacing your gas furnace with a heat pump HVAC system (that provides heating and cooling) when you are ready to replace the furnace? 36% N=92 25% N=62 13% N=34 26% N=66 100% N=253 Table 91: Question 16 - Geographic Subgroup Results Palo Alto is committed to addressing climate change by engaging in strategies that reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs). Space heating is the largest source of GHG in most Palo Alto homes, followed by water heating. What is the likelihood of you… (Percent rating "very" or "somewhat" likely) Area Overall Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 (A) (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) Replacing your gas water heater with a heat pump water heater when you are ready to replace the water heater? 59% 77% C F 44% 62% 52% 57% 60% Replacing your gas furnace with a heat pump HVAC system (that provides heating and cooling) when you are ready to replace the furnace? 60% 71% C 48% 64% 56% 60% 61% Table 92: Question 17 - Demographic Subgroup Results Percent rating "very" or "somewhat" likely Race/ethnicity Sex Overall White alone, not Hispanic Hispanic and/or other race Female Male (A) (A) (B) (A) (B) Replacing your gas water heater with a heat pump water heater when you are ready to replace the water heater? 58% 64% 62% 60% 60% Replacing your gas furnace with a heat pump HVAC system (that provides heating and cooling) when you are ready to replace the furnace? 57% 66% 61% 61% 61% ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 81 Packet Page 86 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 79 Question 18 Table 93: Question 18 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents As a resident of Palo Alto, what one change could the City make that would make you happier? Percent Number Housing (amount, type, affordability/cost of living) 24% N=81 Street conditions and traffic concerns 14% N=47 General government operations 6% N=19 Safety, crime, policing and law enforcement 6% N=19 Parks and recreation amenities/services 5% N=16 City services, utilities and amenities 5% N=17 Improvements for walking and biking 4% N=15 Permits, code/ordinance enforcement 4% N=13 Homelessness 3% N=10 Public transportation 3% N=11 Development (other than housing) 2% N=7 Sense of community/community activities 2% N=6 Local businesses, retail/shopping options 2% N=8 Schools, programs for children 2% N=6 Lower taxes and/or utility costs 1% N=3 Downtown improvements 1% N=4 Overall appearance, cleanliness, upkeep 1% N=5 Parking concerns 1% N=2 Noise Reduction 1% N=4 Other 7% N=24 Nothing/Don't know 3% N=11 Total 100% N=335 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 82 Packet Page 87 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 80 Question 19 Table 94: Question 19 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents As a resident of Palo Alto, what one thing do you believe the City does well and would want to maintain? Percent Number Parks, open space, and natural environment 25% N=73 Utilities 12% N=34 Libraries, museums, theaters, etc. 10% N=29 Safety services 8% N=23 Schools and education, programs for youth 4% N=13 Cleanliness of community 4% N=13 Ability to give input and communication with government 4% N=11 Ease of bicycle travel/walking 4% N=11 Government/leadership 2% N=5 General City services 1% N=4 Everything/great place to live 1% N=3 Sense of community, community activities, and recreation 0% N=1 Other 3% N=9 Total 100% N=294 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 83 Packet Page 88 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 81 Demographic Questions Table 95: Question D1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: Percent Number Very positive 1% N=2 Somewhat positive 7% N=27 Neutral 50% N=191 Somewhat negative 36% N=137 Very negative 7% N=26 Total 100% N=383 Table 96: Question D2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your employment status? Percent Number Working full time for pay 55% N=213 Working part time for pay 12% N=45 Unemployed, looking for paid work 2% N=8 Unemployed, not looking for paid work 3% N=11 Fully retired 24% N=92 College student, unemployed 4% N=16 Total 100% N=385 Table 97: Question D3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do you work inside the boundaries of Palo Alto? Percent Number Yes, outside the home 27% N=101 Yes, from home 28% N=105 No 44% N=165 Total 100% N=371 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 84 Packet Page 89 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 82 Table 98: Question D4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents How many years have you lived in Palo Alto? Percent Number Less than 2 years 20% N=77 2 to 5 years 12% N=47 6 to 10 years 12% N=45 11 to 20 years 20% N=78 More than 20 years 37% N=142 Total 100% N=389 Table 99: Question D5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Which best describes the building you live in? Percent Number One family house detached from any other houses 58% N=224 Building with two or more homes (duplex, townhome, apartment or condominium) 39% N=151 Mobile home 0% N=0 Other 3% N=13 Total 100% N=388 Table 100: Question D6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do you rent or own your home? Percent Number Rent 44% N=170 Own 56% N=215 Total 100% N=385 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 85 Packet Page 90 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 83 Table 101: Question D7 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents About how much is your monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners' association (HOA) fees)? Percent Number Less than $500 per month 4% N=13 $500 to $999 per month 6% N=22 $1,000 to $1,499 per month 5% N=18 $1,500 to $1,999 per month 9% N=34 $2,000 to $2,499 per month 8% N=29 $2,500 to $2,999 per month 7% N=24 $3,000 to $3,499 per month 7% N=25 $3,500 to $3,999 per month 8% N=28 $4,000 to $4,499 per month 7% N=26 $4,500 to $4,999 per month 5% N=20 $4,500 to $4,999 per month 6% N=21 $5,500 to $5,999 per month 7% N=25 $6,000 to $6,499 per month 2% N=9 $6,500 to $6,999 per month 2% N=8 $7,000 to $7,499 per month 1% N=2 $7,500 to $7,999 per month 3% N=11 $8,000 to $8,499 per month 3% N=10 $8,500 to $8,999 per month 2% N=6 $9,000 to $9,499 per month 1% N=3 $9,500 to $9,999 per month 1% N=4 $10,000 or more per month 8% N=30 Total 100% N=367 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 86 Packet Page 91 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 84 Table 102: Question D8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do any children 17 or under live in your household? Percent Number No 65% N=250 Yes 35% N=133 Total 100% N=383 Table 103: Question D9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older? Percent Number No 67% N=257 Yes 33% N=126 Total 100% N=382 Table 104: Question D10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) Percent Number Less than $25,000 3% N=10 $25,000 to $49,999 5% N=17 $50,000 to $74,999 12% N=41 $75,000 to $99,999 12% N=40 $100,000 to $149,999 10% N=36 $150,000 to $199,999 13% N=45 $200,000 to $249,999 10% N=35 $250,000 to $299,999 10% N=33 $300,000 to $349,999 4% N=14 $350,000 to $399,999 4% N=14 $400,000 to $449,999 4% N=14 $450,000 to $499,999 14% N=49 $500,000 or more 0% N=0 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 87 Packet Page 92 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 85 How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) Percent Number Total 100% N=349 Table 105: Question D11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Are you Spanish, Hispanic or Latino? Percent Number No, not Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 94% N=355 Yes, I consider myself to be Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 6% N=24 Table 106: Question D12 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race(s) you consider yourself to be.) Percent Number American Indian or Alaskan Native 1% N=5 Asian, Asian Indian or Pacific Islander 29% N=108 Black or African American 3% N=11 White 67% N=248 Other 6% N=21 Total 100% N=368 Table 107: Question D13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents In which category is your age? Percent Number 18 to 24 years 4% N=16 25 to 34 years 17% N=65 35 to 44 years 15% N=56 45 to 54 years 26% N=97 55 to 64 years 11% N=40 65 to 74 years 12% N=45 75 years or older 16% N=59 Total 100% N=378 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 88 Packet Page 93 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 86 Table 108: Question D14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your gender? Percent Number Female 51% N=191 Male 49% N=185 Identify in another way 1% N=2 Total 100% N=378 Table 109: Question D14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your sexual orientation? Percent Number Heterosexual 92% N=330 Lesbian 1% N=4 Gay 1% N=5 Bisexual 3% N=12 Identify another way 2% N=8 Total 100% N=358 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 89 Packet Page 94 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 87 Appendix B: Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions from Probability Survey Following are responses to questions 18 and 19. Responses are presented here in verbatim form, including any typographical, grammatical or other mistakes. Responses are in alphabetical order within the category in which the response was categorized. Question 18: As a resident of Palo Alto, what one change could the City make that would make you happier? Housing (amount, type, affordability/cost of living) • Affordability! I make over look and its as if I'm living below the poverty line PA has become so unsustainable. If I had the oppt. to be full remote, I would live elsewhere. • affordable housing • Affordable housing • Affordable housing for teachers, fire fighters, service people, artists & musicians. The current high-rises are quite ugly, maybe something a little nicer looking? • Affordable housing that treats the whole city, not just the San Antonio area. And affordable housing for not just the lowest income, but the stretched people in the middle searching for rentals. Also, improve the timing of the Foothills/Arastradero/Miranda lights so that bikes have a chance to clear the intersection when the Miranda at Aras light turns green. • Affordable rents. • Allow construction of denser apartment buildings along major corridors (e.g. University, California, El Camino, Middlefield). We need to add more housing before the state steps in and forces our hand in a way we don't want. • approve more housing • Bringing greater economic diversity / affordable housing. • Build and allow more housing so more non-rich people can live here • Build more affordable housing • Build more housing of all types. Denser housing, affordable housing, apartments and condos and townhouses so that people at all life stages can live safely and comfortably. Single family housing on big lots isn't the best solution for everyone! • Build more housing. • Denser and more affordable housing • Develop plan build rental housing for all income ages abilities on University site, Fry's site, Creek side, city owned parking lots. Better stronger relationships working with Stanford University and research, Cal Trans, Cal Train, PAUSD. Develop build multi all income levels very low inomce to mediaum income housing along ECR between California Ave and East Measow in the weeded lots, abandoned blgs, Quansa huts. Buidl housing on Cambridge ave . Incorporate good low income housing out of ROLM/COM/INDUST toxic areas where there are not city services, and near sea level rise. • Do not allow super rich residents to create compounds by buying houses around them to use for businesses • Eliminating new construction that does not include very affordable low-income housing!!!. • Encourage building of apartment complexes such as on Park Ave, El Camino, Alma sites. Don't waste money on the current definition of homeless or unhoused as this is a junkie./ mental capacity issue. Remove all parked RVs parked in the city. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 90 Packet Page 95 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 88 • Even though housing prices are outrageous, there is an upper limit on the number of people our land can support. The wild explosion in urbanization has increased traffic and made the place more crowded but the cost of housing is still outrageous. The cost of apartments is still beyond most people's means. Lets slow down on all this development. • Fair housing for everyone; with dignity. • Figure out how to provide affordable housing to increase the diversity of the city. • i dont make enough to own a home here and I make much more than the 'average' person, I cant settle here if I want to have a family and own a home or even probably have a small garden to grow a fruit tree because most rental housing in a reasonable price range doesn't have any yard unless I want a bunch of roommates and I feel too old for that ****. I have some small citrus trees in pots but eventually they'll be too big to move and so I can't exist here forever if I actually want to plant them, if I'm renting even if I was happy with a place, the landlord might decide they want to remodel and up the rent. I don't need anything fancy but it would be nice to be able to exist in a place with out feeling like it was at the expense or my quality of life with out being reamed to just exist. Also i drive to work which is not directly in palo alto because it seems like palo alto only has employment for law offices, software companies and the service industry. Cheaper housing, mixed use zoning, housing closer to jobs and convenient areas to do activities/shopping so having a car isnt required. a train system with a reasonably frequent schedule, that doesnt sound its god forsaken horn at 530 in the morning at the at grade crossing near my apartment. Things need to be close enough together or convenient enough that not using a car is the practical timely option. cal train is not a practical replacement as it currently exists • If I could find cheaper rent as a graduate student. • Increase affordable housing • Increase affordable housing (no need for mkt rate housing or offices) without increasing office source i e. redmi worker/resident imbalance. • Increase low income housing so fewer homeless; fiber to the home would be good too • Less dense housing so there will be less traffic on main corridor. Preserve and improve the wonderful parks in the city. • LESS EXPENSIVE FOR YOUNG PEOPLE TO LIVE HERE. • Lower cost of housing. This is a wonderful place to live but 10x-20x higher property costs compared to other part of the country. Honestly, we could never afford to buy property here which is sad • Lower costs • Lower market rate housing costs • Make Palo Alto more affordable to everyone, poor, and rich. • More affordable housing • More affordable housing • more affordable housing • more affordable housing • more affordable housing • More affordable housing - especially on transportation corridor/Caltrain. North PA needs to build - it can't all be around San Antonio • More affordable housing for local public employees (teachers, first responders, etc.) and other low income workers. • MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR WORKING PEOPLE. • More affordable housing options • More affordable housing property integrated into existing community. • More affordable housing! ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 91 Packet Page 96 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 89 • MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING! WHY IS THIS NOT IN #12? • More affordable housing, bring in younger residents! (And replace our tree that has been with a cone for 1.5 years!) • More affordable housing. • More affordable rent; it eats up much of my salary. Palo Alto is a nice place to live & is very close to work. • More affordable utilities and housing opportunities. Lower taxes. • more high-density residential areas • More housing options for our children just starting careers!. • More housing, increased density • MORE HOUSING. • more low income housing • more low income housing • more market rate housing • Much more housing so our community can be affordable to more people who have a broad range of incomes. • no dense residential buildings, unless they are all income restricted units. • Not assume everyone who lives here has lots of money and can afford to do things like buy an electric car, put in solar panels, replace appliances, etc. • Palo Alto is a fantastic place to live. I love the parks, the schools, the trees, the natural beauty and the small town atmosphere with cosmopolitan air from all the smart peeps. I wish there were a way to wave a magic wand and make the place more affordable. I worry the cost of living issues, paired with pandemic and economic downturn, is pushing people out (when it was already rarefied). Palo Alto will lose its essential vitality if it becomes any more exclusively populated by only Richie-Riches and absentee owners. It's not easy to solve. Also, here is a very specific request that I've brought up in the past; I know I'm becoming a crank but you sent me that survey request so here goes: Neighborhood safety would be improved if a stop sign were put on Homer at the Cowper intersection. It is the only intersection with a through cross-street on Homer that doesn't have a stop sign and I've witnessed. multiple accidents here and lots & lots of honking/near accidents. This is a frequent crossing place for Channing House peeps and homeward bound Addison kids. (I've requested this twice through online resident and been denied, politely, by the public safety information person but I maintain it would be a benefit.) • Pass legislation that limits the amount of time a house can remain vacant to address the housing shortage and cost of rent in the city. • Peck ice rent control. • Prioritizing lower cost of living and affordability • Provide enough low cost housing to meet the needs of the population who travel to work here. • Provide more low income housing. • Reduce costs of everything • Reduce the house price and property tax • Reduce the number of large businesses. The business-to-home ratio is too high, creates a lot of commuting into Palo Alto. • reducing living cost. • Reduction of companies headquartered here with the attendant need for high-cost housing • Rent (or quality of rented property) control • Rent control / better access for students siking and control them instead of using the whole street to avoid accidents. • Rent control! ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 92 Packet Page 97 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 90 • See that we have housing so that the service people we want to work in Palo Alto can live in Palo Alto • Stop building multi-story structures out to the sidewalk. You're making Palo Alto into San Francisco!. • Stop fighting housing, approve more housing for our neighbors and kids. Also please better promote trains, busses, biking and active transportation options • Stop population increase due to insufficient infrastructure. • The City has to stop building dense housing developments and permitting "megahomes" to be built on lots that are too small. • The price of house dropped. • Tougher rent control stop expansion of Stanford University < 3% affiliates increase per year. • We need more housing Street Conditions and Traffic Concerns • We need more housing • Align lights on Embarcadero between Paly and El Camino • At least put a stop sign at crosswalk in front of Whole Foods. I've almost been hit twice by speeding drivers. We are disappointed by police apathy. Something needs to be changed. [?]. • Better maintain streets and sidewalks. • BETTER SYNCHRONIZING OF TRAFFIC LIGHTS ON MIDDLEFIELD AND ACMA!. • BETTER TRAFFIC PLANNNG AND CONTROL BETTER AND MORE THOUGHTFUL BUILDING PERMITS, BE REALISTIC ABOUT TRAFFIC AND PARKING. • Block off sections of Middlefield Road to control traffic and speeding through neighborhoods • calm traffic on Louis Road, finish the plan that was started previously. • Close downtown to cars like in mountain view. • Concentrate on local issues (such as fixing potholes) and stop trying to be a world leader in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. • do not close train crossings- Churchill, etc. Keep the track crossings as is. Do not further restrict streets for cars- no more bike lanes or traffic controls. The streets NEED to move traffic along otherwise quality of life suffers. people and bikes can move themselves around cars, not vice versa. • El Camino between Page Mill and Arastradero is in terrible shape. Please do something to get it repaired. • Enforce speed limit and traffic lights on embarcoders road - people speed and run the red lights. • fewer cars on the roads • Fix condition on major streets (El Camino?) improve policing, in all areas!. • Fix the pavement on the streets. The streets are a disgrace with repaving, bumps, etc. • Fix the pot holes in the roads • Fix the roads - especially El Camino; Make the city safer. • Fix the rotten road surfaces. • FIXED EL CAMINO REAL. • GET THE TRAFFIC SIGNALS DEMAND SENSORS TO WORK/FIXED. • Getting rid of the obstacles on thru streets like Foothill Expy & Aras traders / San Antonio. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 93 Packet Page 98 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 91 • Have the pot holes on El Camino Real fixed. Get a program to put solar on apartment buildings to replace gas. I would love to replace the gas water heaters and furnaces at the property I manage with solar or what you have in question 18 but it would need to be a city program that did it because I can't do it myself. I would also like to see a program that would put electric ( or solar if such a thing exists) charging stations in apartment complexes. I would like to see a program that paid for all these changes for the good of the system. If you put solar on my building that would take care of all the electrical needs of the buildings that would be great. Also please never do rent control in Palo Alto and never do parking permits in the Ventura neighborhood because there are too many apartments in this neighborhood and a parking permit program would be horrible for parking and for people visiting apartments and for the business along El Camino Real and Cal Ave. So please never entertain the idea of parking permits in Ventura ( I don't think this has ever come up, but I don't want it to ever come up). All these things stated. please fix the pot holes in El Camino Real • improve rail crossing safety • improve street upkeep, particularly after rain causes flooding, debris, potholes etc • Improve the traffic signals. • improve traffic : improve driving / enforcement or traffic laws / reduce speeds / reduce bike accidents • Improve traffic flow throughout the city • I've brought up several traffic safety concerns to Palo Alto transportation but have been rejected on all counts for help. I feel like our city is not striving for safety improvement and is content to use status quo and unwillingness to change as reasons to let safety slip. • Less traffic • Less traffic and more considerate drivers for people out walking. • Less traffic, safer speeds. • Open California Avenue. Get rid of "parklets" • Overall trafficenforcement of traffic rules • Reduce car traffic on University again, as part of a broader effort to center people rather than vehicles in transportation planning • Reduce congestion and traffic problems • Remove the traffic circle at E Meadow & Ross, I have almost been hit twice while out jogging. • repair roads • ROADS ( repair main roads and improve traffic conditions ) • Safer in the street. • Safer streets • Slow and calm traffic. • Stop making unnecessary changes to lanes and curbs! Charleston/Arastradero has been messed up for years. It feels like funneling tax-payer money to contractors. Bicycle lanes for students could have been made safer more quickly and without roadwork and tons of concrete (which contributes to green-house gases). • Stop putting in ridiculous traffic furniture on roads to slow down traffic. By doing so, reducing the amount of road available for cars and bikes and makes it much more dangerous for cyclists when there isn't enough road space because of some extra wide median structure. These unusual road structures make it more dangerous for everyone because they are not what is usual and expected. This is evidenced by the high number of curbs with tire marks on them. Charleston, Ross, etc... • Stop the ridiculous 'road diet' design, along with the push-out curbing, etc.; Also, get police to better manage speeding in residential areas • Traffic enforcement ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 94 Packet Page 99 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 92 • traffic, safety of cyclist • When city is doing the new pavement on existing streets, can city consider consistency on the same streets? I live on La Para Avenue. Some section of La Para has paved sidewalk, but others don't. It will look nicer with full consistency on my street. General Government Operations • A functional city council not caught up in old preservalenut us qwatti BS. • Better decisions by the city counsel • Better representation on City Council from South area. City Council somewhat elitist and heavenly North Palo Alto representation. Kind of a clique, not diverse enough. Not enough affordable housing. Expand/change library open days to Wednesday to Sunday. Increase open hours. • City government should be more open and accessible. • expedite decision making • Find great people to take leadership roles in our city! All neighboring cities have engaged city leadership, lots of community programs and activities. This city has lost its community spirit. • Fix the City of Palo Alto HR bottleneck • Focus on local municipal priorities before (improving planning dept., fixing sidewalks & streets) more than issues about which our community is already aware (useless water/energy,... • Focus only on matters for which city government has primary or exclusive responsibility and on which it can achieve meaningful, efficient and cost-effective results. • Mail a written newsletter every month with real news that is easy to understand including construction projects underway, changes in laws that affect people who live here (e.g., tree ordinance, train crossing plans), and suggestions for how to improve everyone's quality of life (e.g., get gas out of your home, volunteer in the community). • make accountable city council • Make housing more affordable. • Make sure elected officials are held accountable for prioritizing residents' concerns, not business. • Reduce size and cost of government so remaining budgets of time and money can be spent dealing with crime, safety, infrastructure, and essential services, and not be spent virtue-signaling on issues such as climate, social justice, DEI, ESG, or similar nonessential concerns. Stop setting naive, uninformed policy goals, and let the free market and the economics of substitution decide when conversion from one energy technology to another occurs. • reduce staff • Stop wasting your time and our money on the so-called "addressing climate change." You only address you feelings of virtue while making zero impact on climate while forcing us to waste our money on your virtue signalling. Yes, I am talking about your foolish (and expensive) efforts to limit natural gas usage in the city. • Talk to a live person at the city • The city government ignores the opinions of the citizens. The $8 million wasted on the Ross Road bicycle path is an example; forced on a neighborhood that did not want it!. • The males on city council need behavior modification in addressing women. They use and repeat words for example: contagious, obstructionist, untrustworthy. You should listen to recorded city council meetings. Did you notice that two new city council members are female leaders? Safety, Crime, Policing, and Law Enforcement • Add closed circuit TV in high crime areas. Add adult exercise equipment in parks. • address increasing crime rate ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 95 Packet Page 100 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 93 • Deal with minor/property crime. Thieves keep getting bolder-no visible effort to address. • Ensure safety of Palo Alto residents, support our Police • Improve safety • Increase personal safety and minimize crime • Maintain a safe environment for residents • more police paying attention to theft and attacks on residents • More visibility into crime • police force that is non-violent • Reduce crime • Reduce crime. • Reduce property crime and the risk of criminal attacks against people who are at home or walking Palo Alto streets. • Reduce property crime and the risk of criminal attacks against people who are at home or walking Palo Alto streets. • Reduced break-in and bike safety • safety • Safety from Vandalism & violence. • See more police car cruse through Barron Park • stop crimes like stealing packages from front door. City Services, Utilities, and Amenities • Affordable faster fiber service 10mbps @ cable price. • All utility cables (including power) to be moved underground • Better garbage pickup company / service. • Better utility prices / earlier music nights @ parks I would also like to see the Eichler swim pool take more members so we could wet in. • Explain twice a year how specific city services are being incrementally augmented or reduced based on revenue surpluses or shortfalls. • Extending library hours and items • Fiber service that is affordable but better town cable (now). • Focus on the quality of core City services (parks, roads, safety, sanitation) which need better maintenance and/or improvement. • free internet access using fiber • High speed internet - fiber • Improve 5G coverage across the entire city • Improve GreenWaste service or offer more than one option for service provider. Some healthy competition would be great! • More affordable utilities and better roads and sidewalks. • Palo Alto offering high speed fiber internet service to residents • Reduce all utility costs, sewer, refuse, and drain fees should be subsidized by "gas" profits. • Seeing staff being more productive and not sitting around(in vehicles) • to improve or reform the quality and efficiency of the city services Parks and Recreation Amenities/Services • Acquire additional 7 acres at Cubberley and build new Community Center • Add more Pickleball courts please! ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 96 Packet Page 101 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 94 • Fix Lucy Stern facilities, the Toilets and the auditorium are appallingly out of date and unbelievably unmaintained. • Have more tennis courts and off-leash dog areas • I wish there were more recreational activities offered for the youth of Palo Alto. I look at the City of Sunnyvale's course catalog every season with great envy, wishing there were more options for my kids (5yo and 8yo). I feel like the offerings today are geared towards older people (50+). • Improve Cubberley facilities • Improving the soccer field in Greer Park: adding lighting equipments, and leveling the field better or converting to turf. • In addition to focusing on economic, commercial and educational development, please build more space for outdoor entertainment facilities for residents, and build youth sports venues, especially skateboarding grounds, which are simply useless. • More dog parks!!! • More pickleball courts at Milchell Park. • More pickleball courts, fix potholes. • More recreational activities for teens!. • rebuild Cubberley Community Center • Sort out the problem with Cubberley/school District. Have a real community center/wellness center/gym that is city owned. It's a shame the disrepair of Cubberley. Our city should have it's own Recreation/Community Center. • Stop double-charging residents to use Foothills Park. Non-residents only pay entrance fee; residents have to pay both entrance fee + our normal property taxes. If increased traffic adds increased operation costs, that money should come from the increased traffic, not residents who already fund the park. Charging residents twice is not equitable, and I resent it so much that I've basically stopped using the park that I have cherished for 39 years. • there is no nice gym or rec center around here Improvements for Walking and Biking • Actual improvements to bicycling instead of the dangerous side paths and bollards currently being installed. (The time estimate to complete this survey is severely low.) • Add safe bike lanes to every busy street. • Better PROTECTED bike lanes in ALL major roads, and more traffic calming measures, especially on streets like Fabian Way where there are a lot of children and elderly adults using the street- and cars are constantly speeding and not yielding to cyclists or pedestrians. A thin green line is not appropriate as bikeway infrastructure on wide mile-long roads. Longer avenues also need more crosswalks • -Bike lanes can cause unsafe issues on major thorough fares -use land carefully w/out creating urban congestion. • Fix el camino or the adjacent side streets to be more bike friendly. If you want to get from one side to the other, you have to cross the main road but that is not easy. Say you want to skip El Camino entirely and ride along side - you can't! The side streets aren't continuous. • Fix sidewalks • Increase oversight on bicycle traffic and hand out tickets to those who run red lights and do not stop at stop signs • Keep some of the streets permanently car free. (Cal Ave, but also Univ. Ave.) • MAKE DOWNTOWN FULLY PEDESTRIAN. • Make it safer to walk the streets downtown. • More pedestrian only streets downtown ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 97 Packet Page 102 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 95 • more pedestrian rail crossings so it isn't as far to walk to shops and services on the other side of the tracks • Prioritizing other modes of transportation, particularly bicycling around the downtown area; (re)introducing a bikeshare program • Protect the bike lanes • REDUCE TRIPPING HAZARDS AT SIDEWALKS. Permits, Code/Ordinance Enforcement • BANISH EVERYONE WHO USES A LEAF-BLOWER. • Better code enforcement. Gas blowers are not allowed but common. • Better use of or tax of empty lots and buildings • better, more streamlined permit services • Fix (or at least change the reputation of) the permitting system. Getting a replacement electrical panel. Fahgeddaboutit. • Less restriction on zoning, buit code. • More efficiency in workflows in getting things done (ie. building permits) at City Hall. • More efficient building permit issuing/processing • more enforcement of rules/regulations of groups that buy property for the sole purpose of driving up prices, but make the process of home improvement easier/less onerous for all residents who plan to live long-term in community • Need to enforce codes and ordinances. Far too much gas-powered lawn equipment!! The noise issues are terrible, especially for those of us who need to work (and live) in relative quiet. Also, sketchy landlords who rent to AirBnB, etc. need to comply with rental policies. RENT CONTROL!!!! The rental increases are horrendous and tenants are powerless--it's untenable and unsustainable. • Not seeing RV/campers all over the neighborhood, and associated litter, environmental damage, and excrement. Absolutely ridiculous, I've been almost hit walking my children because a blind spot of RV parked on a corner. • Streamline the process for building an ADU in Palo Alto • The permit process is costly and inspectors are not always helpful or kind. Hard to maintain and upgrade one's home. Public Transportation • Better public transportation • bring back and improve free shuttles. • convenient public transportation around town • Enabling any kind of transit besides single driver automobiles! It is simply faster to drive to most places within Palo Alto, which then impacts traffic congestion, noise, and local air quality. We need alternatives to the slow and clunky buses. We have great bike friendly roads (Ross Road, etc) -- can we do more of that? • Free Shuttle service to most of Palo Alto. ie. west of Alma and ECR. To San Antonio shopping Center, to Cubberly and to Stanford. • Improve public transportation. • Increase public transit routes, schedules, availability!!! Cut down laneage on Alma St, lower speeds, add better mass transit that runs with small headways • More frequent public transit, safer bike lanes, less street parking and more apartment complexes. • More shuttles that are electric that would travel up and down Middlefield Rd. • Public transportation. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 98 Packet Page 103 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 96 • Underground the train. Homelessness • Address an adequate solution to the homeless on El Camino Real (in RVs, cars) • Address homelessness!!! • Address the homeless situation in downtown Palo Alto. The current situation is not safe for residents. Also, address traffic pattern between Town & Country shopping center and Paly. • combat homelessness • Get the panhandlers off of University Avenue and off of El Camino Real. • Help the homeless afford housing. • Housing; taking care of homeless. • Humane service for the homeless to get them off University Ave • Reduce/eliminate homeless people walking in neighborhoods now. • solve the homeless problem Local Businesses, Retail/Shopping Options • attention paid to south palo to make it friendly for residents with restaurants, shopping and services. • Encourage more local businesses that aren't restaurants or health clubs. • More Asian restaurants • More dining establishments and stores near the hospital. • Remove the art place in Louis St. & Charleston Ave. • Repair and upgrade "Lucy Steen Theatre". • Restaurants within walking distance (not just in downtown area) • There is a good amount of abandoned commercial real estate locations, especially along El Camino Real, I would love to see more shops there. I would also love more opportunities for community bonding - I was bummed I missed my neighborhood gathering this year. Maybe more funding/opportunities/advertisement, such as a email list for community members to see what is happening in the community? Development (other than housing) • Address reasons under City control for general slowness of any type of construction in the city (downtown business build-outs always behind schedule, home renovation permitting infamously slow, slow pace of approval of new developments, etc.) • BETTER ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CONTROL -UGLY BLDGS ARE GOING UP NICE HAVING OUTDOOR RESTAURANTS ON STREETS- -MORE & PERMANENT. • reduce or eliminate all commercial development • Revitalize the stretch of El Camino between Charleston and Page Mill. I grew up here and there has not been any improvements in our area. A little attention please. Demolish the Glass Slipper. • Stop allowing our nice suburban city turning into an urban area of big buildings right out to the street! • Stop building new office space. We have far too much office space already. No more mixed-use developments that make jobs/housing worse. • Strictly limit overall growth including limitations on building height and a moratorium on new office space construction. Fight state mandates on housing. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 99 Packet Page 104 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 97 Sustainability • Enhance biodiversity by offering ivy removal rebates to homeowners in exchange for planting California native plants. • Helping customers setup/use gray water at their homes • I miss the old recycling center. I know that all its services are now available elsewhere, but it was nice to have it all in one place. • Restrict water use. Interesting to me that it was not mentioned in this survey. It is the most important topic to address and city is doing very little to force people to cut back. It needs to be mandatory and the city needs to figure out a method that is as fair as possible. Living on a quarter acre with grass surrounding a house is not fair to those of use who recycle kitchen and shower water and seldom flush AND have draught resistant plants and have for 20 years. Second would to fire the incompetence in the planning office by starting with the woman whose first name begins with an R. • Setting aside more areas for California native plant gardens, putting electricity underground so trees don't have to be pruned into wierd shapes. • Stop SFO from having all their jet routes over my house in Midtown. Hire a new lobbyist and hold the FAA to its environmental regulations. • Use measure e site for green infrastructure (former dump, next to sewage treatment plant). Sense of Community/Community Activities • Build stronger community bonds - quality ties between neighbors. Other places I've lived fostered strong community ties (fostered through block parties / events, community gatherings, etc.) • City owned activities, such as the Golf Course, Foothill Park, and the Science Museum would be discounted for city inhabitants. Currently, at the Golf Course everyone pays the same without regard to where they live. My tax dollars go towards these services AND, in addition, I get to pay the same fee as residents of other communities? That's just wrong. • Facilitate more events in neighborhoods, have more fun events in the city like the fathers day music thing downtown we used to have • Focus on the residents -- not the real estate developers or the tech industry, who have always paid a premium to live in this wonderful town. Palo Alto is attractive location for tech, so we don't have to cater to them with dormitories for their workers. A real focus on families (of all kinds) will maintain our neighborhoods' character. Overbuilding is not delivering affordability, but is diminishing quality of life and in my view risks reducing our attractiveness as a place for innovation and economic strength. • I wish there were more large community special opportunities like closing University Avenue and having a monthly concert etc • Organize / Facilitate an opportunity Civics engagement for the residents Schools, Programs for Youth • I hope the libraries provide more educational or entertaining programs for children. I often check them on the website, but wish there could be more. But I love library staff and library services. • Improve the middle school quality more hospitality / food businesses staying open after 9pm. • Make Schools use funds wisely and make schools a better place for better academic education, not brainwashing. • More funds to public schools. More school bus services. • Provide school buses • Speech therapy services at Weingarten for children who are deaf or have hearing loss ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 100 Packet Page 105 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 98 Overall Appearance, Cleanliness, Upkeep • Allow citizens to cut the trees in front of their house because of Root Expansion; and expand Library hours • Every single house must maintain certain degree of neatness of the front yard! Hope the city makes the mandatory list to maintain. • green spaces • Less trash on the streets. • Maintain the entrances to the city. Embarcadero at 101 and El Camino around University are an unmaintained mess. PA should either maintain the areas or hold accountable who we think is responsible, Doing nothing is unacceptable. Noise Reduction • Create quiet zones for Caltrain • In general, Palo Alto is overbuilt with too much traffic. Can no longer leave windows open during both day and night due to excessive noise from traffic in neighborhood. Each year quality of Palo Alto life deteriorates. Some ways to mitigate these problems: 1) Open back up California Ave to cars so they don't come down residential streets instead. Traffic will only get worse when public safety building opens and further degrade when teacher housing completes. 2) Stop approving new buildings, both business and residential to reduce future traffic, water and power consumption. Most of the new and even older buildings in my neighborhood are unoccupied, so convert them to housing if needed to meet California housing requirements. 4) Be more realistic about negative environmental impact assessments that new building projects bring. For example, traffic estimates for new projects are always wrong in my area and underestimate number of new cars/traffic brought into area. Buildings also allowed to go too close to curb; trees removed cannot survive replanting with reduced growing area. 5) Increase onsite parking for any new projects; most cannot/will not use the poor mass transit options in Palo Alto (even when near a train station.) Requiring onsite area for 1.5 cars per residential unit essential as most units will have one, possibly two cars. Unfair to neighbors to have those residential cars parked on street instead. 6) Enforce traffic laws and ticket cars/commuter vans that sometimes idle for 15 minutes and longer. 7) Tow/remove the RVs that block sidewalks and reduce access to merchants on Park Blvd; I can no longer park near stores I like to visit. 8) Stop Internet/Fiber Project. Already have plenty of options between Comcast, AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile. For example, T-Mobile provide 300 to 500 Mbits/second download for $50 per month (including taxes) and even less if you also have cell phone plan. • reduce cal train noise (horn) • There are areas where gas-powered leaf blowers are allowed. The noise and emissions they give off should make them illegal in all areas of the City. I'm in a mixed zone (I think you call it) off El Camino on Sheridan Avenue. The noise from the leaf blowers is here every day of the week -- at the Sunrise Senior Living building (twice a week), at my building once a week, and at 435 Sheridan once a week. There is no excuse for the horrible emissions that are causing climate change and the noise of the leaf blowers (on top of the airplane noise). This should be an easy fix! Why not offer rebates on leaf blowers so help the small contractors manage the transition? Gas-powered leaf blowers are also a health issue for the works using them. You don't see them wearing equipment to prevent hearing loss nor to prevent those toxic fumes for going into their lungs. This is outrageous, knowing what we know about the health impacts of emissions and noise. The safety of these low-paid workers should be a higher priority for Palo Alto and for their employers. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 101 Packet Page 106 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 99 Downtown Improvements • Improve Univ Ave - people use to travel to PA for restaurants & shopping now our downtown looks dumpy compared to others invest in Univ Ave, attract better restaurants/shops again. • Make the downtown more vibrant. Redwood City is making much more of an effort!. • more variety in downtown busnesses • Permanently convert California Ave to foot traffic and outdoor dining and shopping Lower Taxes and/or Utility Costs • Lower city sales tax. No more this long survey - 184 entries- is too excessive. Tza more involved incl R citizen. • Reduce Electrical Outages !! IF/WHEN they happen be resposponsive and fast in the online communication. • Reduce taxes Parking Concerns • Continue to monitor parking in residential areas close to downtown • Get rid of the residential parking program. It's a disaster and I'd rather go back to how it was 20 years ago. Other • * A GOOD SENIOR CENTER!. • Allow access to Santa Clara public library system automatically with Palo Alto library membership • ELECTED MAYOR! COST-EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT RETURN FOOT-THE-PARK TO P.A. RESIDENTS!!. • Get rid of unwanted phone calls • Good midance to 50' height limit. • Increase local fire protection. My local fire station has shut down. The wonderful and needed people help with fires and saving lives. Saving lives from fires as well as other emergencies. • Make the historic homes/areas special, as they do in New England (my background). Keep them "green," as in less concrete. • More affordable. • More protection for the quality of life for people now living here. The quality of life has dropped significantly in the past 20 years. • More street light at night. • More transparent communication and deeper understanding that going all electric is impossible and costly to many homeowners. • My teenage/daughter said the library has very limited choice of teen books since all of them are the same plot of romance books & are other variety. She now has to read non-fration books. Her friends think the same. • Pay more attention to our pet/animal welfare by providing a highly more robust animal services!! Currently it is dysfunctional, ineffective and does not absolutely nothing to reach out to the PALO ALTO population that is full of pets! There is so much that could be done to improve both human and pet lives by promoting the relationship! • Planning, permitting and city council processes are multi-year. Not good. • Publish personal interests and professions for members of the council and various committees and wprlomg grpi[s/ ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 102 Packet Page 107 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 100 • Put more financial burden onto home owners to support the working class members of our community, who keep it running. • Reduce the freight train speed to lessen the house shaking near the train track. • Reducing the number of RVs in & around living areas, create safe parking areas for them. • replace Cubberley • Stop being so politically correct. E.g.: STOP banning plastics & gas appliances, etc. Eliminate the bottle deposit or make refunds easier. • Stop discrimination against workers • Stop mask and vaccine mandates. • stop with surveys! • When I finally die (I'm. almost 90) guarantee I go straight to heaven! Question 19: As a resident of Palo Alto, what one thing do you believe the City does well and would want to maintain? Parks, open space, and natural environment • Baylands • Beautiful parks and outdoor spaces. • Continue to keep the environment clean and beautiful • Continue to protect and improve parks and community centers like in and around Cubberly. • Conversation of natural environment => Trees, parks - beautiful. • Foothills park • Good parks & libraries • green spaces • Green spaces • I love our parks and libraries! Thank you for making them so accessible for our community at large • I think the city does a fantastic job with the urban planning and the trees, foliage, etc • Its greenery • Keep as many trees as possible throughout Palo Alto. • Keeping our city green • Keeping up the green space. • Maintain & increase open space. • Maintain parks and improve maintainable and upkeep. • Maintain parks and open space for accessible use. • maintain the parklets in front of certain restaurant areas • maintain the quality and quantity of parks and open space. • Maintain trees. • Maintaining natural spaces such as parks. • Maintaining the greenery and encourage the city to plant a massive number of trees. • Maintenance of parks as places for everyone to enjoy • Natural environment • Nature preserves, trails. • open and recreational spaces ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 103 Packet Page 108 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 101 • Open green spaces (so many wonderful parks, big and small), and mature trees in so many of the neighborhoods. Palo Alto feels very different from Mountain View, Menlo Park, and other nearby cities -- because our green space is so much better. (Foothill Nature Preserve of course....). • Open space + parks. • Open space and facilities. • Park and library • Park maintenance • Park system • parks • Parks • Parks • Parks • Parks • Parks & playgrounds are great. • PARKS & RECREATION. • Parks and activities • Parks and bike paths • parks and libraries • Parks and libraries • Parks and natural preserves • Parks and natural spaces • Parks and open space • parks and open space • Parks and open space • parks and open space • Parks and Recreation • Parks and recreation • Parks are great! • parks, recreation activities, open spaces, libraries • Parks, trees. • Parks. • parls • Paths and parks are well maintained • Preserve the nature. • Preserve the open space and many parks in the city and service the parks. • Provides open space and healthy trees. • providing a beautiful and pleasant natural environment (parks, etc.) • Providing and maintaining public parks • Providing and protecting parks and open spaces. Good for the environment, residents health and sense of community. • Takes good care of trees and green spaces. • The city is gorgeous. The parks are clean. Every city official I've interacted with has been really professional and courteous. I love how careful the city is with its trees. (I know the community parks would be easier to use if they had bathrooms but that's a complicated story.) • the overall excellence of parks, libraries, schools and other wonderful community services! • The quality of parks and open spaces • Trees and Parks are beautiful. • Vibrancy of programs and public spaces. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 104 Packet Page 109 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 102 • We have a wonderful parks program with many beautiful and inviting places to locally enjoy the outdoors. • We have great parks and open space areas and should maintain them • Well kept parks. Utilities • Utilities, independence from big government • Champion and support quality childcare for infants through grade 5 • City of Palo Alto Utilities • City owned utilities to help control costs. • City owned utilities. • City supplied utilities. • Excellent residential water quality. • fewer fees charge on Trash re-pick up. • garbage collection • garbage collection • General stability, good utilities service, safety • Good utilities • I think the Utilities are generally handled well. The people who actually come out to the home when we have problems are excellent. • Keep our own utility. • Live the municipal services center open house!. • Most city public services like waste collection, sewers, utilities, school system, traffic safety oversight during school start and end periods, lots more. For me its the best place in the world to reside, moderate climate is a big factor as is overall community participation on many aspects. • Municipal ownership of utilities • Our water supply from Hetch Hetchy. • Palo Alto Utilities • Public utilities • Reduce utility bill • Response from "Emergency sewer problems" department!. • The City's Utilities Department is excellent and the best feature of living in the City. • Utilities • Utilities are good • Utilities system. Delivery and customer service are first-rate • Utilities, fire and police • Utilities, libraries and parks- all great. • Utilities, libraries, baylands • Utilities. • Utilities. • Utility electricity prices are very good. • Utility services Libraries, museums, theaters, etc. • Art Center, Palo Alto Players, Jr Museum and Childrens Theater are exceptional! Support them more. • Arts and activities for the community ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 105 Packet Page 110 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 103 • Arts events to kids and families. • Arts, theatre, city classes, etc. • Beautiful parks, and many of them, though a bit outdated • Education, recreational & cultural aspects - very pleasant place to live. • Excellent library system. • Excellent library! • Great libraries • Great library services, including elibrary services • Libraries • Libraries • libraries - they are the best • LIbraries & City Parks • Libraries and parks are excellent. Public art is wonderful. • Libraries, visual performing arts programs for children, makes space @ cubberly. • Libraries/childrens theater • library is great in Palo Alto • library services and parks • LIBRARY, ART PROGRAMS. • Library. • Love Palo Alto's community services, especially the Junior Museum & Zoo. Please keep supporting it! • love the libraries and librarians! • Provide a wide variety of excellent amenities and programs • Services offered by the libraries and parks • The classes offered at Community centers. • The libraries are great (we have too many of them though). • The many nonprofit organizations like Gamble Garden, PAHA, MOAH, etc. exist only because the City is willing to let them use City acreage and facilities. These volunteer run nonprofits are highlights and places of pleasure for citizens and visitors. • your art center is pretty nice Safety services • City safety. • Crime prevention and cleanliness of streets and sidewalks • Crime-free neighborhoods. • Emergency services • Essential services like fire and police • Fire & emergency services. • fire and police department quality • Fire/Rescue services • Keep the crime rate relatively low. • Maintain the police and fire departments. • Maintenance and operation of fire stations, as well as the wildfire loss prevention regulations about brush around houses. • Palo Alto POlice • Palo Alto Police • police ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 106 Packet Page 111 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 104 • Police & fire are outstanding. • Police and Fire departments • police services • public safety • Public safety • Reduce crime. • Safety and convenience of walking and biking for transportation • Safety. • safty Schools and education, programs for youth • alues education and diversity • Community [?] public schools, youth sports. • Education • Educational opportunities for children are good. Quality of life overall is good and walkability is great. • Great elementary & high schools, street dev and cleaning great biking routes. • High level of education preK-12 • high quality K12 education system • K-12 educational opportunities • Maintain the quality of the schools. • Probably schools, not curiculium • schools • Schools. • Services for youth are generally excellent. Cleanliness of community • clean streets • Keep the city clean • Maintaining Palo Alto as a pleasant place to live. • maintains cleanliness • Maintenance and upkeep of city • natural beauty, preserve neighborhood feel. avoiding building up the city with more housing. • street sweeping • Street tree trimming • Street trees and overall quality of streetscapes is excellent, this is both a major reason I choose to live in Palo Alto as well as something that always gets positive comments from my out of town guests • The general look and feel of the city is pleasant, and seems pretty well maintained. • The tree service was amazing. The other day, one of the big trees in my neighborhood fell, and staff came and it was all clean in the morning. I was impressed by their responsiveness. • Upkeep of the trees and sidewalks. Ability to give input and communication with government • attentiveness to resident's needs • Attracts and honors input from diverse, talented residents. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 107 Packet Page 112 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 105 • Be engaged with its citizens • Communication • Community communications • Engaged community • general ambiance of concerned, engaged citizens • I am impressed with the responsiveness of city staff and the ease of navigation on city websites. I also do enjoy the mail communication, when I get them. • Listens to concerns • Public comment opportunies • Reaching out to residents and valuing their opinion. Ease of bicycle travel/walking • Bicycles. At least we have bike paths and boulevards, although traffic is so out of control right now that I'm afraid to bicycle. Seriously. Traffic is extremely dangerous, people don't stop at stop signs and drive through red lights turning right, even into pedestrians trying to cross in crosswalks, and the heavier e-bikes are a threat to normal bikes and pedestrians. Many people drive 35 on narrow residential streets, often with children present. I am very disappointed that I can't make full utilization of the bike boulevard 250 feet from my house because of safety issues. If we could get the cars, and, e-bikes, to slow down and drive more safely, there would be a lot more bicycling. Please expand the bike opportunities-- most cities don't have that (yet). • Bike lanes. • Bike routes and building more of them. • bike safety • bike ways • Keep pedestrian only zones, like on California avenue • Maintain the culture & infrastructure for kids biking to school. • Palo Alto is great for getting around without a car (walking and biking). We need to keep focusing on this to take cars off the road and alleviate traffic. • Safe routes to school program is one of the best in the country. • walkability of city streets • We like the bike boulevards, want to expand on those Government/leadership • Continue being led by thoughtful, highly-educated, wise and caring people, who want to benefit society and our town with their leadership. • Effort to make best decisions for the community, rather than self dealing. • Maintains an overall honest and friendly government, quick to respond when needed, and relatively honest re the city's ability to perform difficult operations. • Palo Alto's "Uplift Local" is great. The more the better. • The City Council seems to be working hard to balance the need for more housing while also trying to maintain careful growth so that our precious lifestyle isn't damaged. General City services • Overall city services are quite good (pool and parks), the Fire Department is super, and the government functions well. • Palo Alto provides an amazing number of high quality services for it citizens. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 108 Packet Page 113 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 106 • The online building permit process - much improved (speed, communication) from pre-pandemic in person process. Everything/great place to live • A good living environment • It's pretty good here. • Maintaining Palo Alto as a pleasant place to live. Sense of community, community activities, and recreation • city events like the chilli bake off in mitchell park Other • FARMERS MARKETS. • Free parking downtown. • I like the variety of restaurants downtown and at Stanford mall • Intelligent inclusive diversity • manage parking in residential areas near commercial areas • Parking is downtown is pretty good. Also, the outdoor restaurant space has been a big plus. • Reduce racism. • Support and value a diverse community • The vibrancy of University Ave as a space to eat, work, & live. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 109 Packet Page 114 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 107 Appendix C: Results to Open Participation Survey About the Open Participation Survey After the data collection period for the probability, address-based survey was underway, the City made available a web-based survey to its residents through a link on the City’s website and on social media. Visitors to the site were able to complete the survey from November 16 – December 19, 2022 and 116 surveys were received. This section contains the results of this open participation web-based survey. These data were not collected through a random sample and it is unknown who in the community was aware of the survey; therefore, a level of confidence in the representativeness of the sample cannot be estimated. However, to reduce bias where possible, these data were weighted to match the demographic characteristics of the 2010 Census and 2019 American Community Survey estimates for adults in the City of Palo Alto. The results of the weighting scheme for the open participation survey are presented in the following table. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 110 Packet Page 115 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 108 Table 110: Palo Alto, CA 2021 Weighting Table Characteristic Population Norm Unweighted Data Weighted Data Housing Rent home 45% 15% 42% Own home 55% 85% 58% Detached unit* 58% 88% 62% Attached unit* 42% 12% 38% Race and Ethnicity White 68% 75% 65% Not white 32% 25% 35% Not Hispanic 95% 98% 99% Hispanic 5% 2% 1% Sex and Age Female 52% 70% 65% Male 48% 30% 35% 18-34 years of age 22% 5% 10% 35-54 years of age 41% 22% 41% 55+ years of age 37% 74% 50% Females 18-34 10% 5% 10% Females 35-54 21% 14% 21% Females 55+ 20% 51% 20% Males 18-34 12% 0% 0% Males 35-54 20% 8% 21% Males 55+ 17% 23% 29% * U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2017 5-year estimates ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 111 Packet Page 116 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 109 Results Tables Table 111: Question 1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Palo Alto as a place to live 30% N=34 58% N=67 11% N=13 1% N=1 0% N=0 100% N=115 Your neighborhood as a place to live 38% N=43 43% N=49 20% N=22 0% N=0 0% N=0 100% N=115 Palo Alto as a place to raise children 29% N=33 51% N=59 13% N=15 1% N=1 5% N=6 100% N=114 Palo Alto as a place to work 20% N=23 36% N=41 20% N=23 4% N=5 20% N=23 100% N=115 Palo Alto as a place to visit 14% N=16 46% N=52 30% N=33 7% N=7 4% N=4 100% N=113 Palo Alto as a place to retire 11% N=13 30% N=35 20% N=23 17% N=20 21% N=24 100% N=114 The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 20% N=22 60% N=68 20% N=23 0% N=0 0% N=0 100% N=114 Table 112: Question 1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Palo Alto as a place to live 30% N=34 58% N=67 11% N=13 1% N=1 100% N=115 Your neighborhood as a place to live 38% N=43 43% N=49 20% N=22 0% N=0 100% N=115 Palo Alto as a place to raise children 30% N=33 54% N=59 14% N=15 1% N=1 100% N=108 Palo Alto as a place to work 26% N=23 45% N=41 25% N=23 5% N=5 100% N=92 Palo Alto as a place to visit 15% N=16 48% N=52 31% N=33 7% N=7 100% N=108 Palo Alto as a place to retire 14% N=13 38% N=35 25% N=23 22% N=20 100% N=91 The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 20% N=22 60% N=68 20% N=23 0% N=0 100% N=114 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 112 Packet Page 117 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 110 Table 113: Question 2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 10% N=11 54% N=62 32% N=37 4% N=5 0% N=0 100% N=115 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 17% N=19 65% N=73 15% N=16 3% N=3 0% N=0 100% N=111 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 38% N=44 46% N=53 15% N=18 0% N=0 0% N=0 100% N=115 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 34% N=39 51% N=59 11% N=13 2% N=2 1% N=1 100% N=114 Residents' connection and engagement with their community 16% N=18 54% N=61 24% N=28 6% N=7 0% N=0 100% N=114 Table 114: Question 2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 10% N=11 54% N=62 32% N=37 4% N=5 100% N=115 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 17% N=19 65% N=73 15% N=16 3% N=3 100% N=111 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 38% N=44 46% N=53 15% N=18 0% N=0 100% N=115 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 34% N=39 52% N=59 11% N=13 2% N=2 100% N=113 Residents' connection and engagement with their community 16% N=18 54% N=61 24% N=28 6% N=7 100% N=113 Table 115: Question 3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Don't know Total Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 23% N=26 47% N=54 20% N=23 9% N=10 1% N=1 100% N=114 Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 39% N=45 39% N=45 15% N=17 6% N=7 1% N=1 100% N=115 Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 60% N=68 27% N=31 4% N=4 5% N=5 5% N=5 100% N=113 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 113 Packet Page 118 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 111 Table 116: Question 3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Total Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 23% N=26 48% N=54 21% N=23 9% N=10 100% N=113 Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 39% N=45 39% N=45 15% N=17 7% N=7 100% N=114 Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 63% N=68 28% N=31 4% N=4 5% N=5 100% N=107 Table 117: Question 4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate the job you feel the Palo Alto community does at each of the following. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Making all residents feel welcome 10% N=11 49% N=56 23% N=26 15% N=17 4% N=4 100% N=115 Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 15% N=18 32% N=36 23% N=27 27% N=32 2% N=3 100% N=115 Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 14% N=16 43% N=50 26% N=30 15% N=17 1% N=1 100% N=115 Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 5% N=6 27% N=31 30% N=34 33% N=37 5% N=6 100% N=113 Table 118: Question 4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the job you feel the Palo Alto community does at each of the following. Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Making all residents feel welcome 10% N=11 51% N=56 24% N=26 15% N=17 100% N=111 Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 16% N=18 32% N=36 24% N=27 28% N=32 100% N=112 Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds 14% N=16 44% N=50 27% N=30 15% N=17 100% N=114 Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) 5% N=6 28% N=31 32% N=34 35% N=37 100% N=107 Table 119: Question 5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 15% N=17 59% N=66 17% N=19 6% N=6 3% N=4 100% N=111 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 114 Packet Page 119 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 112 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 9% N=11 46% N=53 32% N=37 12% N=13 0% N=0 100% N=115 Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 10% N=11 41% N=47 37% N=42 10% N=12 1% N=2 100% N=114 Employment opportunities 7% N=7 36% N=41 16% N=18 14% N=16 28% N=32 100% N=114 Shopping opportunities 20% N=22 45% N=51 29% N=32 6% N=7 1% N=1 100% N=113 Cost of living in Palo Alto 1% N=1 2% N=2 31% N=35 66% N=74 0% N=0 100% N=114 Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 17% N=19 51% N=58 25% N=28 6% N=7 1% N=1 100% N=113 Traffic flow on major streets 6% N=7 33% N=37 36% N=41 25% N=28 1% N=1 100% N=114 Ease of public parking 14% N=16 46% N=52 24% N=28 10% N=12 5% N=6 100% N=114 Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 15% N=17 64% N=72 13% N=14 6% N=7 2% N=2 100% N=113 Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 2% N=3 8% N=10 19% N=22 49% N=55 21% N=24 100% N=113 Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 23% N=25 40% N=45 19% N=22 11% N=12 8% N=9 100% N=113 Ease of walking in Palo Alto 34% N=39 40% N=46 20% N=23 4% N=5 1% N=1 100% N=114 Variety of housing options 1% N=1 19% N=21 33% N=38 43% N=49 4% N=5 100% N=114 Availability of affordable quality housing 1% N=1 1% N=2 14% N=16 69% N=79 14% N=16 100% N=114 Recreational opportunities 29% N=33 54% N=62 14% N=15 1% N=1 2% N=2 100% N=114 Availability of affordable quality mental health care 1% N=1 5% N=5 16% N=18 31% N=35 47% N=54 100% N=114 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 18% N=20 57% N=64 19% N=21 3% N=4 2% N=2 100% N=111 Table 120: Question 5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 16% N=17 61% N=66 17% N=19 6% N=6 100% N=108 Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto 9% N=11 47% N=53 33% N=37 12% N=13 100% N=114 Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 10% N=11 42% N=47 38% N=42 11% N=12 100% N=112 Employment opportunities 9% N=7 50% N=41 22% N=18 19% N=16 100% N=82 Shopping opportunities 20% N=22 45% N=51 29% N=32 6% N=7 100% N=112 Cost of living in Palo Alto 1% N=1 2% N=2 31% N=35 66% N=74 100% N=113 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 115 Packet Page 120 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 113 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 17% N=19 52% N=58 25% N=28 6% N=7 100% N=111 Traffic flow on major streets 6% N=7 33% N=37 36% N=41 25% N=28 100% N=113 Ease of public parking 15% N=16 48% N=52 26% N=28 11% N=12 100% N=108 Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 15% N=17 65% N=72 13% N=14 7% N=7 100% N=111 Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 3% N=3 11% N=10 24% N=22 62% N=55 100% N=89 Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 24% N=25 43% N=45 21% N=22 12% N=12 100% N=104 Ease of walking in Palo Alto 34% N=39 41% N=46 20% N=23 4% N=5 100% N=113 Variety of housing options 1% N=1 19% N=21 35% N=38 45% N=49 100% N=109 Availability of affordable quality housing 1% N=1 2% N=2 16% N=16 81% N=79 100% N=98 Recreational opportunities 30% N=33 56% N=62 14% N=15 1% N=1 100% N=111 Availability of affordable quality mental health care 2% N=1 9% N=5 30% N=18 58% N=35 100% N=60 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 19% N=20 58% N=64 20% N=21 3% N=4 100% N=109 Table 121: Question 6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 2% N=3 12% N=14 22% N=25 24% N=28 40% N=45 100% N=114 K-12 education 33% N=37 43% N=49 9% N=10 1% N=1 14% N=16 100% N=114 Adult educational opportunities 18% N=20 47% N=53 7% N=8 0% N=0 28% N=32 100% N=114 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 8% N=9 66% N=75 21% N=24 2% N=2 3% N=3 100% N=114 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 13% N=14 43% N=49 26% N=30 15% N=17 3% N=3 100% N=114 Opportunities to learn about City services through social media websites such as Twitter and Facebook 10% N=11 34% N=38 11% N=12 6% N=7 39% N=44 100% N=113 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 116 Packet Page 121 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 114 Table 122: Question 6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 4% N=3 20% N=14 36% N=25 40% N=28 100% N=68 K-12 education 38% N=37 50% N=49 11% N=10 1% N=1 100% N=98 Adult educational opportunities 25% N=20 65% N=53 10% N=8 0% N=0 100% N=82 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 8% N=9 68% N=75 22% N=24 2% N=2 100% N=110 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 13% N=14 44% N=49 27% N=30 16% N=17 100% N=110 Opportunities to learn about City services through social media websites such as Twitter and Facebook 16% N=11 55% N=38 18% N=12 10% N=7 100% N=68 Table 123: Question 7 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. No Yes Total Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their services 48% N=55 52% N=59 100% N=114 Visited a neighborhood park or City park 4% N=5 96% N=109 100% N=114 Used Palo Alto public libraries or their services 20% N=23 80% N=91 100% N=114 Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Palo Alto 80% N=90 20% N=23 100% N=113 Attended a City-sponsored event 43% N=49 57% N=65 100% N=114 Participated in a club 70% N=79 30% N=34 100% N=114 Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 3% N=3 97% N=111 100% N=114 Done a favor for a neighbor 12% N=14 88% N=100 100% N=114 Used the City’s website to conduct business or pay bills 58% N=66 42% N=48 100% N=114 Used the Utilities website to conduct business or pay bills 31% N=35 69% N=79 100% N=114 Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person, phone, email or web) for help or information 48% N=54 52% N=59 100% N=113 Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person, phone, email or web) to express your opinion 46% N=52 54% N=61 100% N=113 Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.) 49% N=55 51% N=58 100% N=114 Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting 48% N=54 52% N=59 100% N=114 Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto 39% N=45 61% N=69 100% N=114 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 117 Packet Page 122 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 115 Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. No Yes Total Walked or biked instead of driving 11% N=12 89% N=102 100% N=114 Observed a code violation or other hazard in Palo Alto (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 33% N=38 67% N=76 100% N=114 Household member was a victim of a crime in Palo Alto 88% N=98 12% N=13 100% N=111 Reported a crime to the police in Palo Alto 86% N=95 14% N=16 100% N=111 Stocked 14 days’ worth of supplies in case of a major disaster where you have no electricity, water, internet, or telephone service 55% N=63 45% N=51 100% N=114 *This question did not have a "don't know" option. Table 124: Question 8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Please rate the following categories of Palo Alto government performance. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 3% N=4 45% N=52 32% N=36 11% N=12 9% N=10 100% N=114 The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 2% N=3 27% N=31 45% N=51 21% N=24 5% N=6 100% N=114 The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement 5% N=6 33% N=37 42% N=48 12% N=13 8% N=10 100% N=114 Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 4% N=4 28% N=32 40% N=46 24% N=27 4% N=4 100% N=114 Generally acting in the best interest of the community 5% N=6 32% N=36 44% N=50 18% N=20 1% N=1 100% N=114 Being honest 6% N=6 36% N=41 39% N=44 10% N=11 10% N=12 100% N=114 Being open and transparent to the public 9% N=10 30% N=34 43% N=49 13% N=15 5% N=6 100% N=114 Informing residents about issues facing the community 7% N=8 48% N=55 24% N=27 20% N=22 1% N=1 100% N=113 Treating all residents fairly 2% N=2 32% N=36 24% N=27 24% N=27 18% N=21 100% N=113 Treating residents with respect 4% N=4 54% N=60 22% N=24 15% N=17 5% N=6 100% N=112 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 118 Packet Page 123 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 116 Table 125: Question 8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the following categories of Palo Alto government performance. Excellent Good Fair Poor Total The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 3% N=4 50% N=52 35% N=36 12% N=12 100% N=104 The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 3% N=3 28% N=31 47% N=51 22% N=24 100% N=108 The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement 5% N=6 36% N=37 46% N=48 13% N=13 100% N=104 Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 4% N=4 29% N=32 42% N=46 25% N=27 100% N=109 Generally acting in the best interest of the community 5% N=6 32% N=36 44% N=50 18% N=20 100% N=112 Being honest 6% N=6 40% N=41 43% N=44 11% N=11 100% N=102 Being open and transparent to the public 10% N=10 32% N=34 45% N=49 14% N=15 100% N=108 Informing residents about issues facing the community 7% N=8 49% N=55 24% N=27 20% N=22 100% N=112 Treating all residents fairly 2% N=2 39% N=36 30% N=27 29% N=27 100% N=92 Treating residents with respect 4% N=4 57% N=60 23% N=24 16% N=17 100% N=106 Table 126: Question 9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total The City of Palo Alto 10% N=11 56% N=62 24% N=27 10% N=11 0% N=0 100% N=112 The State Government 2% N=3 41% N=46 32% N=36 19% N=21 5% N=6 100% N=112 The Federal Government 4% N=5 34% N=37 39% N=43 15% N=17 8% N=9 100% N=110 Table 127: Question 9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Total The City of Palo Alto 10% N=11 56% N=62 24% N=27 10% N=11 100% N=112 The State Government 3% N=3 43% N=46 34% N=36 20% N=21 100% N=106 The Federal Government 5% N=5 36% N=37 42% N=43 17% N=17 100% N=102 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 119 Packet Page 124 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 117 Table 128: Question 10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Traffic enforcement 4% N=4 24% N=26 35% N=38 32% N=35 6% N=6 100% N=111 Traffic signal timing 2% N=2 38% N=42 30% N=33 30% N=34 0% N=0 100% N=111 Street repair 5% N=5 43% N=48 31% N=35 21% N=23 0% N=0 100% N=112 Street cleaning 17% N=19 56% N=60 19% N=20 4% N=4 5% N=5 100% N=107 Street tree maintenance 11% N=12 60% N=67 21% N=23 5% N=5 4% N=4 100% N=112 Sidewalk maintenance 6% N=6 42% N=47 40% N=44 10% N=11 2% N=2 100% N=111 Land use, planning, and zoning 1% N=2 23% N=25 26% N=29 35% N=39 15% N=17 100% N=112 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 2% N=2 23% N=25 23% N=26 17% N=19 36% N=40 100% N=112 Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) 39% N=44 46% N=52 8% N=9 6% N=6 1% N=1 100% N=112 Building and planning application processing services 1% N=1 4% N=5 19% N=22 14% N=16 61% N=69 100% N=113 Affordable high-speed internet access 6% N=7 18% N=20 36% N=40 12% N=14 28% N=32 100% N=112 Electric utility 21% N=23 52% N=58 24% N=27 2% N=3 1% N=1 100% N=112 Gas utility 20% N=22 58% N=65 19% N=22 2% N=2 1% N=1 100% N=112 Utility payment options 22% N=24 51% N=57 8% N=9 6% N=6 13% N=14 100% N=112 Drinking water 43% N=48 48% N=54 8% N=9 0% N=0 0% N=0 100% N=112 Sewer services 23% N=26 61% N=68 7% N=8 3% N=3 7% N=7 100% N=112 Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) 15% N=17 60% N=68 13% N=14 2% N=3 9% N=11 100% N=112 Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e- waste) 29% N=33 49% N=55 16% N=18 4% N=5 1% N=1 100% N=112 Police services 11% N=12 36% N=40 14% N=16 2% N=2 37% N=42 100% N=112 Crime prevention 5% N=6 27% N=31 19% N=21 18% N=20 30% N=34 100% N=112 Animal control 13% N=15 26% N=29 11% N=12 2% N=2 47% N=52 100% N=111 Ambulance or emergency medical services 13% N=14 20% N=22 3% N=3 2% N=2 62% N=67 100% N=108 Fire emergency services 27% N=30 27% N=30 0% N=0 0% N=0 46% N=52 100% N=112 Fire prevention and education 9% N=10 30% N=34 1% N=2 2% N=2 57% N=64 100% N=112 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 120 Packet Page 125 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 118 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Palo Alto open space 54% N=60 33% N=36 11% N=12 1% N=1 1% N=1 100% N=111 City parks 52% N=59 45% N=51 2% N=2 1% N=1 0% N=0 100% N=113 Recreation programs or classes 23% N=26 46% N=52 7% N=8 2% N=2 21% N=23 100% N=112 Recreation centers or facilities 26% N=29 42% N=47 9% N=10 2% N=2 20% N=23 100% N=112 Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs) 42% N=47 43% N=48 5% N=6 1% N=1 9% N=10 100% N=112 Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment, accessibility) 41% N=46 42% N=47 5% N=5 1% N=1 12% N=13 100% N=113 Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks) 36% N=41 50% N=55 4% N=4 1% N=1 9% N=10 100% N=112 Art programs and theater 30% N=33 37% N=41 9% N=10 2% N=2 23% N=25 100% N=111 City-sponsored special events 6% N=7 40% N=44 18% N=19 0% N=0 36% N=40 100% N=111 City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 5% N=6 53% N=59 32% N=35 3% N=3 6% N=7 100% N=111 Public information services (Police/public safety) 7% N=7 38% N=42 20% N=23 3% N=3 32% N=35 100% N=111 Public information services (non-Police/public safety) 11% N=12 32% N=35 28% N=31 3% N=4 26% N=29 100% N=111 Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.) 14% N=15 58% N=63 14% N=15 3% N=3 11% N=12 100% N=108 Table 129: Question 10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Traffic enforcement 4% N=4 25% N=26 37% N=38 34% N=35 100% N=104 Traffic signal timing 2% N=2 38% N=42 30% N=33 31% N=34 100% N=111 Street repair 5% N=5 43% N=48 31% N=35 21% N=23 100% N=112 Street cleaning 18% N=19 58% N=60 19% N=20 4% N=4 100% N=102 Street tree maintenance 11% N=12 62% N=67 22% N=23 5% N=5 100% N=108 Sidewalk maintenance 6% N=6 43% N=47 41% N=44 10% N=11 100% N=108 Land use, planning, and zoning 2% N=2 27% N=25 30% N=29 41% N=39 100% N=95 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 3% N=2 35% N=25 36% N=26 26% N=19 100% N=72 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 121 Packet Page 126 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 119 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) 40% N=44 47% N=52 8% N=9 6% N=6 100% N=110 Building and planning application processing services 3% N=1 11% N=5 50% N=22 36% N=16 100% N=44 Affordable high-speed internet access 8% N=7 25% N=20 50% N=40 17% N=14 100% N=80 Electric utility 21% N=23 52% N=58 24% N=27 2% N=3 100% N=111 Gas utility 20% N=22 59% N=65 19% N=22 2% N=2 100% N=111 Utility payment options 25% N=24 59% N=57 9% N=9 7% N=6 100% N=97 Drinking water 43% N=48 49% N=54 8% N=9 0% N=0 100% N=111 Sewer services 25% N=26 65% N=68 7% N=8 3% N=3 100% N=105 Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) 17% N=17 67% N=68 14% N=14 3% N=3 100% N=101 Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e-waste) 30% N=33 50% N=55 16% N=18 5% N=5 100% N=111 Police services 17% N=12 58% N=40 22% N=16 3% N=2 100% N=70 Crime prevention 8% N=6 39% N=31 27% N=21 26% N=20 100% N=78 Animal control 25% N=15 50% N=29 21% N=12 4% N=2 100% N=59 Ambulance or emergency medical services 34% N=14 52% N=22 8% N=3 5% N=2 100% N=41 Fire emergency services 50% N=30 49% N=30 0% N=0 0% N=0 100% N=60 Fire prevention and education 22% N=10 70% N=34 3% N=2 5% N=2 100% N=48 Palo Alto open space 55% N=60 33% N=36 11% N=12 1% N=1 100% N=109 City parks 52% N=59 45% N=51 2% N=2 1% N=1 100% N=113 Recreation programs or classes 30% N=26 59% N=52 9% N=8 3% N=2 100% N=88 Recreation centers or facilities 33% N=29 53% N=47 11% N=10 3% N=2 100% N=89 Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs) 46% N=47 47% N=48 5% N=6 1% N=1 100% N=101 Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment, accessibility) 46% N=46 47% N=47 5% N=5 1% N=1 100% N=100 Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks) 40% N=41 55% N=55 4% N=4 1% N=1 100% N=101 Art programs and theater 38% N=33 47% N=41 12% N=10 3% N=2 100% N=86 City-sponsored special events 10% N=7 62% N=44 28% N=19 0% N=0 100% N=71 City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 6% N=6 57% N=59 34% N=35 3% N=3 100% N=104 Public information services (Police/public safety) 10% N=7 56% N=42 30% N=23 4% N=3 100% N=76 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 122 Packet Page 127 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 120 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Public information services (non-Police/public safety) 15% N=12 43% N=35 38% N=31 4% N=4 100% N=82 Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.) 16% N=15 65% N=63 15% N=15 4% N=3 100% N=96 Table 130: Question 11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with “Don’t Know” Responses Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto Utilities’ services: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Reliability of utility services 51% N=55 38% N=41 7% N=7 2% N=2 1% N=1 100% N=107 Affordability of utility services 23% N=26 36% N=40 24% N=26 12% N=13 5% N=6 100% N=109 Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services 41% N=45 31% N=34 14% N=15 1% N=1 13% N=14 100% N=109 Utilities online customer self-service features 10% N=11 49% N=54 7% N=8 2% N=2 32% N=35 100% N=109 Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business 16% N=18 43% N=47 6% N=6 6% N=7 29% N=32 100% N=111 Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 17% N=19 29% N=32 14% N=15 10% N=11 30% N=34 100% N=111 Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay 21% N=23 38% N=43 32% N=35 2% N=2 7% N=8 100% N=111 Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website 16% N=16 36% N=38 17% N=18 7% N=8 24% N=25 100% N=106 Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 18% N=19 39% N=43 13% N=14 6% N=6 25% N=27 100% N=110 Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 13% N=15 30% N=33 10% N=11 6% N=7 41% N=45 100% N=111 Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff 19% N=21 20% N=22 12% N=13 1% N=2 48% N=53 100% N=111 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 123 Packet Page 128 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 121 Table 131: Question 11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto Utilities’ services: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Reliability of utility services 52% N=55 39% N=41 7% N=7 2% N=2 100% N=106 Affordability of utility services 25% N=26 38% N=40 25% N=26 12% N=13 100% N=104 Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services 47% N=45 36% N=34 16% N=15 1% N=1 100% N=95 Utilities online customer self-service features 15% N=11 72% N=54 11% N=8 3% N=2 100% N=75 Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business 23% N=18 60% N=47 8% N=6 8% N=7 100% N=78 Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 24% N=19 41% N=32 20% N=15 14% N=11 100% N=77 Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay 22% N=23 41% N=43 34% N=35 2% N=2 100% N=103 Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website 20% N=16 47% N=38 23% N=18 10% N=8 100% N=81 Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 23% N=19 52% N=43 17% N=14 8% N=6 100% N=82 Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 22% N=15 50% N=33 17% N=11 10% N=7 100% N=65 Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff 37% N=21 38% N=22 23% N=13 3% N=2 100% N=57 Table 132: Question 12 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Palo Alto community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Total Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 58% N=63 35% N=37 7% N=8 0% N=0 100% N=108 Overall economic health of Palo Alto 47% N=49 42% N=45 10% N=10 1% N=1 100% N=106 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 56% N=61 14% N=16 30% N=33 0% N=0 100% N=110 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 39% N=42 45% N=48 16% N=17 0% N=0 100% N=107 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 27% N=29 37% N=40 33% N=36 4% N=4 100% N=110 Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 29% N=32 41% N=45 29% N=32 1% N=1 100% N=110 Residents' connection and engagement with their community 20% N=22 61% N=66 18% N=19 1% N=2 100% N=109 Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions 42% N=46 34% N=36 10% N=11 14% N=16 100% N=109 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 124 Packet Page 129 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 122 Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Palo Alto community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Total Increasing local solar generation capacity within city boundaries 37% N=41 29% N=31 23% N=26 11% N=12 100% N=110 Increasing electric storage capacity within city boundaries 31% N=34 35% N=39 27% N=30 7% N=7 100% N=110 Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information 16% N=18 14% N=15 49% N=54 21% N=23 100% N=109 Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues 27% N=29 29% N=32 36% N=39 8% N=9 100% N=109 *This question did not have a "don't know" option. Table 133: Question 13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents With “Don’t Know” Responses In a typical week, how likely are you to: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Don't know Total Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple) 43% N=48 17% N=19 20% N=22 19% N=21 0% N=0 100% N=110 Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors 52% N=57 44% N=47 2% N=3 2% N=2 0% N=0 100% N=109 Table 134: Question 13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Without "Don't Know" Responses In a typical week, how likely are you to: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Total Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple) 43% N=48 17% N=19 20% N=22 19% N=21 100% N=110 Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors 52% N=57 44% N=47 2% N=3 2% N=2 100% N=109 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 125 Packet Page 130 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 123 Table 135: Question 14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What mode of transportation do you use most for your typical daily needs for getting around town? Percent Number Driving 59% N=65 Walking 15% N=16 Biking 26% N=29 Bus 0% N=0 Train 0% N=0 Free shuttle 0% N=0 Taxi 0% N=0 Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 0% N=0 Carpooling 0% N=0 Total 100% N=110 * This question did not have a “don’t know” option. Table 136: Question 15 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents In a typical week, how likely are you to: Very convenient Somewhat convenient Somewhat inconvenient Very inconvenient Total Walking 28% N=28 46% N=45 19% N=19 7% N=7 100% N=99 Biking 49% N=48 37% N=36 7% N=6 8% N=8 100% N=98 Bus 4% N=3 17% N=16 42% N=40 37% N=36 100% N=95 Train 6% N=6 35% N=34 32% N=31 26% N=25 100% N=96 Free shuttle 14% N=12 27% N=24 31% N=27 29% N=25 100% N=88 Taxi 7% N=6 28% N=26 33% N=30 32% N=29 100% N=92 Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 38% N=37 28% N=27 12% N=12 23% N=23 100% N=98 Carpooling 6% N=6 35% N=33 24% N=23 36% N=34 100% N=96 * This question did not have a “don’t know” option. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 126 Packet Page 131 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 124 Table 137: Question 16 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with "Don't Know" Responses If you plan to purchase a new car within the next two years, what is the likelihood of it being: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Don't know Total All-electric 43% N=42 27% N=27 10% N=9 8% N=8 12% N=12 100% N=98 Plug-in hybrid 17% N=17 37% N=36 21% N=20 15% N=15 9% N=9 100% N=97 Hydrogen fuel cell 3% N=3 6% N=6 15% N=15 50% N=49 25% N=24 100% N=96 Other 10% N=7 3% N=3 4% N=3 16% N=12 67% N=50 100% N=74 Table 138: Question 16 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses If you plan to purchase a new car within the next two years, what is the likelihood of it being: Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Total All-electric 48% N=42 31% N=27 11% N=9 9% N=8 100% N=87 Plug-in hybrid 19% N=17 41% N=36 23% N=20 17% N=15 100% N=88 Hydrogen fuel cell 4% N=3 8% N=6 20% N=15 67% N=49 100% N=72 Other 29% N=7 11% N=3 13% N=3 47% N=12 100% N=25 Table 139: Question 17 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents with "Don't Know" Responses Palo Alto is committed to addressing climate change by engaging in strategies that reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs). Space heating is the largest source of GHG in most Palo Alto homes, followed by water heating. What is the likelihood of you… Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Don't know Total Replacing your gas water heater with a heat pump water heater when you are ready to replace the water heater? 20% N=22 26% N=29 18% N=19 19% N=21 17% N=19 100% N=110 Replacing your gas furnace with a heat pump HVAC system (that provides heating and cooling) when you are ready to replace the furnace? 21% N=22 24% N=26 14% N=15 23% N=25 19% N=20 100% N=109 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 127 Packet Page 132 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 125 Table 140: Question 17 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Palo Alto is committed to addressing climate change by engaging in strategies that reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs). Space heating is the largest source of GHG in most Palo Alto homes, followed by water heating. What is the likelihood of you… Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Total Replacing your gas water heater with a heat pump water heater when you are ready to replace the water heater? 24% N=22 32% N=29 21% N=19 23% N=21 100% N=91 Replacing your gas furnace with a heat pump HVAC system (that provides heating and cooling) when you are ready to replace the furnace? 25% N=22 30% N=26 17% N=15 28% N=25 100% N=89 Demographic Questions Table 141: Question D1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: Percent Number Very positive 1% N=1 Somewhat positive 12% N=14 Neutral 42% N=47 Somewhat negative 44% N=49 Very negative 1% N=1 Total 100% N=112 Table 142: Question D2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your employment status? Percent Number Working full time for pay 51% N=57 Working part time for pay 11% N=12 Unemployed, looking for paid work 0% N=0 Unemployed, not looking for paid work 3% N=3 Fully retired 35% N=40 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 128 Packet Page 133 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 126 What is your employment status? Percent Number College student, unemployed 0% N=0 Total 100% N=112 Table 143: Question D3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do you work inside the boundaries of Palo Alto? Percent Number Yes, outside the home 36% N=39 Yes, from home 15% N=17 No 49% N=53 Total 100% N=108 Table 144: Question D4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents How many years have you lived in Palo Alto? Percent Number Less than 2 years 6% N=6 2 to 5 years 18% N=19 6 to 10 years 8% N=9 11 to 20 years 14% N=16 More than 20 years 55% N=60 Total 100% N=111 Table 145: Question D5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Which best describes the building you live in? Percent Number One family house detached from any other houses 62% N=70 Building with two or more homes (duplex, townhome, apartment or condominium) 36% N=40 Mobile home 0% N=0 Other 2% N=2 Total 100% N=112 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 129 Packet Page 134 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 127 Table 146: Question D6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do you rent or own your home? Percent Number Rent 42% N=46 Own 58% N=65 Total 100% N=112 Table 147: Question D7 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents About how much is your monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners' association (HOA) fees)? Percent Number Less than $500 per month 4% N=4 $500 to $999 per month 5% N=5 $1,000 to $1,499 per month 5% N=5 $1,500 to $1,999 per month 16% N=16 $2,000 to $2,499 per month 13% N=13 $2,500 to $2,999 per month 9% N=8 $3,000 to $3,499 per month 12% N=12 $3,500 to $3,999 per month 5% N=5 $4,000 to $4,499 per month 0% N=0 $4,500 to $4,999 per month 0% N=0 $4,500 to $4,999 per month 6% N=6 $5,500 to $5,999 per month 2% N=2 $6,000 to $6,499 per month 5% N=4 $6,500 to $6,999 per month 1% N=1 $7,000 to $7,499 per month 1% N=1 $7,500 to $7,999 per month 1% N=1 $8,000 to $8,499 per month 5% N=5 $8,500 to $8,999 per month 2% N=2 $9,000 to $9,499 per month 0% N=0 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 130 Packet Page 135 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 128 About how much is your monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners' association (HOA) fees)? Percent Number $9,500 to $9,999 per month 5% N=5 $10,000 or more per month 3% N=3 Total 100% N=99 Table 148: Question D8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do any children 17 or under live in your household? Percent Number No 56% N=62 Yes 44% N=48 Total 100% N=110 Table 149: Question D9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older? Percent Number No 64% N=71 Yes 36% N=40 Total 100% N=111 Table 150: Question D10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) Percent Number Less than $25,000 3% N=2 $25,000 to $49,999 11% N=11 $50,000 to $74,999 13% N=12 $75,000 to $99,999 7% N=6 $100,000 to $149,999 14% N=13 $150,000 to $199,999 8% N=7 $200,000 to $249,999 15% N=14 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 131 Packet Page 136 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 129 How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) Percent Number $250,000 to $299,999 6% N=6 $300,000 to $349,999 0% N=0 $350,000 to $399,999 1% N=1 $400,000 to $449,999 4% N=4 $450,000 to $499,999 18% N=17 $500,000 or more 0% N=0 Total 100% N=94 Table 151: Question D11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Are you Spanish, Hispanic or Latino? Percent Number No, not Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 99% N=105 Yes, I consider myself to be Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 1% N=1 Table 152: Question D12 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race(s) you consider yourself to be.) Percent Number American Indian or Alaskan Native 0% N=0 Asian, Asian Indian or Pacific Islander 30% N=30 Black or African American 1% N=1 White 68% N=68 Other 3% N=3 Total 100% N=100 Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one option. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 132 Packet Page 137 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 130 Table 153: Question D13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents In which category is your age? Percent Number 18 to 24 years 0% N=0 25 to 34 years 10% N=10 35 to 44 years 17% N=18 45 to 54 years 24% N=25 55 to 64 years 18% N=19 65 to 74 years 21% N=22 75 years or older 11% N=11 Total 100% N=106 Table 154: Question D14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your gender? Percent Number Female 50% N=52 Male 48% N=50 Identify in another way 2% N=2 Total 100% N=104 Table 155: Question D14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your sexual orientation? Percent Number Heterosexual 89% N=91 Lesbian 0% N=0 Gay 4% N=4 Bisexual 2% N=2 Identify another way 6% N=6 Total 100% N=103 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 133 Packet Page 138 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 131 Appendix D: Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions from Open Participation Survey Following are responses to questions 18 and 19. Responses are presented here in verbatim form, including any typographical, grammatical or other mistakes. Responses are in alphabetical order. Question 18: As a resident of Palo Alto, what one change could the City make that would make you happier? • Address housing affordability • Address speeding on residential streets. • Admit that affordable housing in Palo Alto is a myth unless subsidized by the state/federal gov't. • Agressively zone for more housing, at expense of more office space. Trade off zoning to allower larger, taller developments, but with a larger below-market or subsidized component. Decide what that tradeoff might be, so a developer can have a predictable process. In all, a whole lot more housing, some of it BMR. • Allow autopay for bills to the city (e.g. tax payments) • Approve as much housing as possible, all over the city • Attend to south Palo Alto comprehensive planning (improving transit, bike, walk options, and making Cubberley functional) to support all of the housing the city is zoning for San Antonio Road in south Palo Alto. This part of south PA took the last 1,000 new units. We have supported affordable housing development in our neighborhood, and the city continues to fail to provide fair distribution of services here. Leave City Hall and spend time in this part of the city to understand it. City staff, on several recent projects (grade separations, Cubberley, San Antonio planning , Eden Housing) , has seemed VERY unfamiliar with this area. Google maps is a very poor substitute for visiting the area WITH residents to understand what it is like to live here and how things work (and don't work) here. The city cannot plan well, if staff and consultants don't understand what is already there and how it is working. • Attract competent support workers who can help with home maintenance, care giving • Better response from public works • Better street sweeping after storms • Better traffic enforcement! • better traffic management. more growth and poor traffic design make the roads seems like they are always clogged. very bad for the environment as well as residents' satisfaction • bike lane barriers • Bike safety along Bryant/Embarcadero add tunnel at Seal • Build a grade-separated bike/pedestrian crossing over the railroad tracks and Alma in South Palo Alto because we have none. • build housing • Build more housing • Build more housing for the missing middle • Building better bicycling infrastructure • building more housing at all levels of affordability • Cameras on Univ and Stanford shopping to help catch thieves • Cap of 5% on rent increases per year ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 134 Packet Page 139 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 132 • Change the setback rules so I can install an electric heat pump HVAC system with the modern quiet equipment instead of sitting on ancient 1950's setback rules that are no longer sensible and prohibit us spending way too much money to make this transition. • City employees and electeds to have respect for neighbors' deep research, extraordinary time and treasure spent to be treated as an equal against deep-pocketed highly influential private schools/businesses; give neighbors a true seat at the table with regard to development. • Continue to make multimodal transportation a priority. It is critical to support alternative modes of transportation beyond cars. Cars cannot help make our community safe and livable with the projected growth and density of housing. It is critical to improve our streets and infrastructure to support cycling, public options, and pedestrian traffic. The transportation department has done an excellent job but Palo Alto is barely in pace with what other cities are doing. Single person driving is not the answer. • Create more opportunities for affordable housing • Creating a greater feeling of safety • Develop housing for the teachers of this community. • Extra tax on vacant houses & use that money to help homeless people. • Far lower barriers to home improvements and developments. The city makes everything too costly, hard, AMD too dependent on personal opinion or demeanor of staff you happen to get. • Fewer NIMBYs including on City Council • Figuring out how to add more housing, low cost and market rate • Fix the potholes • Fixing potholes in roads • Focus on increasing the safety in the city • Focus on more affordable housing and pushing back against developers trying to maximize profit rather than that goal • Focus on the community of people living here. Please don't cater to those with money who are not honest and abide by the rules like Castilleja. And please explore getting rid of short term AirBnB to help with the housing needs. There is plenty of unused housing in Palo Alto and what appears to be large investors owning these homes and apartments. Define the demographics of those you want to provide housing for and then see what inventory already exists in the AirBnB arena. Many other cities, including Santa Barbara, have done this to provide housing especially for those working in or near Santa Barbara. • For all of Palo Alto, a more efficient and frequent public transportation to California Ave., University Ave. area, Stanford Shopping Center. New small department store more upscale than Target or Penny's . Calif. Ave. has a good hardware store, maybe place a good general clothing dept. store near it. If it were good people would patronize it. • Get rid of all the homeless people sleeping downtown • Get the Aviation Authorities to stop routing landing planes over Palo Alto. They should be going down the bay. • Greenlight more ADUs. You are making housing less available and less affordable • Have a stronger "customer service" orientation to citizens on basic services. Had some very negative interaction experiences with utilities support and permitting process. Not sure why, but people responding to question and issues seem pretty negative. • Have city council spend less on outside consultants and make decisions faster • Have more interactions with neighbors. Newer neighbors coming in are not as friendly. • Have the city focus more on local livability issues (roads, parking, public safety, etc.) and less on "save the world" issues ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 135 Packet Page 140 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 133 • Having one or more libraries open on Sundays; having Community Services open between Christmas and New Years....times when people are most likely to use these services. • High density built environment, including housing, to make walking and cycling the best and fastest way to get around. Push car parking to the outskirts. More bike lanes and slower roads for driving. Person-first design rather than car-first. • If the city wants a natural gas tax revenue stream, add it to our property tax bill because it's a tax. • I'm pretty happy as it is. • Improved bicycle facilities • Increase library hours • Keep 5G out of Palo Alto, or at the very least keep it out of residential areas and away from schools. • keep cars from speeding and running stop signs in the neighborhoods, especially on routes that kids use for biking and walking • Kindness and respect in all dealings • Leave Churchill Ave open and readjust lights to be demand based to allow traffic to flow more easily • less property crime, better tree maintenance • Less restaurants and more normal small businesses downtown, like it used to be. Music shop, book stores, not those high end shops. • less traffic • Limit cars commenting in our city and educating business commuters to follow traffic rules(ex speed limit) and respect bikers and walkers when they enter our city boundary. • Limit multi-unit housing to transit centers (University and Cal Ave) and major thoroughfares (El Camino, University, Oregon Expressway). Offer bigger rebates for heat pumps and more flexibility for placement of the outdoor components • listen to the neighborhood groups who spend time and money on figuring out solutions to issues (i.e. the NevCap and PNQL groups) • Make biking and public trans more accessible • MAKE GAS LEAF BLOWERS ILLEGAL- ENFORCE TICKETS FOR VIOLATIONS- I SEE (HEAR) SO MANY VIOLATIONS. • Make our library system part of the Santa Clara county library system • Make the streets smoother for bicycles. Too many holes, uneven surfaces (Not due to road under construction) on the streets. Streets get resurfaced then months later it gets dug up and the street is no longer smooth. • More competitive grocery stores • More afforable housing for low/middle income folks • more affordable housing • More affordable housing • More affordable housing • More affordable housing stock • More affordable housing. • More affordable senior housing • More protected bike lanes • More responsive city council: get stuff DONE • More traffic enforcement • NA • NA ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 136 Packet Page 141 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 134 • Palo Alto is so slow to complete the road work on arastradero between el Camino and Gunn. Has there been a period of even 6 months in the last 10 years where there wasn't an unfinished project? It took 6 months to replace a bike lane this year. There have been ditches by the El Camino stoplights for nearly 6 months. Come on! It's a safe route to school that serves 4 schools and probably at least 1000 kids. Don't start a project and take months to finish it. This literally happens no where else in Palo Alto. Why do you hate our neighborhood! • Permanent ability to offer public comment via zoom/remotely. • Plant more trees • Please find sites to build LARGE-SCALE affordable housing. Duplexes/fourplexes in single-family neighborhoods is a very bad idea (I know it's the State's idea). I think it's very important to build affordable housing quickly for lower-income people who work here. The city seems to be in no hurry. • Police lower utility cost and taxes; schools are terrible • politically, don't go extremes either left or right • Prioritize and expedite the approval of deeply affordable homes/apartments for those in need, including those living without homes on the street. • Provide fiber internet service to all Palo Alto homes. • Redesign the ridiculous outdated, University Ave./train station loop. • Reduce crime, don't approve building projects that give developers outs re: res zoning, adequate parking and traffic impacts • Require the PA Public Library to respond to citizen interests, such as returning to the pre-COVID hours, now that their budget has been almost completely restored. The absence of a citizen advisory board has been a disaster as far as assessing the public's needs and interests for the library. • returning to at least 5 years ago it used to be • revitalizing our downtown area, redwood city, los altos, menlo park all have better services in downtown area. • Safer neighborhood and in shopping malls, better organized parking for RVs • Slow down growth, possibly even reduce space dedicated to offices. • Stop increasing the population and adding more high rise buildings • Stop ugly large building--Palo Alto is becoming a nondescript city. It's never going to be a cheap place to live -- just accept that. Build housing for local first responders and service providers but NOT drab and crowded mega cinder blocks. • Streamline building permit application process. • street repair • Vigorous enforcement of gas leafblower ban • Work on the pricing of home utilities to residents. Provide shredding event like you used to. Question 19: As a resident of Palo Alto, what one thing do you believe the City does well and would want to maintain? • 311 services • Answers above that were positive • City utilities • Communication • Communication with residents • Continued maintenance of streets and street trees and sidewalks. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 137 Packet Page 142 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 135 • Create an updated version of Cubberly that has educational and recreation classes, art, dance, FOPAL, including a few non-profits. Ask what the residents near Cubberly what they want in additon to city wide responses. Resolve the Cubberly issue. • Customer service of city employees • Diversity of experiences in terms of support for art and recreation. Love the park, bike paths, library and art investments that have been made. • ELECTRIC UTILITY • Embrace diversity • encourage green energy • Engaging with the community on issues. • environmental concerns • Excellent programs for children, great education, great libraries • Free Outdoor spaces and bike-ability • Great communication, good availability for meeting (electeds; not staff) • Great parks, libraries and school system • hear from voice of palo alto • I appreciate Foothills Park and the many community parks available to all. • I love all the trees, parks, great schools and carbon-neutral electricity! • I really appreciate the trees in Palo Alto, the green space in the Stanford dish area, and access to wonderful Foothills Park. • I regularly use the public spaces at Cuberley. This is a tremendous benefit to the community. It is clear that this space needs to be updated and I think that it should continue to be utilized by the Public - playing fields, gyms, studios, music rooms, auditorium. It's a wonderful asset and it could be so much more but I don't want to see it used solely by the PAUSD or sold for housing development. • Infrastructure • Keep up the weekly reports...starting during the COVID lockdown...good info in them--we read them every week. • Keeping our parks and green spaces open and cared for. • Keeping the city looking neat and inviting. • keeping up maintenance where there are needs • Libraries • Libraries • Libraries, athletic facilities (tennis, swimming, etc.), parks • Listening to residents. • Maintain and add more park space to catch up to what the comprehensive plan says you should have for each resident in Palo Alto. • Maintain natural recreation areas, e.g. the baylands, Byxbee Park, Foothills Park, local city parks. • Maintain public parks • Maintain the character of the city. • Maintaining recreation services • Maintains the trees and parks • Much of what's valuable in the community comes via proximity to the Stanford campus. So • NA • NA • NA • NA • NA ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 138 Packet Page 143 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 136 • NA • NA • NA • NA • natural spaces • Open spaces, the Baylands, the natural environment. Also the schools. • Owning own utilities so that we can have it be from renewable sources (solar, wind) • Owns its own utilities. • Parks • Parks • parks • Parks and Community Recreation Activities • Parks and libraries • Parks and libraries • parks and libraries and Cubberley. • Parks and libraries! • Parks and open space • Parks and park maintenance • Parks and recreation department programs are great. A good variety of classes are offered. • Parks, open spaces • parks. libraries. bike paths • Peace, quieteness, safety • Police presence. • Promoting greener transportation options • Protect our open space • Provides excellent libraries and we have our own utilities which is huge! • Public Library • public works departrment • Public works. • Recycling • Responds to community feedback • Safe route to school. • Safe Routes to School program • Safe Routes to School program • schools, parks, libraries • Sense of community...people like to know each other and do things together • Street signs • Supporting bicyclists • The ability of all residents to easily access local services by foot, bike, pedicab or bus/shuttle. • The city works to make good long term solutions for problems • The public-facing administrative staff are respectful, polite, and responsive. We are fortunate to have good people providing public service. • The school system here is good and the only reason we moved here is because my fiance went to school here. If the education system becomes less rigorous, we would likely live in a different city. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 139 Packet Page 144 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 137 • There are a lot of things the city used to do very well, including hiring experienced, skilled staff who were willing and able to engage productively with citizens. Hire good people, train them and hold onto them... reward excellent performers. Encourage staff to proactively work with citizens and be less guarded. Staff up to plan to support all the new housing. A lot of work needs to be done in preparation for that. We are very understaffed right now. This city has great bones. Please maintain that by making sure we have high quality staff in sufficient numbers to do necessary comprehensive planning--something that the city , until recently, did very well. Get out of the office and engage with citizens--especially in south PA--which seems increasingly, to be an afterthought for the city. Stop treating Cubberley like the basement the city uses to store stuff while you are fixing facilities in other parts of the city. The school district is now following the city's lead on that. Cubberley MUST be functional to provide community services and a future school site for thousands of new residents who will be living in much smaller spaces than current residents. They are going to NEED community services and spaces. • Utilities • utilities seem to work well. i worry that change will only make them worse. especially overly ambitious ESG goals that while well intentioned may not be effective and just end up being a waste of money • Utilities! • Utilities, all of them. • Utilities. • utility and library services • Utility Dept is a wonderful asset • Walkability • Walkable, bikeable, safe environment • With the exception of the gas tax, the utilities department seems to be rather well run! • wonderful parks and open spaces • Zoning of small shopping centers, easily accessible to the neighborhoods. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 140 Packet Page 145 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 138 Appendix E: Communities Included in National Benchmark Comparisons The communities included in the Palo Alto comparisons are listed on the following pages along with their population according to the 2017 American Community Survey. Adams County, CO ................ 509,844 Albany city, OR ........................ 54,442 Albemarle County, VA ........... 108,819 Albert Lea city, MN .................. 17,804 Alexandria city, VA ................ 158,309 Allegan County, MI ................ 117,104 American Canyon city, CA ..... 20,256 Ankeny city, IA ......................... 64,744 Ann Arbor city, MI ................. 121,093 Apache Junction city, AZ ........ 41,863 Arapahoe County, CO............ 649,980 Asheville city, NC .................... 92,328 Ashland city, OR ...................... 21,138 Ashland town, MA ................... 17,787 Ashland town, VA ...................... 7,819 Athens-Clarke County unified government (balance), . 124,962 Auburn city, AL ........................ 65,508 Aurora city, CO ...................... 379,434 Avon town, IN .......................... 18,056 Avondale city, AZ .................... 86,091 Bainbridge Island city, WA ...... 24,859 Baltimore County, MD ........... 828,193 Basehor city, KS ........................ 6,225 Batavia city, IL ......................... 26,479 Battle Creek city, MI ................ 51,084 Baytown city, TX ..................... 76,089 Beaumont city, CA .................. 48,272 Bedford city, TX....................... 49,145 Berthoud town, CO .................... 8,574 Bethlehem township, PA ........ 24,122 Bettendorf city, IA ................... 36,214 Billings city, MT ..................... 109,705 Bloomington city, IN ............... 84,691 Bloomington city, MN ............. 85,226 Bonner Springs city, KS............. 7,846 Borger city, TX ......................... 12,534 Boulder city, CO..................... 108,777 Bowling Green city, KY ............ 71,628 Bozeman city, MT ................... 48,330 Brighton city, CO ..................... 38,355 Broadview village, IL ................. 7,677 Brookline CDP, MA .................. 59,223 Brooklyn Center city, MN ........ 30,755 Brooklyn city, OH ..................... 10,788 Broomfield city, CO ................. 69,444 Brownsburg town, IN .............. 26,560 Buckeye town, AZ ................... 74,467 Buffalo Grove village, IL .......... 40,804 Canandaigua city, NY .............. 10,241 Cannon Beach city, OR ............. 1,554 Cañon City city, CO ................. 16,369 Cape Coral city, FL ................ 189,633 Carol Stream village, IL ........... 39,447 Cartersville city, GA ................. 21,331 Cedar Park city, TX ................. 77,181 Cedar Rapids city, IA ............ 133,125 Celina city, TX ......................... 13,608 Centennial city, CO ............... 111,331 Chanhassen city, MN.............. 25,965 Chapel Hill town, NC ............... 61,912 Chardon city, OH ....................... 5,168 Charles County, MD .............. 161,448 Charlotte County, FL ............. 185,926 Charlottesville city, VA ............ 47,217 Chatfield city, MN ..................... 2,690 Chattanooga city, TN ............ 181,370 Chesterfield County, VA ....... 348,500 Clackamas County, OR ......... 415,084 Clatsop County, OR ................. 39,656 Clayton city, MO ...................... 16,763 Clearwater city, FL ................ 115,975 Cleveland Heights city, OH ..... 44,176 Clive city, IA ............................ 17,246 Clovis city, CA ....................... 112,663 College Park city, MD ............. 32,221 Collegedale city, TN ................ 11,402 Colleyville city, TX ................... 26,766 Collinsville city, IL ................... 24,489 Columbia city, MO ................ 122,659 Commerce City city, CO.......... 55,891 Conshohocken borough, PA..... 8,039 Coolidge city, AZ ..................... 13,016 Coral Gables city, FL ............... 49,937 Coronado city, CA ................... 24,526 Corvallis city, OR ..................... 58,612 Coventry town, CT .................. 12,434 Cupertino city, CA ................... 59,799 Dacono city, CO ........................ 6,167 Dakota County, MN............... 425,271 Dallas city, OR ......................... 16,612 Dallas city, TX .................... 1,338,846 Danvers town, MA .................. 27,549 Danville city, KY ...................... 16,801 Davenport city, IA ................. 102,199 Davidson town, NC ................. 12,920 Daviess County, KY ............... 101,001 Dayton city, OH ..................... 140,444 Decatur city, GA ...................... 24,814 DeLand city, FL ....................... 33,620 Delhi charter township, MI ... 27,817 Denison city, TX ...................... 24,851 Denton city, TX ..................... 139,734 Denver city, CO ..................... 715,878 Des Peres city, MO ................... 8,654 DeSoto city, TX ....................... 53,170 Dothan city, AL ........................ 68,608 Dover city, NH ......................... 31,922 Dublin city, OH ........................ 47,824 Durham city, NC .................... 276,341 Durham County, NC .............. 317,665 Dyer town, IN .......................... 15,933 Eagan city, MN ........................66,377 Eden Prairie city, MN ...............64,481 Edina city, MN .........................52,215 Edmond city, OK ......................93,101 El Cerrito city, CA .....................25,280 El Mirage city, AZ ....................35,702 El Paso de Robles (Paso Robles) city, CA ............................31,480 Elbert County, CO ....................26,230 Elgin city, IL .......................... 112,062 Elk Grove city, CA ................. 173,370 Englewood city, CO .................34,840 Erie town, CO ...........................27,157 Escambia County, FL ........... 316,691 Escondido city, CA ............... 150,396 Estes Park town, CO .................. 6,504 Farmers Branch city, TX ..........42,659 Farmington Hills city, MI .........80,937 Fate city, TX .............................14,300 Fayetteville city, GA .................17,902 Fayetteville city, NC .............. 211,201 Ferguson township, PA ...........19,540 Fernandina Beach city, FL .......12,622 Flagstaff city, AZ .....................73,319 Florence town, AZ ...................26,777 Flower Mound town, TX ..........78,854 Fort Collins city, CO .............. 166,069 Franklin city, TN.......................80,675 Frederick town, CO ..................10,414 Fremont city, CA ................... 234,829 Frisco town, CO ......................... 2,928 Fruita city, CO ..........................14,068 Gaithersburg city, MD..............67,878 Gardner city, KS .......................21,936 Georgetown city, TX ................75,470 Gilbert town, AZ .................... 248,349 Glen Ellyn village, IL .................27,741 Glencoe village, IL ..................... 8,836 Glendora city, CA .....................51,087 Golden city, CO ........................20,391 Goodyear city, AZ ....................83,519 Grand Rapids city, MI ........... 199,417 Grand Traverse County, MI .....92,640 Greeley city, CO .................... 107,445 Greer city, SC ...........................32,229 Gulf Breeze city, FL ................... 6,725 Gunnison County, CO ..............17,119 Hamilton city, OH ....................62,162 Hanover County, VA ............. 106,538 Hastings city, MN ....................22,796 Highlands Ranch CDP, CO .. 107,017 Homer Glen village, IL .............24,521 Honolulu County, HI ............. 979,682 Hopkinton town, MA ...............18,030 Horry County, SC .................. 344,186 Huntsville city, TX ....................41,664 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 141 Packet Page 146 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 139 Hutchinson city, MN ............... 13,935 Independence city, IA................ 6,085 Iowa City city, IA ...................... 75,849 Issaquah city, WA ................... 38,707 Jackson city, MO .................... 14,893 Jackson County, MI .............. 158,174 Jerome city, ID ........................ 11,824 Johnson City city, TN .............. 66,934 Johnson County, KS.............. 597,574 Johnston city, IA ..................... 22,077 Jupiter town, FL ...................... 65,139 Kalamazoo city, MI ................. 76,106 Kansas City city, KS .............. 153,014 Kansas City city, MO ............. 491,158 Kerrville city, TX ...................... 23,511 Kingman city, AZ ..................... 30,433 Kingsport city, TN ................... 53,699 La Mesa city, CA ..................... 60,208 La Vista city, NE ...................... 17,081 Laguna Beach city, CA ............ 22,991 Lake Elsinore city, CA ............. 64,201 Lake Forest city, CA ................ 84,666 Lake Havasu City city, AZ ....... 55,463 Lake in the Hills village, IL ...... 28,617 Lake Zurich village, IL ............. 19,912 Lakeville city, MN .................... 65,710 Lakewood city, CO ................ 155,733 Lakewood city, WA.................. 60,564 Lancaster County, SC ............. 95,378 Larkspur city, CA ..................... 12,363 Las Cruces city, NM .............. 102,950 Las Vegas city, NV ................ 644,594 Lawrence city, KS .................... 97,348 Lehi city, UT ............................. 66,980 Lenexa city, KS ........................ 54,804 Lewes city, DE ........................... 3,266 Lincolnwood village, IL ........... 12,338 Lindsborg city, KS ..................... 3,294 Little Elm city, TX .................... 49,792 Littleton city, CO ...................... 46,208 Livermore city, CA ................... 91,763 Longmont city, CO .................. 95,864 Los Alamos County, NM ......... 18,976 Loudoun County, VA ............. 405,312 Louisville city, CO .................... 19,342 Loveland city, CO .................... 81,774 Lynchburg city, VA .................. 80,970 Lynnwood city, WA.................. 38,538 Manassas city, VA .................. 41,038 Mankato city, MN .................... 42,685 Maple Grove city, MN.............. 71,569 Maplewood city, MN ............... 40,684 Marin County, CA .................. 259,441 Marion city, IA ......................... 39,910 Mariposa County, CA .............. 17,319 Marshalltown city, IA .............. 26,957 Maryland Heights city, MO ..... 26,996 Maui County, HI..................... 166,657 McKinney city, TX ................. 191,197 Mecklenburg County, NC ... 1,095,170 Menlo Park city, CA ................. 35,211 Mercer Island city, WA ............ 25,820 Meridian charter township, MI 42,853 Mesquite city, TX .................. 142,429 Middleton city, WI ................... 19,764 Middletown town, RI ............... 15,982 Milford city, DE ........................ 11,463 Milton city, GA ........................ 39,252 Minnetrista city, MN ................. 7,989 Minturn town, CO ...................... 1,149 Missoula County, MT ............ 119,062 Missouri City city, TX .............. 75,348 Moline city, IL .......................... 41,213 Monroe city, MI ....................... 19,543 Montgomery County, MD .. 1,047,661 Moorpark city, CA ................... 36,443 Morristown city, TN ................ 29,887 Morrisville town, NC ............... 27,582 Mount Prospect village, IL ...... 54,165 Mountlake Terrace city, WA ... 21,328 Muscatine city, IA ................... 23,661 Needham town, MA ................ 31,177 Nevada County, CA ................. 99,417 New Braunfels city, TX ........... 84,622 New Brighton city, MN ............ 22,663 New Concord village, OH .......... 2,530 New Orleans city, LA ............ 391,249 Nichols Hills city, OK ................ 3,910 Niles village, IL ........................ 29,198 Noblesville city, IN .................. 64,430 Norfolk city, NE ....................... 24,410 North Bend city, OR .................. 9,708 North Kansas City city, MO ... 4,606 North Mankato city, MN ......... 13,903 North Port city, FL ................... 68,779 Northglenn city, CO ................. 39,201 Novi city, MI ............................ 60,439 O'Fallon city, IL ........................ 29,487 Oak Park village, IL ................. 52,102 Oakdale city, MN..................... 27,925 Oklahoma City city, OK ......... 649,821 Olmsted County, MN ............ 156,446 Oregon City city, OR ................ 37,057 Orland Park village, IL ............. 58,380 Oshkosh city, WI ..................... 66,753 Overland Park city, KS .......... 193,412 Paducah city, KY ..................... 24,947 Palm Coast city, FL ................. 88,222 Palm Springs city, CA ............. 48,390 Palo Alto city, CA .................... 67,973 Panama City Beach city, FL ... 12,747 Papillion city, NE ..................... 24,310 Park City city, UT....................... 8,467 Parker town, CO ...................... 55,460 Pasco city, WA ........................ 74,266 Pasco County, FL .................. 539,885 Pearland city, TX ................... 125,817 Perryville city, MO ..................... 8,500 Philadelphia city, PA .......... 1,581,531 Pinehurst village, NC .............. 16,382 Plano city, TX ........................ 288,870 Plymouth city, MN .................. 78,879 Port St. Lucie city, FL ............ 195,773 Portage city, MI ....................... 49,224 Portland city, TX ..................... 17,807 Powhatan County, VA ............. 29,253 Prairie Village city, KS ............. 22,255 Prior Lake city, MN ................. 26,775 Pueblo city, CO ..................... 111,776 Puyallup city, WA .................... 41,666 Raleigh city, NC ..................... 469,698 Ramsey city, MN ..................... 27,201 Raymore city, MO ................... 21,676 Redlands city, CA .................... 71,680 Reno city, NV ........................ 250,903 Richfield city, MN ....................36,253 Richland city, WA .....................57,353 Richmond city, CA ................ 110,051 Richmond city, VA ................ 229,233 Richmond Heights city, MO ...... 8,581 Rio Rancho city, NM ................97,976 River Falls city, WI ...................15,870 Riverside city, CA .................. 327,569 Rochester city, MN ............... 117,134 Rochester city, NY ................ 206,357 Rock Hill city, SC .....................74,410 Rockville city, MD ....................68,155 Roeland Park city, KS ................ 6,747 Rohnert Park city, CA ..............42,559 Rosemount city, MN ................24,792 Roseville city, CA .................. 138,860 Round Rock city, TX ............. 128,812 Royal Palm Beach village, FL ..39,615 Sacramento city, CA ............. 503,482 Salem city, OR ...................... 171,806 Sammamish city, WA ..............65,265 San Carlos city, CA ..................29,647 San Diego city, CA .............. 1,414,545 San Jose city, CA ............... 1,029,409 Sangamon County, IL ........... 195,963 Santa Cruz city, CA ..................65,011 Santa Fe County, NM ........... 150,319 Sausalito city, CA ...................... 7,177 Savage city, MN.......................31,758 Schaumburg township, IL .... 129,604 Schaumburg village, IL ............73,392 Scott County, MN ................. 147,201 Scottsdale city, AZ ............... 254,995 Sedona city, AZ .......................10,341 Sevierville city, TN ...................17,185 Shakopee city, MN ..................41,423 Shawnee city, KS .....................65,844 Shorewood village, IL ..............17,303 Shrewsbury town, MA .............37,683 Sioux Falls city, SD ............... 180,927 Skokie village, IL ......................63,300 Snoqualmie city, WA ...............13,550 Snowmass Village town, CO ..... 2,786 Somerset town, MA .................18,160 South Bend city, IN ............... 102,686 South Portland city, ME ...........25,665 Spring Hill city, KS ..................... 6,992 Springville city, UT ...................33,251 St. Augustine city, FL...............15,065 St. Charles city, IL ....................32,612 St. Cloud city, MN ....................68,390 St. Croix County, WI .................89,702 St. Louis County, MN ............ 199,499 St. Lucie County, FL.............. 320,914 Stafford County, VA ............. 150,185 State College borough, PA ......42,100 Steamboat Springs city, CO ....13,048 Sugar Land city, TX .............. 118,563 Sunnyvale city, CA ................ 152,569 Surprise city, AZ ................... 139,007 Suwanee city, GA.....................20,444 Tacoma city, WA .................. 215,766 Takoma Park city, MD .............17,703 Tempe city, AZ ..................... 191,607 Temple city, TX ........................76,590 The Woodlands CDP, TX ...... 114,532 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 142 Packet Page 147 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 140 Thomasville city, NC ............... 26,834 Thousand Oaks city, CA ........ 127,648 Tinley Park village, IL .............. 56,082 Tracy city, CA .......................... 91,462 Tualatin city, OR ...................... 27,601 Tustin city, CA ......................... 80,815 Twin Falls city, ID .................... 49,819 Unalaska city, AK ...................... 4,758 Urbandale city, IA .................... 43,879 Vallejo city, CA ...................... 121,275 Victoria city, MN ........................ 9,787 Vienna town, VA ...................... 16,532 Walnut Creek city, CA ............. 69,836 Warrensburg city, MO ............. 20,313 Washington County, MN....... 259,072 Washington County, RI ......... 126,139 Washoe County, NV .............. 464,182 Washougal city, WA ................ 15,927 Waukesha city, WI .................. 72,419 Waunakee village, WI .............. 13,903 Wellington village, FL .............. 64,990 West Bend city, WI .................. 31,587 West Chester township, OH ... 64,420 West St. Paul city, MN ............ 19,805 Westminster city, CO ............ 114,832 Westminster city, MD ............. 18,649 Wheat Ridge city, CO ...............31,889 White House city, TN ...............12,258 Wichita city, KS ..................... 390,566 Williamsburg city, VA ..............15,034 Wilmington city, NC .............. 122,162 Wilsonville city, OR ..................24,413 Windsor town, CO ....................23,679 Winston-Salem city, NC ........ 245,787 Winter Garden city, FL .............44,888 Woodbury city, MN ..................71,298 Woodinville city, WA ................13,038 Wyoming city, MI ....................... 75,99 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 143 Packet Page 148 of 792 City of Palo Alto Community Survey January 2023 Report of Results Page 141 Appendix F: Survey Materials The following pages contain copies of the survey materials sent to randomly selected households within the City of Palo Alto. ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 144 Packet Page 149 of 792 Dear Palo Alto Resident, Our annual Community Survey is a critical community feedback tool that helps the City Council and City staff understand community perspectives on current services and programs, as well as unmet needs and priorities. You can go online and complete the survey now at: https://polco.us/xxplaceholder Please do not share your survey link. This survey is for randomly selected households only. The City will conduct a separate survey that is open to all residents just a few weeks from now. For additional ways to join the conversation and provide input, go to www.cityofpaloalto.org/engage Sincerely, Ed Shikada City Manager Dear Palo Alto Resident, Our annual Community Survey is a critical community feedback tool that helps the City Council and City staff understand community perspectives on current services and programs, as well as unmet needs and priorities. You can go online and complete the survey now at: https://polco.us/xxplaceholder Please do not share your survey link. This survey is for randomly selected households only. The City will conduct a separate survey that is open to all residents just a few weeks from now. For additional ways to join the conversation and provide input, go to www.cityofpaloalto.org/engage Sincerely, Ed Shikada City Manager ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 145 Packet Page 150 of 792 Presorted First Class Mail US Postage PAID Boulder, CO Permit NO. 94 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Presorted First Class Mail US Postage PAID Boulder, CO Permit NO. 94 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 146 Packet Page 151 of 792 Dear Palo Alto Resident, Just a reminder—if you have not yet completed Palo Alto’s 2022 Community Survey, please do so. If you have completed it, thank you. Please do not respond twice. Our annual Community Survey is a critical community feedback tool that helps the City Council and City staff understand community perspectives on current services and programs, as well as unmet needs and priorities. You can go online and complete the survey now at: https://polco.us/xxplaceholder Please do not share your survey link. This survey is for randomly selected households only. The City will conduct a separate survey that is open to all residents just a few weeks from now. For additional ways to join the conversation and provide input, go to www.cityofpaloalto.org/engage Sincerely, Ed Shikada City Manager Dear Palo Alto Resident, Just a reminder—if you have not yet completed Palo Alto’s 2022 Community Survey, please do so. If you have completed it, thank you. Please do not respond twice. Our annual Community Survey is a critical community feedback tool that helps the City Council and City staff understand community perspectives on current services and programs, as well as unmet needs and priorities. You can go online and complete the survey now at: https://polco.us/xxplaceholder Please do not share your survey link. This survey is for randomly selected households only. The City will conduct a separate survey that is open to all residents just a few weeks from now. For additional ways to join the conversation and provide input, go to www.cityofpaloalto.org/engage Sincerely, Ed Shikada City Manager ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 147 Packet Page 152 of 792 Presorted First Class Mail US Postage PAID Boulder, CO Permit NO. 94 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Presorted First Class Mail US Postage PAID Boulder, CO Permit NO. 94 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 148 Packet Page 153 of 792 Dear Palo Alto Resident, Our annual Community Survey is a critical community feedback tool that helps the City Council and City staff understand community perspectives on current services and programs, as well as unmet needs and priorities. A paper survey will arrive in a few days, or you can go online and complete the survey now at: https://polco.us/xxplaceholder Please do not share your survey link. This survey is for randomly selected households only. The City will conduct a separate survey that is open to all residents just a few weeks from now. For additional ways to join the conversation and provide input, go to www.cityofpaloalto.org/engage Sincerely, Ed Shikada City Manager Dear Palo Alto Resident, Our annual Community Survey is a critical community feedback tool that helps the City Council and City staff understand community perspectives on current services and programs, as well as unmet needs and priorities. A paper survey will arrive in a few days, or you can go online and complete the survey now at: https://polco.us/xxplaceholder Please do not share your survey link. This survey is for randomly selected households only. The City will conduct a separate survey that is open to all residents just a few weeks from now. For additional ways to join the conversation and provide input, go to www.cityofpaloalto.org/engage Sincerely, Ed Shikada City Manager ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 149 Packet Page 154 of 792 Presorted First Class Mail US Postage PAID Boulder, CO Permit NO. 94 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Presorted First Class Mail US Postage PAID Boulder, CO Permit NO. 94 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 150 Packet Page 155 of 792 October 2022 Dear Palo Alto Resident: Please help us shape the future of Palo Alto! You have been selected at random to participate in the 2022 Palo Alto Community Survey. Please take a moment to share your feedback about our community. The annual Community Survey is a critical community feedback effort that helps the City Council and City staff understand community perspectives on current services and programs, as well as unmet needs and priorities. The survey is one way among many through which we gain insights from residents throughout our community. Please take a few minutes to fill out the enclosed survey. Your participation in this survey is very important—especially since your household is one of only a small number being surveyed. The survey results are reviewed by the City Council and City staff and community input helps shape the City’s decision-making processes and changes to City services. A few things to remember: • Responses are completely anonymous. • In order to hear from a diverse group of residents, the adult 18 years or older in your household who most recently had a birthday should complete this survey. • You may return the survey by mail in the enclosed postage-paid envelope, or you can complete the survey online at: https://polco.us/xxplaceholder If you have any questions about the survey, please call (650) 329-2392. For additional ways to engage with the City, go to www.cityofpaloalto.org/engage Thank you for your time and participation! Sincerely, Ed Shikada City Manager ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 151 Packet Page 156 of 792 2022 Community Survey Page 1 of 5 Please complete this survey if you are the adult (age 18 or older) in the household who most recently had a birthday (the year of birth does not matter). Your responses are anonymous and will be reported in group form only. 1. Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Palo Alto. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Palo Alto as a place to live ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Your neighborhood as a place to live ............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Palo Alto as a place to raise children.............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Palo Alto as a place to work .......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Palo Alto as a place to visit ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Palo Alto as a place to retire .......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The overall quality of life in Palo Alto ............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 2. Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) .............................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto .............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto ......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto .................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Residents’ connection and engagement with their community ....................... 1 2 3 4 5 3. Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following. Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Don’t likely likely unlikely unlikely know Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks .................... 1 2 3 4 5 Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years .................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends .................................... 1 2 3 4 5 4. Please rate the job you feel the Palo Alto community does at each of the following. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Making all residents feel welcome ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Attracting people from diverse backgrounds .................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds ................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) ........... 1 2 3 4 5 5. Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Overall quality of business and service establishments in Palo Alto ................. 1 2 3 4 5 Variety of business and service establishments in Palo Alto ............................ 1 2 3 4 5 Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Employment opportunities ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Shopping opportunities ................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Cost of living in Palo Alto ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Traffic flow on major streets ......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of public parking ................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto ................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto ......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto .............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of walking in Palo Alto .......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Variety of housing options ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality housing ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto ............................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of paths and walking trails ........................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.) ....... 1 2 3 4 5 Recreational opportunities ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality mental health care ........................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 152 Packet Page 157 of 792 Page 2 of 5 6. Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool ....................................... 1 2 3 4 5 K-12 education ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Adult educational opportunities ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities .............................. 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to participate in community matters ......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds.............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to learn about City services through social media websites such as Twitter and Facebook ..................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 7. Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. No Yes Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their services ................................................................................... 1 2 Visited a neighborhood park or City park ................................................................................................. 1 2 Used Palo Alto public libraries or their services ......................................................................................... 1 2 Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Palo Alto .......................................................................... 1 2 Attended a City-sponsored event ............................................................................................................ 1 2 Participated in a club .............................................................................................................................. 1 2 Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors ................................................................................. 1 2 Done a favor for a neighbor .................................................................................................................... 1 2 Used the City’s website to conduct business or pay bills ........................................................................... 1 2 Used the Utilities website to conduct business or pay bills ........................................................................ 1 2 Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person, phone, email or web) for help or information .......................... 1 2 Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person, phone, email or web) to express your opinion ................. 1 2 Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.) ................................... 1 2 Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting .......................................................................... 1 2 Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto ....................................................................... 1 2 Voted in your most recent local election .................................................................................................. 1 2 Used bus, rail, or other public transportation instead of driving ................................................................ 1 2 Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone ............................................................... 1 2 Walked or biked instead of driving .......................................................................................................... 1 2 Observed a code violation or other hazard in Palo Alto (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) ...................... 1 2 Household member was a victim of a crime in Palo Alto .......................................................................... 1 2 Reported a crime to the police in Palo Alto .............................................................................................. 1 2 Stocked 14 days’ worth of supplies in case of a major disaster where you have no electricity, water, internet, or telephone service .................................................................................. 1 2 8. Please rate the following categories of Palo Alto government performance. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking .................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement ......... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall confidence in Palo Alto government ................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Generally acting in the best interest of the community ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Being honest ................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Being open and transparent to the public ...................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Informing residents about issues facing the community ................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Treating all residents fairly ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Treating residents with respect ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 9. Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know The City of Palo Alto ..................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The State Government ................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 The Federal Government .............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 153 Packet Page 158 of 792 2022 Community Survey Page 3 of 5 10. Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Traffic enforcement ............................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Traffic signal timing ............................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Street repair ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Street cleaning ................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Street tree maintenance ..................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Sidewalk maintenance ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Land use, planning, and zoning ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) ....................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands and greenbelts) ................. 1 2 3 4 5 Building and planning application processing services .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Affordable high-speed internet access ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Electric utility ...................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Gas utility ........................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Utility payment options ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Drinking water .................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Sewer services ................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) ......................... 1 2 3 4 5 Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e-waste) .......................... 1 2 3 4 5 Police emergency services .................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Crime prevention ................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Animal control .................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ambulance or emergency medical services .......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Fire emergency services...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Fire prevention and education ............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Palo Alto open space (e.g Foothills, Baylands) ..................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 City parks ........................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Recreation programs or classes ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Recreation centers or facilities ............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs) .... 1 2 3 4 5 Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment, accessibility) ............................. 1 2 3 4 5 Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks) ... 1 2 3 4 5 Art programs and theater ................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 City-sponsored special events ............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 City website (cityofpaloalto.org) .......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Public information services (Police/public safety) ................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Public information services (non-Police/public safety) .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.) ............................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 11. Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto Utilities’ services: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Reliability of utility services ................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Affordability of utility services ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services ......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Utilities online customer self-service features ..................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business ...... 1 2 3 4 5 Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive ............................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay ............ 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website ................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications ........................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of contacting Utilities department staff ...................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff ............................. 1 2 3 4 5 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 154 Packet Page 159 of 792 Page 4 of 5 12. Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Palo Alto community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Very Somewhat Not at all Essential important important important Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) .................................................. 1 2 3 4 Overall economic health of Palo Alto ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto .................................................................. 1 2 3 4 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto ............................................. 1 2 3 4 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto ........................................ 1 2 3 4 Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts .................................... 1 2 3 4 Residents’ connection and engagement with their community ........................... 1 2 3 4 Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions ............................................... 1 2 3 4 Increasing local solar generation capacity within city boundaries ........................ 1 2 3 4 Increasing electric storage capacity within city boundaries ................................. 1 2 3 4 Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information ............................................. 1 2 3 4 Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues ....... 1 2 3 4 13. In a typical week, how likely are you to: Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Don’t likely likely unlikely unlikely know Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple) ......................... 1 2 3 4 5 Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors ........... 1 2 3 4 5 14. What mode of transportation do you use most for your typical daily needs for getting around town?  Driving  Biking  Train  Taxi  Carpooling  Walking  Bus  Free shuttle  Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 15. If you did not have access to a car for your usual daily transportation around town, how convenient (based on time and proximity) would you consider each of the following methods of getting around? Very Somewhat Somewhat Very convenient convenient inconvenient inconvenient Walking ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 Biking ................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 Bus ................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 Train ................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 Free shuttle ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 Taxi................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service ................................................. 1 2 3 4 Carpooling ......................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 16. If you plan to purchase a car within the next two years, what is the likelihood of it being one of the following: Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Don’t likely likely unlikely unlikely know All-electric ......................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Plug-in hybrid .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Hydrogen fuel cell .............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Other:_____________________________________________ .......... 1 2 3 4 5 17. Palo Alto is committed to addressing climate change by engaging in strategies that reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs). Space heating is the largest source of GHG in most Palo Alto homes, followed by water heating. What is the likelihood of you… Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Don’t likely likely unlikely unlikely know Replacing your gas water heater with a heat pump water heater when you are ready to replace the water heater? ............................ 1 2 3 4 5 Replacing your gas furnace with a heat pump HVAC system (that provides heating and cooling) when you are ready to replace the furnace? ................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 18. As a resident of Palo Alto, what one change could the City make that would make you happier? ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 155 Packet Page 160 of 792 2022 Community Survey Page 5 of 5 19. As a resident of Palo Alto, what one thing do you believe the City does well and would want to maintain? Our last questions are about you and your household. Again, all of your responses to this survey are completely anonymous and will be reported in group form only. D1. What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be:  Very positive  Somewhat positive  Neutral  Somewhat negative  Very negative D2. What is your employment status?  Working full time for pay  Working part time for pay  Unemployed, looking for paid work  Unemployed, not looking for paid work  Fully retired  College student, unemployed D3. Do you work inside the boundaries of Palo Alto?  Yes, outside the home  No  Yes, from home D4. How many years have you lived in Palo Alto?  Less than 2 years  11-20 years  2-5 years  More than 20 years  6-10 years D5. Which best describes the building you live in?  One family house detached from any other houses  Building with two or more homes (duplex, townhome, apartment or condominium)  Mobile home  Other D6. Do you rent or own your home?  Rent  Own D7. About how much is your monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners’ association (HOA) fees)?  Less than $500  $5,500 to $5,999  $500 to $999  $6,000 to $6,499  $1,000 to $1,499  $6,500 to $6,999  $1,500 to $1,999  $7,000 to $7,499  $2,000 to $2,499  $7,500 to $7,999  $2,499 to $2,999  $8,000 to $8,499  $3,000 to $3,499  $8,500 to $8,999  $3,500 to $3,999  $9,000 to $9,499  $4,000 to $4,499  $9,500 to $9,999  $4,500 to $4,999  $10,000 or more  $5,000 to $5,499 D8. Do any children 17 or under live in your household?  No  Yes D9. Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older?  No  Yes D10. How much do you anticipate your household’s total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Total income from all sources for all persons living in your household.)  Less than $25,000  $250,000 to $299,999  $25,000 to $49,999  $300,000 to $349,999  $50,000 to $99,999  $350,000 to $399,999  $100,000 to $149,000  $400,000 to $449,999  $150,000 to $199,999  $450,000 to $499,999  $200,000 to $249,999  $500,000 or more D11. Are you Spanish, Hispanic or Latino?  No, not Spanish, Hispanic or Latino  Yes, I consider myself to be Spanish, Hispanic or Latino D12. What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what you consider yourself to be.)  American Indian or Alaskan Native  White  Asian, Asian Indian or Pacific Islander  Other  Black or African American D13. In which category is your age?  18-24 years  45-54 years  65-74 years  25-34 years  55-64 years  75 years or older  35-44 years D14. What is your gender?  Woman  Man  Identify in another way  go to D14a D14a. If you identify in another way, how would you describe your gender?  Agender/ I don’t identify  Transgender man with any gender  Transgender woman  Genderqueer/gender fluid  Two-spirit  Non-binary  Not listed, I identify as:_________________ D15. What is your sexual orientation?  Heterosexual  Bisexual  Lesbian  Identify in another way  Gay  go to D15a D15a. If you identify in another way, how would you describe your sexual orientation?  Asexual  Questioning  Pansexual  Not listed, I identify as:  Queer ____________________________ Thank you! Please return the completed survey in the postage-paid envelope to: National Research Center, Inc., PO Box 549, Belle Mead, NJ 08502 ITEM 3 Attachment A - Palo Alto Community Survey Report 2023 Item 3: Page 156 Packet Page 161 of 792 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: CONSENT Lead Department: Public Works Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Approval of a General Services Agreement with Linko Technology, Inc. (Contract C23185605) in the Amount of $219,447 Over a Seven-Year Term for Pretreatment Program Software RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or their designee to execute the attached general services contract with Linko Technology, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $219,447 for a seven-year software subscription to manage the Regional Water Quality Control Plant’s Pretreatment Program data. The contract amount includes $199,497 for basic services and $19,950 for related, additional but unforeseen work that may develop during the contract (additional services). BACKGROUND The Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) is required to have a Pretreatment Program that controls and monitors industrial discharges to the RWQCP per its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and as specified in the federal Pretreatment Regulations (Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 403). The City of Palo Alto Public Works Pretreatment Program permits, inspects, and conducts monitoring (i.e., sampling of discharge) on the industrial waste activities of industries and commercial dischargers located in the East Palo Alto Sanitary District, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Palo Alto, and Stanford University. While Mountain View permits and inspects industrial waste activities in their jurisdiction, the City of Palo Alto Public Works Pretreatment Program conducts monitoring of those facilities. These regulated businesses include, but are not limited to, research and development facilities, metal finishers, photographic processors, dentists, vehicle service facilities, and machine shops. The Pretreatment Program utilizes a software database to effectively manage thousands of data points collected annually on the permitting and monitoring requirements for what is currently 111 facilities. Prior to 2019, staff utilized a custom-made software created and managed by Computing Solutions Group for more than 20 years. In 2019, Pretreatment Program Management recognized ITEM 4 Staff Report Item 4: Page 1 Packet Page 162 of 792 the need to update the software and identified the custom-made software as a vulnerability for this highly regulated Program. As such, the Pretreatment Program Management at that time went through a request for proposals (RFP) to find a product that met Program needs while also providing a larger support system for troubleshooting and maintaining data. After extensive review of the proposals and the software capabilities, LinkoCTS (a commercial off-the-shelf software) was confirmed as the best fit and was selected to manage the Pretreatment Program data. The City then entered into Professional Services Agreement No. S19174949 with Linko Technology, Inc. for transition over to the new software and three years of software hosting and support.1 After contracting in 2019, City staff spent over five months on-boarding in order to migrate existing data from the previous database, set up and confirm user accounts, and conduct initial training. After formal on-boarding with Linko Technology, Inc. staff, City Pretreatment Program staff spent an additional year on in-house training and developing Standard Operating Procedures tailored to LinkoCTS to ensure optimal use for City-specific processes. This software has since become an integral part of the Pretreatment Program's effort to manage the large amount of data generated from monitoring events, industrial permits, and various reporting processes to ensure compliance with federal Pretreatment regulations. The current agreement with Linko Technologies, Inc. expired October 28, 2022, and staff is seeking a new agreement with Linko Technology, Inc to continue use of this software and support (Attachment A). ANALYSIS Linko Technology, Inc. is the sole developer and producer of this proprietary software. Linko Technology, Inc., is the only organization authorized to provide Linko Software, implementation services, training, or support of the LinkoCTS software. Staff is satisfied with this new software and recommends continuing on this platform. As such, staff did not conduct a solicitation and instead received an exemption from solicitation approval, per Palo Alto Municipal Code 2.30.360 (b)(2), which allows an exemption when “due to circumstances beyond the control of the city, the time necessary to use the competitive solicitation process, procedures and requirements would result in a substantial economic loss to the city or the substantial interference with a required city operation”. TIMELINE There are no service impacts anticipated with renewing the LinkoCTS subscription and support service. The Consultant is expected to provide hosting and support of the software for seven 1 Contract No. S19174949 with Linko Technology, Inc, 2019 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/public-works/water-quality-control-plant/files-for-staff- reports/contract-s19174949-linko-technology.pdf ITEM 4 Staff Report Item 4: Page 2 Packet Page 163 of 792 years. Work is expected to begin in February 2023 and conclude in February 2030. Software services and troubleshooting support will seamlessly continue with this new agreement. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT The Linko Technology, Inc. contract amount is not to exceed $219,447 at the end of the seven- year term, which includes $199,497 for basic services and $19,950 for related, additional but unforeseen work that may develop during the contract. Funding of $20,343 for this agreement is available in the Fiscal Year 2023 Adopted Budget in the Wastewater Treatment Fund. Funding for future years of the contract will be subject to Council appropriation as part of the annual budget process. POLICY IMPLICATIONS This project is in conformance with the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and does not represent any changes to existing City policies. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Use of the Pretreatment Program software does not involve public meetings or other stakeholder engagement; primary users of the software are City staff. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Council action on this item is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the award of a contract for Pretreatment Program software hosting and support services is a continuing administrative or maintenance activity. CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(2). ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Linko Technology, Inc. Contract, C23185605 APPROVED BY: Brad Eggleston, Director Public Works/City Engineer Report #: 2211-0394 ITEM 4 Staff Report Item 4: Page 3 Packet Page 164 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 1 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C23185605 GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into on the 23rd day of January, 2023, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and LINKO TECHNOLOGY, INC., a Washington corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of Aquatic Informatics Inc., located at 1999 Broadway, Suite 830, Denver, CO 80202, Telephone Number: (602) 809-2509 (“CONTRACTOR”). In consideration of their mutual covenants, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. SERVICES. CONTRACTOR shall provide or furnish the services (the “Services”) described in the Scope of Services, attached at Exhibit A. 2. EXHIBITS. The following exhibits are attached to and made a part of this Agreement: “A” - Scope of Services “B” - Schedule of Performance “C” - Schedule of Fees “D” - Insurance Requirements “E” – Information Privacy Policy “F” – Cybersecurity Terms & Conditions CONTRACT IS NOT COMPLETE UNLESS ALL INDICATED EXHIBITS ARE ATTACHED. 3. TERM. The term of this Agreement is from March 1, 2023 to February 28, 2030 inclusive, subject to the provisions of Sections R and W of the General Terms and Conditions. 4. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. CONTRACTOR shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to CONTRACTOR, and if applicable, in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Schedule of Performance, attached at Exhibit B. Time is of the essence in this Agreement. 5. COMPENSATION FOR ORIGINAL TERM. CITY shall pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept as not-to-exceed compensation for the full performance of the Services and reimbursable expenses, if any: A sum calculated in accordance with the fee schedule set forth at Exhibit C, not to exceed a total maximum compensation amount of Two Hundred and Nineteen Thousand Four Hundred and Forty Seven dollars ($219,447.00). DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 4 Packet Page 165 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 2 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 CONTRACTOR agrees that it can perform the Services for an amount not to exceed the total maximum compensation set forth above. Any hours worked or services performed by CONTRACTOR for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth above for performance of the Services shall be at no cost to CITY. CITY has set aside the sum of Nineteen Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty dollars ($19,950.00) for Additional Services. CONTRACTOR shall provide Additional Services only by advanced, written authorization from the City Manager or designee. CONTRACTOR, at the CITY’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONTRACTOR’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services. Compensation shall be based on the hourly rates set forth above or in Exhibit C (whichever is applicable), or if such rates are not applicable, a negotiated lump sum. CITY shall not authorize and CONTRACTOR shall not perform any Additional Services for which payment would exceed the amount set forth above for Additional Services. Payment for Additional Services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. 6. COMPENSATION DURING ADDITIONAL TERMS. CONTRACTOR’S compensation rates for each additional term shall be the same as the original term; OR 7. CLAIMS PROCEDURE FOR “9204 PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS”. For purposes of this Section 7, a “9204 Public Works Project” means the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any public structure, building, road, or other public improvement of any kind. Public Contract Code Section 9204 mandates certain claims procedures for Public Works Projects, which are set forth in “Appendix __ Claims for Public Contract Code Section 9204 Public Works Projects”. This project is not a 9204 Public Works Project. 8. INVOICING. Send all invoices to CITY, Attention: Project Manager. The Project Manager is: Isabel Zacharczuk, Dept.: Public Works, Watershed Protection, Telephone: (650) 329- 2585. Invoices shall be submitted based on the Invoice Schedule in Exhibit C: Schedule of Fees. Invoices shall provide a detailed statement of Services performed during the invoice period and are subject to verification by CITY. CITY shall pay the undisputed amount of invoices within 30 days of receipt. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 5 Packet Page 166 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 3 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 A. ACCEPTANCE. CONTRACTOR accepts and agrees to all terms and conditions of this Agreement. This Agreement includes and is limited to the terms and conditions set forth in sections 1 through 8 above, these general terms and conditions and the attached exhibits. B. QUALIFICATIONS. CONTRACTOR represents and warrants that it has the expertise and qualifications to complete the services described in Section 1 of this Agreement, entitled “SERVICES,” and that every individual charged with the performance of the services under this Agreement has sufficient skill and experience and is duly licensed or certified, to the extent such licensing or certification is required by law, to perform the Services. CITY expressly relies on CONTRACTOR’s representations regarding its skills, knowledge, and certifications. CONTRACTOR shall perform all work in accordance with generally accepted business practices and performance standards of the industry, including all federal, state, and local operation and safety regulations. C. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in the performance of this Agreement, CONTRACTOR and any person employed by CONTRACTOR shall at all times be considered an independent CONTRACTOR and not an agent or employee of CITY. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to complete the work required under this Agreement. D. SUBCONTRACTORS. CONTRACTOR may not use subcontractors to perform any Services under this Agreement unless CONTRACTOR obtains prior written consent of CITY. CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible for directing the work of approved subcontractors and for any compensation due to subcontractors. E. TAXES AND CHARGES. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for payment of all taxes, fees, contributions or charges applicable to the conduct of CONTRACTOR’s business. F. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONTRACTOR shall in the performance of the Services comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders. G. PALO ALTO MINIMUM WAGE ORDINANCE. CONTRACTOR shall comply with all requirements of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 4.62 (Citywide Minimum Wage), as it may be amended from time to time. In particular, for any employee otherwise entitled to the State minimum wage, who performs at least two (2) hours of work in a calendar week within the geographic boundaries of the City, CONTRACTOR shall pay such employees no less than the minimum wage set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 4.62.030 for each hour worked within the geographic boundaries of the City of Palo Alto. In addition, CONTRACTOR shall post notices regarding the Palo Alto Minimum Wage Ordinance in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code section 4.62.060. H. DAMAGE TO PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY. CONTRACTOR shall, at its sole expense, repair in kind, or as the City Manager or designee shall direct, any damage to public or DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 6 Packet Page 167 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 4 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 private property that occurs in connection with CONTRACTOR’s performance of the Services. CITY may decline to approve and may withhold payment in whole or in part to such extent as may be necessary to protect CITY from loss because of defective work not remedied or other damage to the CITY occurring in connection with CONTRACTOR’s performance of the Services. CITY shall submit written documentation in support of such withholding upon CONTRACTOR’s request. When the grounds described above are removed, payment shall be made for amounts withheld because of them. I. WARRANTIES. CONTRACTOR expressly warrants that all services provided under this Agreement shall be performed in a professional and workmanlike manner in accordance with generally accepted business practices and performance standards of the industry and the requirements of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR expressly warrants that all materials, goods and equipment provided by CONTRACTOR under this Agreement shall be fit for the particular purpose intended, shall be free from defects, and shall conform to the requirements of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR agrees to promptly replace or correct any material or service not in compliance with these warranties, including incomplete, inaccurate, or defective material or service, at no further cost to CITY. The warranties set forth in this section shall be in effect for a period of one year from completion of the Services and shall survive the completion of the Services or termination of this Agreement. J. MONITORING OF SERVICES. CITY may monitor the Services performed under this Agreement to determine whether CONTRACTOR’s work is completed in a satisfactory manner and complies with the provisions of this Agreement. K. CITY’S PROPERTY. Any reports, information, data or other material (including copyright interests) developed, collected, assembled, prepared, or caused to be prepared under this Agreement will become the property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use and will not be made available to any individual or organization by CONTRACTOR or its subcontractors, if any, without the prior written approval of the City Manager. L. AUDITS. CONTRACTOR agrees to permit CITY and its authorized representatives to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years from the date of final payment, CONTRACTOR’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONTRACTOR agrees to maintain accurate books and records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for at least three (3) following the terms of this Agreement. M. NO IMPLIED WAIVER. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY shall operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. N. INSURANCE. CONTRACTOR, at its sole cost, shall purchase and maintain in full force during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described at Exhibit D. DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 7 Packet Page 168 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 5 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 Insurance must be provided by companies with a Best’s Key Rating of A-:VII or higher and which are otherwise acceptable to CITY’s Risk Manager. The Risk Manager must approve deductibles and self-insured retentions. In addition, all policies, endorsements, certificates and/or binders are subject to approval by the Risk Manager as to form and content. CONTRACTOR shall obtain a policy endorsement naming the City of Palo Alto as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy. CONTRACTOR shall obtain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled or materially reduced in coverage or limits until after providing 30 days prior written notice of the cancellation or modification to the Risk Manager. CONTRACTOR shall provide certificates of such policies or other evidence of coverage satisfactory to the Risk Manager, together with the required endorsements and evidence of payment of premiums, to CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement and shall throughout the term of this Agreement provide current certificates evidencing the required insurance coverages and endorsements to the Risk Manager. CONTRACTOR shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall obtain and provide to CITY separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor that meet all the requirements of this section. The procuring of such required policies of insurance shall not operate to limit CONTRACTOR’s liability or obligation to indemnify CITY under this Agreement. O. HOLD HARMLESS. To the fullest extent permitted by law and without limitation by the provisions of section N relating to insurance, CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents from and against any and all demands, claims, injuries, losses, or liabilities of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss and including without limitation all damages, penalties, fines and judgments, associated investigation and administrative expenses and defense costs, including, but not limited to reasonable attorney’s fees, courts costs and costs of alternative dispute resolution), arising out of, or resulting in any way from or in connection with the performance of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR’s obligations under this Section apply regardless of whether or not a liability is caused or contributed to by any negligent (passive or active) act or omission of CITY, except that CONTRACTOR shall not be obligated to indemnify for liability arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of CITY. The acceptance of the Services by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section survive the completion of the Services or termination of this Agreement. P. NON-DISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONTRACTOR certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONTRACTOR acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 8 Packet Page 169 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 6 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. Q. WORKERS' COMPENSATION. CONTRACTOR, by executing this Agreement, certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and certifies that it will comply with such provisions, as applicable, before commencing and during the performance of the Services. R. TERMINATION. The City Manager may terminate this Agreement without cause by giving ten (10) days’ prior written notice thereof to CONTRACTOR. If CONTRACTOR fails to perform any of its material obligations under this Agreement, in addition to all other remedies provided by law, the City Manager may terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice of termination. Upon receipt of such notice of termination, CONTRACTOR shall immediately discontinue performance. CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR for services satisfactorily performed up to the effective date of termination. If the termination is for cause, CITY may deduct from such payment the amount of actual damage, if any, sustained by CITY due to CONTRACTOR’s failure to perform its material obligations under this Agreement. Upon termination, CONTRACTOR shall immediately deliver to the City Manager any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other material or products, whether or not completed, prepared by CONTRACTOR or given to CONTRACTOR, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials shall become the property of CITY. S. ASSIGNMENTS/CHANGES. This Agreement binds the parties and their successors and assigns to all covenants of this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be assigned or transferred without the prior written consent of CITY. No amendments, changes or variations of any kind are authorized without the written consent of CITY. T. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. In accepting this Agreement, CONTRACTOR covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ any person having such an interest. CONTRACTOR certifies that no CITY officer, employee, or authorized representative has any financial interest in the business of CONTRACTOR and that no person associated with CONTRACTOR has any interest, direct or indirect, which could conflict with the faithful performance of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR agrees to advise CITY if any conflict arises. U. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be governed and interpreted by the laws of the State of California. DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 9 Packet Page 170 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 7 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 V. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement, including all exhibits, represents the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the services that may be the subject of this Agreement. Any variance in the exhibits does not affect the validity of the Agreement and the Agreement itself controls over any conflicting provisions in the exhibits. This Agreement supersedes all prior agreements, representations, statements, negotiations and undertakings whether oral or written. W. NON-APPROPRIATION. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This Section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. X. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONTRACTOR shall comply with CITY’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at CITY’s Purchasing Division, which are incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONTRACTOR shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of CITY’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, CONTRACTOR shall comply with the following zero waste requirements: • All printed materials provided by CONTRACTOR to CITY generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by CITY’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post- consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks. • Goods purchased by Contractor on behalf of CITY shall be purchased in accordance with CITY’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including, but not limited to, Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Division’s office. • Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by CONTRCATOR, at no additional cost to CITY, for reuse or recycling. CONTRACTOR shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. Y. AUTHORITY. The individual(s) executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. Z. PREVAILING WAGES DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 10 Packet Page 171 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 8 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 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 Agreement is not a public works contract, if Agreement does not include a public works construction project of more than $25,000, or the Agreement does not include a public works alteration, demolition, repair, or maintenance (collectively, ‘improvement’) project of more than $15,000. AA. DIR REGISTRATION. In regard to any public work construction, alteration, demolition, repair or maintenance work, CITY will not accept a bid proposal from or enter into this Agreement with CONTRACTOR without proof that CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors are registered with the California Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) to perform public work, subject to limited exceptions. City requires CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of SB 854. CITY provides notice to CONTRACTOR of the requirements of California Labor Code section 1771.1(a), which reads: “A contractor or subcontractor shall not be qualified to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, subject to the requirements of Section 4104 of the Public Contract Code, or engage in the performance of any contract for public work, as defined in this chapter, unless currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5. It is not a violation of this section for an unregistered contractor to submit a bid that is authorized by Section 7029.1 of the Business and Professions Code or Section 10164 or 20103.5 of the Public Contract Code, provided the contractor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 at the time the Agreement is awarded.” CITY gives notice to CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors that CONTRACTOR is required to post all job site notices prescribed by law or regulation and CONTRACTOR is subject to SB 854-compliance monitoring and enforcement by DIR. CITY requires CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of Labor Code section 1776, including: Keep accurate payroll records, showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by, respectively, CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors, in connection with the Project. The payroll records shall be verified as true and correct and shall be certified and made available for inspection at all reasonable hours at the principal office of CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors, respectively. DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 11 Packet Page 172 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 9 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 At the request of CITY, acting by its project manager, CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors shall make the certified payroll records available for inspection or furnished upon request to the project manager within ten (10) days of receipt of CITY’s request. [For state- and federally-funded projects] CITY requests CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors to submit the certified payroll records to the project manager at the end of each week during the Project. If the certified payroll records are not produced to the project manager within the 10- day period, then CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors shall be subject to a penalty of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker, and CITY shall withhold the sum total of penalties from the progress payment(s) then due and payable to CONTRACTOR. Inform the project manager of the location of CONTRACTOR’s and its listed subcontractors’ payroll records (street address, city and county) at the commencement of the Project, and also provide notice to the project manager within five (5) business days of any change of location of those payroll records. BB. CONTRACT TERMS. All unchecked boxes do not apply to this Agreement. In the case of any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the exhibits hereto or CONTRACTOR’s proposal (if any), the Agreement shall control. In the case of any conflict between the exhibits hereto and CONTRACTOR’s proposal, the exhibits shall control. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO LINKO TECHNOLOGY, INC. ______________________________ By________________________________________ City Manager Name _____________________________________ Title_______________________________________ Telephone: _______________________________ Approved as to form: ___________________________ City Attorney or Designee DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 VP Sales 604-657-4859 James Reyes ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 12 Packet Page 173 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 10 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES BACKGROUND The Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) regulates wastes discharged to the sanitary sewer from industrial and commercial facilities located within its service area through its Regulatory Compliance Program. Operations within the Industrial Waste Discharge Program involve issuing discharge permits, collecting wastewater samples, and processing period compliance reports from industrial and commercial users. To manage the data for the Regulatory Compliance Program, the RWQCP requires CONSULTANT services to continue maintaining a hosted database and software solution hereafter referred to as “Pretreatment Information Management System” (PIMS). The new PIMS was contracted in 2019 and went live in 2020 to replace the RWQCP’s previous site-specific PIMS. The hosted service shall include software and/or service implementation, configuration, training, tailoring and testing as follows: SCOPE OF SERVICES Task 1.0 Year 1 PIMS Hosting and Software Subscription CONSULTANT shall host PIMS as an offsite cloud service and shall support no more than 6 concurrent City users. PIMS shall be provided as an annual subscription service that includes software support, maintenance, and updates, in accordance with the terms set forth in Exhibit A-1. CONSULTANT shall provide hosting and support for the following software modules: • LinkoCTS • LabSync 2.0 • Remote Inspector • Sampling Assistant • Remote Sampler • RDP User(s) • Aquatic Academy User(s) Task 2.0 Year 2 PIMS Hosting and Software Subscription CONSULTANT shall host PIMS as an offsite cloud service and shall support no more than 6 concurrent City users. PIMS shall be provided as an annual subscription service that includes software support, maintenance, and updates, in accordance with the terms set forth in Exhibit A-1. CONSULTANT shall provide hosting and support for the following software modules: • LinkoExchange • LinkoCTS • LabSync 2.0 • Remote Inspector • Sampling Assistant DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 13 Packet Page 174 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 11 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 • Remote Sampler • RDP User(s) • Aquatic Academy User(s) Task 3.0 Year 3 PIMS Hosting and Software Subscription Services CONSULTANT shall host PIMS as an offsite cloud service and shall support no more than 6 concurrent City users. PIMS shall be provided as an annual subscription service that includes software support, maintenance, and updates, in accordance with the terms set forth in Exhibit A-1. CONSULTANT shall provide hosting and support for the following software modules: • LinkoExchange • LinkoCTS • LabSync 2.0 • Remote Inspector • Sampling Assistant • Remote Sampler • RDP User(s) • Aquatic Academy User(s) Task 4.0 Year 4 PIMS Hosting and Software Subscription Services CONSULTANT shall host PIMS as an offsite cloud service and shall support no more than 6 concurrent City users. PIMS shall be provided as an annual subscription service that includes software support, maintenance, and updates, in accordance with the terms set forth in Exhibit A-1. CONSULTANT shall provide hosting and support for the following software modules: • LinkoExchange • LinkoCTS • LabSync 2.0 • Remote Inspector • Sampling Assistant • Remote Sampler • RDP User(s) • Aquatic Academy User(s) Task 5.0 Year 5 PIMS Hosting and Software Subscription Services CONSULTANT shall host PIMS as an offsite cloud service and shall support no more than 6 concurrent City users. PIMS shall be provided as an annual subscription service that includes software support, maintenance, and updates, in accordance with the terms set forth in Exhibit A-1. CONSULTANT shall provide hosting and support for the following software modules: • LinkoExchange • LinkoCTS • LabSync 2.0 • Remote Inspector DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 14 Packet Page 175 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 12 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 • Sampling Assistant • Remote Sampler • RDP User(s) • Aquatic Academy User(s) Task 6.0 Year 6 PIMS Hosting and Software Subscription Services CONSULTANT shall host PIMS as an offsite cloud service and shall support no more than 6 concurrent City users. PIMS shall be provided as an annual subscription service that includes software support, maintenance, and updates, in accordance with the terms set forth in Exhibit A-1. CONSULTANT shall provide hosting and support for the following software modules: • LinkoExchange • LinkoCTS • LabSync 2.0 • Remote Inspector • Sampling Assistant • Remote Sampler • RDP User(s) • Aquatic Academy User(s) Task 7.0 Year 7 PIMS Hosting and Software Subscription Services CONSULTANT shall host PIMS as an offsite cloud service and shall support no more than 6 concurrent City users. PIMS shall be provided as an annual subscription service that includes software support, maintenance, and updates, in accordance with the terms set forth in Exhibit A-1. CONSULTANT shall provide hosting and support for the following software modules: • LinkoExchange • LinkoCTS • LabSync 2.0 • Remote Inspector • Sampling Assistant • Remote Sampler • RDP User(s) • Aquatic Academy User(s) SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCE OF SERVICE OFFERINGS Description of Service Offerings obtained by Subscriber: Provide software implementation and training for PIMS (the “Service Offerings”). Tasks include the migration of data from the City’s existing database into PIMS. Consultant shall perform customization and or tailoring of the software package to ensure it meets the requirements described in Sections A and B of Exhibit A (Scope of Services) of the Agreement. Consultant shall train City staff on PIMS and provide training materials for Industrial Users on the PIMS electronic document/data submission process. DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 15 Packet Page 176 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 13 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 A. Support and maintenance is provided with all Service Offerings. Consultant will maintain the Service Offerings at the latest release making new enhancements and improvements available as part of Consultant's development methodology. In addition to regular maintenance of the Service Offerings, Consultant will support City by answering queries from technically-trained users designated by Subscriber and resolve such queries in manner set out below 1.0 DEFINITIONS (a) “Case priority 1” means the Service Offering is causing data loss or a system outage with no work around; (b) “Case priority 2” means the Service Offering doesn’t work as per the Documentation with no work around; (c) “Case priority 3” means the Service Offering doesn’t work as per the Documentation and a work around exists; (d) “Case priority 4” means the Service Offering doesn’t work as expected and the desired functionality is not in the Documentation; (e) “Case priority 5” means the case is an enhancement request; (f) “Documentation” means the instruction manual or help on the Service Offering; (g) “Operating Hours” are 7:30 am – 5:00 pm (Mon – Fri) Pacific Time excluding Province of British Columbia and Canadian statutory holidays via the Vancouver, Canada office, and 9:00 am - 5:00 pm (Mon – Fri) Australian Eastern Time excluding Tasmanian and Australian statutory holidays via the Hobart, Australia office; (h) “Resolution” means one or more of the following outcomes: a) a mutually acceptable work around, b) a configuration/data change or c) a Service Offering Change; (i) “Service Offering Change” means changes to Service Offering functionality; 2.0 SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES 2.1 Description of Services. During any Subscription Term and subject to the provisions of this Agreement, Consultant will use commercially reasonable efforts to provide the following Support and Maintenance Services: (a) Live telephone support with a support representative during Operating Hours; (b) Email support during Operating Hours; (c) Live Web conferencing with a support representative during Operating Hours where required to understand the support case; (d) Case tracking through our online case tracking system; and (e) Access to an online Support Portal 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. 2.2 Support Service Level Agreement Case Priority Initial Response Target Time to Resolution 1 1 business day or sooner 2 business days 2 1 business day 3 business days DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 16 Packet Page 177 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 14 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 3 1 business day 10 business days 4 1 business day At Consultant’s discretion 5 At Consultant’s discretion At Consultant’s discretion (a) Initial Response and Target Time to Resolution time periods start once a case is logged in with a Consultant support representative or in Consultant’s Support Portal. (b) Resolution times may exceed the Target Time to Resolution time targets depending on the complexity involved in determining the root cause of the case and the complexity of finding a resolution for it. Should this situation arise for priority 1 or 2 cases, the City will be provided a credit towards their next Annual Subscription Fee calculated as follows: a. Credit = Annual Subscription Fee X ((Number of business days in excess of Target Time in a given Subscription Term) / (Total Number of business days in the same Subscription Term)) (c) The credit for any Subscription Term cannot exceed the Annual Subscription Fee. (d) Subscription Term Credits can only be used as a rebate toward the purchase of a subsequent Subscription Term and otherwise has no cash value. (e) Subscription Term Credits are City’s sole remedy if resolution times exceed the Target Time to Resolution. 2.3 Resolution of Service Offering Anomaly. A Service Offering anomaly will be considered to be resolved when: (a) The Service Offering is working in substantial accordance with the Documentation when operated on the supported hardware, operating system and peripheral as designated by Consultant; or (b) Consultant has advised the City of one of the following: (i) how to correct or bypass the Service Offering anomaly; (ii) that the anomaly falls within an exception to this Agreement. 3.0 EXCEPTIONS 3.1 Support and Maintenance Exclusions Maintenance and Support Services are not provided for and do not apply to: (a) Third party software and middleware or services; (b) When the City is in breach of this Agreement or any other agreement between the Company and the City; (c) Service Offerings that are improperly implemented; DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 17 Packet Page 178 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 15 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 (d) Hardware, peripherals (including printers) or software other than the Service Offering; (e) Anomalies in the Service Offering that are not reproducible; or (f) Anomalies, damage or problems in the Service Offering or its operation caused by: i. an incompatible or non-functioning configuration, operating system or hardware system; ii. accident, abuse or misapplication for which Consultant is not responsible; iii. malfunction or non-performance of products supplied by third parties; iv. use contrary to its intended purpose or contrary to the Documentation; or v. any other matters beyond Consultant’s control. 3.2 Third Party Vendors. The City will look solely to the third party vendors of third party software, middleware, hardware or peripheral if there are any anomalies, damage or problems to the Services Offering in or caused by such software, middleware, hardware and/or peripheral. 3.3 Interfaces. Consultant will not be responsible for any of the City’s integration requirements for the Services Offering resulting from a City’s use of third party vendors who may not integrate with the Services Offering. 3.4 Service Commitment Consultant will use commercially reasonable efforts to make Service Offerings available with a Monthly Uptime Percentage (defined below) of at least 99.9%, in each case during any calendar month (the “Service Commitment”). In the event Service Offerings do not meet the Service Commitment, City will be eligible to receive a Service Credit as described below. Definitions 1) “Monthly Uptime Percentage” is calculated by subtracting from 100% the percentage of minutes during the month in which Service Offerings, as applicable, was “Unavailable.” Monthly Uptime Percentage measurements exclude downtime resulting directly or indirectly from any Service Offerings SLA Exclusion (defined below). 2) “Unavailable” means Your Service Offering has no external (to/from internet) connectivity. 3) A “Service Credit” is a dollar credit, calculated as set forth below, that we may credit back to an eligible account. Service Commitments and Service Credits DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 18 Packet Page 179 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 16 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 Service Credits are calculated as a percentage of the total monthly-equivalent charges paid by City (excluding one-time payments such as upfront payments made for initial instance setup) for Service Offerings in accordance with the schedule below. Monthly Uptime Percentage Service Credit % Less than 99.9% but equal to or greater than 99.0% 10% Less than 99.0% 30% Consultant will apply any Service Credits only against future Service Offerings payments otherwise due from City. Service Credits will not entitle you to any refund or other payment from Consultant. A Service Credit will be applicable and issued only if the credit amount for the applicable billing cycle is greater than one dollar ($1 USD). Service Credits may not be transferred or applied to any other billing account. Unless otherwise provided in the Agreement, your sole and exclusive remedy for any unavailability, non-performance, or other failure by us to provide Service Offerings is the receipt of a Service Credit (if eligible) in accordance with the terms of this Schedule. Credit Request and Payment Procedures To receive a Service Credit, City must submit a claim by opening a support case with Consultant. To be eligible, the credit request must be received by us no later than calendar 15 days after the unavailability incident occurred and must include: 1) the words “Service Offerings SLA Credit Request” in the subject line; 2) the dates and times of each Unavailability incident that you are claiming; 3) the URL(s) to the affected Service Offerings instance(s); and 4) City request logs that document the errors and corroborate City’s claimed outage (any confidential or sensitive information in these logs should be removed or replaced with asterisks). If the Monthly Uptime Percentage of such request is confirmed by Consultant and is less than the Service Commitment, then Consultant will issue the Service Credit to City within one month after City’s request is confirmed by us. City’s failure to provide the request and other information as required above will disqualify City from receiving a Service Credit. Service Offerings SLA Exclusions The Service Commitment does not apply to any unavailability, suspension or termination of Service Offerings, or any other Service Offerings performance issues: (i) that result from a suspension of City’s Service Offering for reasons set out in the Agreement; (ii) caused by factors outside of consultant’s reasonable control, including any force majeure event or Internet access or related problems beyond the DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 19 Packet Page 180 of 792 CPA Contract C23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 17 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 demarcation point of the infrastructure provider for Service Offerings); (iii) that result from any actions or inactions of City or any third party; (iv) that result from your equipment, software or other technology and/or third party equipment, software or other technology (other than third party equipment within our direct control); (v) that result from failures of individual instances not attributable to Service Offerings Unavailability; (vi) that result from any maintenance as provided for pursuant to the Agreement; (vii) arising from Consultant’s suspension and termination of City’s right to use Service Offerings in accordance with the Agreement; or (viii) arising from downtime related to scheduled maintenance windows (defined below) (collectively, the “Service Offerings SLA Exclusions”). If availability is impacted by factors other than those used in Consultant’s Monthly Uptime Percentage calculation, then Consultant may issue a Service Credit considering such factors at Consultant’s discretion. Scheduled Maintenance Windows From time to time, City’s Service Offering instance may require maintenance to upgrade or repair hardware or software that will cause downtime and therefore unavailability to City. We will notify City at least 7 calendar days before such maintenance is required and provide an estimate of the duration required to perform the maintenance. Most maintenance can be performed with less than 2 hours of downtime but some may take longer. Consultant will work with City to schedule a start time & date for the maintenance (a scheduled maintenance window) that is mutually acceptable to City and Consultant. Once maintenance has started at the agreed time, Consultant will use commercially reasonable efforts to return City’s Service Offerings instance(s) to service within the estimated duration window – but this will not always be possible due to unforeseen complications that may arise. Scheduled Maintenance Windows are excluded from the Service Offerings SLA. DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 20 Packet Page 181 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 18 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 EXHIBIT B SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONTRACTOR shall perform the Services according to the following schedule: Milestones Completed By Task 1.0 February 29, 2024 Task 2.0 February 28, 2025 Task 3.0 February 28, 2026 Task 4.0 February 28, 2027 Task 5.0 February 29, 2028 Task 6.0 February 28, 2029 Task 7.0 February 28, 2030 DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 21 Packet Page 182 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 19 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF FEES CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR according to the following rate schedule. The maximum amount of compensation to be paid to CONTRACTOR, including both payment for services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed the amounts set forth in Sections 5 and 6 of the Agreement. Any services provided or hours worked for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to CITY. BUDGET SCHEDULE FIXED FEE Task 1 (PIMS Hosting and Software Support) $20,343 Task 2 (PIMS Hosting and Software Support) $28,852 Task 3 (PIMS Hosting and Software Support) $29,247 Task 4 (PIMS Hosting and Software Support) $29,647 Task 5 (PIMS Hosting and Software Support) $30,054 Task 6 (PIMS Hosting and Software Support) $30,468 Task 7 (PIMS Hosting and Software Support) $30,886 Sub-Total Basic Services $199,497 Reimbursable Expenses $0.00 Additional Services $19,950 Maximum Total Compensation $219,447 INVOICE SCHEDULE CONSULTANT shall invoice the City as follows: • 100% of Task 1 by February 1, 2023. • 100% of Task 2 by February 1, 2024. • 100% of Task 3 by February 1, 2025. • 100% of Task 4 by February 1, 2026. • 100% of Task 5 by February 1, 2027. • 100% of Task 6 by February 1, 2028. • 100% of Task 7 by February 1, 2029. DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 22 Packet Page 183 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 20 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 EXHIBIT D INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED HEREIN. REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, PRODUCTS/COMPLETED OPERATIONS AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 YES TECHNOLOGY ERRORS AND OMISSIONS LIABILITY COVERAGE. THE POLICY SHALL AT A MINIMUM COVER PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT OR LACK OF REQUISITE SKILL FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES DEFINED IN THE CONTRACT AND SHALL ALSO PROVIDE COVERAGE FOR THE FOLLOWING RISKS: (i) NETWORK SECURITY LIABILITYARISING FROM UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO, USE OF, OR TAMPERING WITH COMPUTERS OR COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INCLUDING HACKERS, EXTORTION, AND (ii) LIABILITY ARISING FROM INTRODUCTION OF ANY FORM OF MALICIOUS SOFTWARE INCLUDING COMPUTER VIRUSES INTO, OR OTHERWISE CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE CITY’S OR THIRD PERSON’S COMPUTER, COMPUTER SYSTEM, NETWORK, OR SIMILAR COMPUTER RELATED PROPERTY AND THE DATA, SOFTWARE AND PROGRAMS THEREON. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN IN FORCE DURING THE FULL LIFE OF THE CONTRACT. THE POLICY SHALL PROVIDE COVERAGE FOR BREACH RESPONSE COSTS AS WELL AS REGULATORY FINES AND PENALTIES AS WELL AS CREDIT MONITORING EXPENSES WITH LIMITS SUFFICIENT TO RESPOND TO THESE OBLIGATIONS. ALL DAMAGES $2,000,000 $2,000,000 DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 23 Packet Page 184 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 21 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 YES CYBER AND PRIVACY INSURANCE. SUCH INSURANCE SHALL INCLUDE COVERAGE FOR LIABILITY ARISING FROM COVERAGE IN AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE FULL REPLACEMENT VALUE OF DAMAGE TO, ALTERATION OF, LOSS OF, THEFT, DISSEMINATION OR DESTRUCTION OF ELECTRONIC DATA AND/OR USE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION, “PROPERTY” OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO THAT WILL BE IN THE CARE, CUSTODY, OR CONTROL OF VENDOR, INFORMATION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, BANK AND CREDIT CARD ACCOUNT INFORMATION OR PERSONAL INFORMATION, SUCH AS NAME, ADDRESS, SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS, PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION OR OTHER PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION, STORED OR TRAMSITTED IN ELECTRONIC FORM. ALL DAMAGES $2,000,000 $2,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY EACH PERSON EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. II. CONTRACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE AT THE FOLLOWING URL: https://www.planetbids.com/portal/portal.cfm?CompanyID=25569. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 24 Packet Page 185 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 22 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 B. CROSS LIABILITY THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. VENDORS ARE REQUIRED TO FILE THEIR EVIDENCE OF INSURANCE AND ANY OTHER RELATED NOTICES WITH THE CITY OF PALO ALTO. DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 25 Packet Page 186 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 23 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 EXHIBIT E INFORMATION PRIVACY POLICY DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 26 Packet Page 187 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 24 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 27 Packet Page 188 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 25 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 28 Packet Page 189 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 26 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 29 Packet Page 190 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 27 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 30 Packet Page 191 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 28 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 31 Packet Page 192 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 29 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 32 Packet Page 193 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 30 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 33 Packet Page 194 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 31 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 EXHIBIT F CYBERSECURITY TERMS AND CONDITIONS DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 34 Packet Page 195 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 32 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 35 Packet Page 196 of 792 CPA Contract S23185605 – Linko Technology Inc City of Palo Alto General Services Agreement Page 33 of 33 Form Rev. March 29, 2018 DocuSign Envelope ID: 784B7CE1-45CA-4E21-B871-71E788908C11 ITEM 4 Attachment A - Contract C23185605 Linko Tech Aquatic Informatics Item 4: Page 36 Packet Page 197 of 792 1 0 5 4 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: CONSENT REPORT Lead Department: Administrative Services Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Accept Annual Status Report on Development Impact Fees for Fiscal Year 2022 and Adopt a Resolution Making Statutory Findings for Certain Funds EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report contains information on the City of Palo Alto’s Development Impact Fees for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2021-2022. This report meets the annual reporting requirements in Government Code section 66006. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council review and accept the Annual Report on Development Impact Fees for the period ending June 30, 2022 (Attachment A) and adopt the resolution making statutory findings for certain development impact fee funds (Attachment B). BACKGROUND State law (Government Code Section 66006) requires that each local agency that imposes development impact fees prepare an annual report providing specific information about those fees. This requirement is part of the law commonly referred to as AB 1600. It codifies the legal requirement that fees on new development must have the proper nexus to any project on which they are imposed. In addition, AB 1600 imposes certain accounting and reporting requirements with respect to the fees collected. The fees, for accounting purposes, must be segregated from the general funds of the City and from other funds or accounts containing fees collected for other improvements. Interest on each development fee fund or account must be credited to that fund or account and used only for the purposes for which the fees were collected. Government Code Section 66006 contains comprehensive annual reporting requirements for development impact fees. This statute requires that, within 180 days after the close of the fiscal ITEM 5 Staff Report Item 5: Page 1 Packet Page 198 of 792 1 0 5 4 year, the agency that collected the fees must make available to the public the following information regarding each fund or account:  Brief description of the type of fee in the fund.  Amount of the fee.  Beginning and ending balance in the fund.  Amount of fees collected, and interest earned. Identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditure on each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees. Identification of an approximate date by which the construction of a public improvement will commence, if the local agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement. Description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement on which the loaned funds will be expended, and in the case of an interfund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan. Amount of any refunds made due to inability to expend fees within the required time frame. This report must also be reviewed by the City Council at a regularly scheduled public meeting not less than 15 days after the information is made available to the public. In addition, notice of the time and place of the meeting shall be mailed at least 15 days prior to the meeting to any interested party who files a written request with the local agency for such a mailed notice. An early packet consisting of Attachment A only was made available to the public and included in the packet for the December 5, 2022, meeting of the City Council. The law also provides that, for the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit into the fund and every five years thereafter, the local agency shall make findings with respect to any portion of the fee remaining unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted. The finding must: Identify the purpose to which the fee is to be put; Demonstrate a nexus between the fee and the purpose for which it was originally charged; and Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing of incomplete improvements along with the approximate dates on which the anticipated funding is expected to be deposited into the fund. If the agency no longer needs the funds for the purposes collected, or if the agency fails to make required findings, or to perform certain administrative tasks prescribed by AB 1600, the agency ITEM 5 Staff Report Item 5: Page 2 Packet Page 199 of 792 1 0 5 4 may be required to refund to property owners a prorated portion of the monies collected for that project and any interest earned on those funds. ANALYSIS The City of Palo Alto development fees covered by AB 1600, and documented in Attachment A, include the following: Stanford Research Park/El Camino Real traffic impact fees (PAMC Ch. 16.45): Fee for new nonresidential development in the Stanford Research Park/El Camino Real Service Commercial zone, to fund capacity improvements at eight intersections. City ceased collecting effective fiscal year 2020. San Antonio/West Bayshore Area traffic impact fees (PAMC Ch. 16.46): Fee for new nonresidential development in the San Antonio/West Bayshore area to fund capacity improvements at four intersections. City ceased collecting effective fiscal year 2020. Housing impact fees imposed on commercial developments (PAMC Ch. 16.65): Fee on commercial and industrial development to contribute to offset the demand that new jobs create for low income and moderate-income in the City. Parks, Community Centers, and Libraries impact fees (PAMC Ch. 16.58): Fee on new residential and non-residential development to provide community facility funds for parks, community centers, libraries, public safety, and general government. Charleston-Arastradero Corridor pedestrian and bicyclist safety fees (PAMC Ch. 16.60): Fee on new development and re-development within the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor to provide for pedestrian and bicyclist improvements. Citywide Transportation impact fees (PAMC Ch 16.59): Fee on development in all parts of the City to fund transportation projects and programs to reduce congestion. New Public Safety facilities (PAMH Ch. 16.58): Fee on residential and non-residential development to fund police and fire facilities, including fire apparatus and vehicles. General Government facilities: (PAMH Ch. 16.58) – Fee on residential and non-residential development to fund facilities associated with municipal administration. Residential (Rental) impact fees (PAMC Ch. 16.65) Fee on rental residential developments (including mixed use with rental housing) to offset the demand that new market-rate rental housing creates for low and moderate-income housing in the City. AB 1600 requires the City to make certain findings with respect to the fees that remain unexpended in the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit into the fund, and every five years thereafter. There are four categories of fees that require statutory findings in FY2021-22. These proposed findings are contained in Attachment B. ITEM 5 Staff Report Item 5: Page 3 Packet Page 200 of 792 1 0 5 4 The Community Facilities (Parks Impact Fee) Fund has an unexpended balance of $3,810,535 that was collected in FY 2022 and prior. The Community Facilities Community Centers Fund has an unexpended balance of $739,193 that was collected in FY 2022 and prior. The Community Facilities (Library Impact Fee) Fund has an unexpended balance of $931,093 that was collected in FY 2022 and prior. The Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Fund has an unexpended balance of $34,904 that was collected in FY 2022 and prior. In addition to development fee funds that are required to be reported under AB 1600, the following funds are reported for information purposes only and are not required to be reported under AB 1600: Public Art Fund (PAMC Ch. 16.61): Fees imposed on new commercial developments (including mixed use projects), including new construction, remodels, additions and reconstruction that (i) have a floor area of 10,000 sq. ft. or more, and (ii) have a construction value of $200,000, or more, exclusive of costs for architecture, design, engineering, and required studies; and all new residential projects of five or more units to fund public art for private developments. University Avenue Parking In-Lieu Fund (PAMC Ch. 16.57): Fees collected from non- residential development within the University Avenue Parking Assessment District, in lieu of providing the required number of parking spaces. Residential housing in-lieu fees (PAMC Ch. 16.65): Fee on residential developments in- lieu of providing required below-market rate units to low- and moderate-income households. Parkland Dedication (CA Government Code Section 66477-Quimby Act): Fees on parkland dedication imposed on new residential and non-residential development. Water and Wastewater Collection (California Government Code Section 66000): Capacity fees charged to developers that are adding load to the water and sewer systems effective July 1, 2005. RESOURCE IMPACT ITEM 5 Staff Report Item 5: Page 4 Packet Page 201 of 792 1 0 5 4 These various funds are reviewed annually for any unallocated balances and the nexus of appropriate projects annually as part of the development of the City’s five-year capital improvement plan. If the council does not make the findings contained in Attachment B, the development fees described therein might be required to be refunded. This would have fiscal impact of $5,515,725. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT This report has been prepared by the Accounting Division in Administrative Services and reviewed by partner departments including the City Attorney’s Office and the Planning and Development Services Department. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This is not a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Development Impact Fees FY 22 Attachment B: Resolution Making Findings Regarding Continuing Need for Unexpended Development Fees APPROVED BY: Kiely Nose, Administrative Services Director ITEM 5 Staff Report Item 5: Page 5 Packet Page 202 of 792 Attachment A City of Palo Alto Annual Report on Development Impact Fees for Period Ending June 30, 2022 Stanford Research Park/San Antonio/West FUND El Camino Fund Bayshore Fund Purpose and Authority Traffic impact fees imposed on new Traffic impact fees imposed on new for Collection non-residential development in the non-residential development in the Stanford Research Park/El Camino San Antonio/West Bayshore Areas Real CS zone to fund improvements to fund capacity improvements at at eight identified intersections.four identified intersections. PAMC Ch. 16.45, PAMC Ch. 16.46 Amount of the Fee City ceased collecting effective FY 2020 City ceased collecting effective FY 2020 Fund Balance July 1, 2021 $3,519,739 $434,996 Activity in 2021-22 Revenues Interest Earnings 33,656 6,877 Unrealized Gain/(Loss) Investments (206,212)(34,466) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Revenues ($172,556)($27,588) Expenditures Inter-Agency Expense (2,200,000) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Expenditures ($2,200,000) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ending Balance June 30, 2022 $1,147,183 $407,408 Reserves Other Commitments/Appropriations - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Reserves - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Net Funds Available $1,147,183 $407,408 USE OF FEES:USE OF FEES: In FY 2020, City ceased collecting the Stanford Research / El Camino Real CS Zone fee established in 1989. In FY 2022, $2.2M expense to fund Sharing Agreement between the City and the County of Santa Clara for improvements of Mill Road intersections at both Hanover Street and El Camino Real (CMR 13439). No expenditures have been made for this fund in Fiscal Year 2022. In FY 2020, City ceased collecting the San Antonio/West Bayshore area fee established in 1986. ITEM 5 Attachment A Annual Report on Development Impact Fees FY22 Item 5: Page 6 Packet Page 203 of 792 Commercial Housing FUND Impact Fee Fund General Government Facilities Purpose and Authority Fees imposed on commercial and industrial Fees imposed on residential and non-residential development to fund facilities associated with municipal administration. for Collection development to offset the demand that new jobs create for low and moderate- income housing in the City. PAMC Ch.16.65 PAMC Ch. 16.58 Amount of the Fee Hotel / Retail / Other Non-Residential: $23.11 per sq. ft. Office/R&D: $68.50 per sq. ft. Residential: Single family $1,481 per unit; Multi-family $1,184 per unit (ADUs under 750 sq. ft. exempt); Non-residential: Commercial $826 per 1,000 sq. ft. or fraction thereof; Industrial $275 per 1,000 sq. ft. or fraction thereof; Office/Institutional $1,104 per 1,000 sq. ft. or fraction thereof. Fund Balance July 1, 2021 $25,967,219 $57,053 Activity in 2021-22 Revenues Fees Collected 1,428,224 63,428 Interest Earnings 54,217 1,663 Unrealized Gain/(Loss) Investments (300,408)(10,214) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Revenues 1,182,033 54,877 Expenditures Salaries and Benefit (34,894) - Liability Insurance (855) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Expenditures (35,749) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ending Balance June 30, 2022 $27,113,503 $111,930 Reserves Other Commitments/Appropriations - - Reserve for Notes Receivable includes:(23,629,563) $1,290,000 for 2811 Alma $4,137,254 for 801 Alma $7,700,000 for Bueva Vista Mobile Home Park $10,502,309 Wilton Court - Reserve for Reappropriations (1,167,000) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Reserves (24,796,563) - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Net Funds Available $2,316,940 $111,930 USE OF FEES:USE OF FEES: Expenditures in Fiscal Year 2022 are $35K for salaries and benefits. Reserve for Reappropriaton is for Affordable Housing Loan Agreement: 3705 El Camino Real (Wilton Court). No expenditure of funds have been made from this Fund in Fiscal Year 2022. ITEM 5 Attachment A Annual Report on Development Impact Fees FY22 Item 5: Page 7 Packet Page 204 of 792 Residential & Non-Residential Residential & Non-Residential Community Facilities Community Facilities FUND Parks Community Centers Purpose and Authority Fees imposed on new residential and Fees imposed on new residential and for Collection non-residential development approved non-residential development approved after Jan 28, 2002 for Parks. after Jan 28, 2002 for Community Centers. PAMC Ch. 16.58 PAMC Ch. 16.58 Amount of the Fee Residential: Single family $57,420 per unit. (ADUs under 750 sq ft exempt) Residential: Single family $4438 unit. (ADUs under 750 sq ft exempt) Non-residential: Commercial/Industrial $16,837 per net new 1,000 sq ft; Hotel/Motel $2,866 per 1,000 sq ft. Non-residential: Commercial/industrial $1301 per 1,000 sq ft; Hotel/Motel $222 per 1,000 sq ft. Fund Balance July 1, 2021 $3,766,481 $751,143 Activity in 2021-22 Revenues Fees Collected 311,065 51,809 Interest Earnings 57,233 12,321 Unrealized Gain/(Loss) Investments (305,444)(76,080) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Revenues $62,854 ($11,950) Operating Transfer to Capital Projects Fund (18,800) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Expenditures ($18,800) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ending Balance June 30, 2022 $3,810,535 $739,193 Reserves Other Commitments/Appropriations - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Reserves - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Net Funds Available $3,810,535 $739,193 USE OF FEES:USE OF FEES: Budget transfer in FY 2022 was made to Capital Project fund for PG-19000-Park Restroom Installation $13,300 and PG-18001-Dog Park Installation and Renovation for $5,500. FUTURE USE OF FEES: Budgeted as part of FY23-27 CIP: PE-17005 Boulware Park $400k in FY23; PG-18001 Dog Parks $145k in FY23, $150k in FY24 & FY26; PG-19000 Park Restroom Installation $337k in FY23, $350k in FY24 & FY26; PE-08001 Rinconada Park Improvements $400k in FY23; PF-23001 Roth Building Rehabilitation $350k in FY23. No expenditure of funds have been made from this Fund in Fiscal Year 2022. FUTURE USE OF FEES: Budgeted as part of FY23-27 CIP: $1.65M shifted from PE-08001 Rinconada Park Improvements to PF-23001 Roth Building Rehabilitation in FY23. ITEM 5 Attachment A Annual Report on Development Impact Fees FY22 Item 5: Page 8 Packet Page 205 of 792 Residential & Non-Residential Community Facilities Residential Housing FUND Libraries Impact Fee Fund Purpose and Authority for Collection Fees imposed on new residential and non- residentual development approved after January 28, 2002 for Libraries. Fees imposed on all rental residential developments (including mixed use with rental housing) to offset the demand that the new market-rate rental housing creates for low income and moderate-income housing in the City. PAMC Ch. 16.58 PAMC Ch. 16.65 Amount of the Fee Residential: Single family $2,645 per unit; Multi-family $1,956 per unit (ADUs under 750 sq ft exempt) Single and Multi-Family: $22.69 per sq. ft. apartment (rentals) Non-residential: Commercial/industrial $776 per net new 1,000 sq ft.Hotel/Motel $132 per net new 1,000 sq ft. Fund Balance July 1, 2021 $971,303 $894,756 Activity in 2021-22 Revenues Fees Collected 25,718 223,078 Interest Earnings 13,510 15,727 Unrealized Gain/(Loss) Investments (79,438)(75,945)------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Revenues ($40,210)$162,860 Expenditures -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Total Expenditures - $0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ending Balance June 30, 2022 $931,093 $1,057,616 Reserves Other Commitments/Appropriations - - Reserve for Reappropriations - (600,000) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Reserves - (600,000)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Net Funds Available $931,093 $457,616 USE OF FEES:USE OF FEES: No expenditure of funds have been made from this Fund in Fiscal Year 2022. FUTURE USE OF FEES: Budgeted as part of FY23-27 CIP: LB-21000 Library Automated Material Handling $540k in FY23; PF- 23001 Roth Building Rehabilitation $300k in FY23. No expenditures of funds have been made from this Fund in Fiscal Year 2022. Reserve for Reappropriations is for Affordable Housing Loan Agreement: 3705 El Camino Real(Wilton Court). ITEM 5 Attachment A Annual Report on Development Impact Fees FY22 Item 5: Page 9 Packet Page 206 of 792 Charleston-Arastradero Corridor FUND Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety Citywide Transportation Purpose and Authority Fees collected from new development and Transportation impact fees imposed for Collection re-development within the Charleston-on new development in all parts of the Arastradero Corridor to provide for pedest-City to fund congestion reduction rian and bicyclist safety improvements.projects. PAMC Ch. 16.60 PAMC Ch. 16.59 Amount of the Fee Residential: $1,480 per residential unit Commercial: $0.43 per sq ft (ADUs exempt) $8,572 each; per net new PM peak hour trip Fund Balance July 1, 2021 $37,124 $2,281,870 Activity in 2021-22 Revenues Fees Collected - 252,428 Interest Earnings 588 35,431 Unrealized Gain/(Loss) Investments (2,808)(175,459) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Revenues ($2,220)$112,400 Expenditures Operating Transfer to Capital Projects Fund - (395,000) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Expenditures - ($395,000) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ending Balance June 30, 2022 $34,904 $1,999,270 Reserves Other Commitments/Appropriations - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Reserves - - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Net Funds Available $34,904 $1,999,270 USE OF FEES:USE OF FEES: No expenses were been made from this fund in Fiscal Year 2022. Budget transfers of $395K to Capital Project Fund in Fiscal Year 2022 was made for Traffic Signal and Intelligent Transporation (PL-05030). FUTURE USE OF FEES: Budgeted as part of the FY23-27 CIP: PL-05030 Traffic Signal and Intelligent Transportation System Upgrades $395k annually. ITEM 5 Attachment A Annual Report on Development Impact Fees FY22 Item 5: Page 10 Packet Page 207 of 792 FUND New Public Safety Facilities Purpose and Authority Fees imposed on residential and for Collection non-residential development to fund police and fire facilities (including fire apparatus and vehicles) PAMC Ch. 16.58 Amount of the Fee Residential: Single family $1,175 per unit; Multi-family $940 per unit Nonresidential: Commercial $657 per 1,000 sq ft. or fraction thereof; Industrial $220 per 1,000 sq. ft. or fraction thereof; Office/Institutional $876 per 1,000 sq ft or fraction thereof. Fund Balance July 1, 2021 $44,123 Activity in 2021-22 Revenues Fees Collected 50,371 Interest Earnings 1,302 Unrealized Gain/(Loss) Investments (8,026) ----------------------------------------------------------- Total Revenues $43,647 Expenditures - ----------------------------------------------------------- Total Expenditures - ----------------------------------------------------------- Ending Balance June 30, 2022 $87,770 Reserves Other Commitments/Appropriations - ----------------------------------------------------------- Total Reserves - ----------------------------------------------------------- Net Funds Available $87,770 USE OF FEES: No expenditure of funds have been made from this Fund in Fiscal Year 2022. ITEM 5 Attachment A Annual Report on Development Impact Fees FY22 Item 5: Page 11 Packet Page 208 of 792 (INFORMATION ONLY)(INFORMATION ONLY) Residential Housing FUND In-Lieu Fund Parkland Dedication Purpose and Authority for clollection Fees collected from ownership residential developments of three or more units(including mixed used with ownership in housing) in-lieu of providing the required below-market rate unit(s) to low and moderate income households. Fees on parkland dedication imposed on new residential and non-residential development. PAMC Ch. 16.65 Govt Code Sec. 66477 (Quimby Act) Amount of the Fee Single family $85.07 per sq. ft. single family detached; $56.72 per sq. ft. single family attached. Multi family $56.72 per sq. ft. condos. Single Family: $69,483.47 per unit; Multi- Family: $47,892.56 per unit. This applies only to residential projects that require a subdivision or parcel map. Land dedication is required for subdivisions resulting in more than 50 parcels. Parkland Dedication Fee -Land: Single Family: 531 sq. ft. per unit; Multi-Family: 366 sq. ft. per unit. When parkland dedication applies, park impact fees do not apply. Fund Balance July 1, 2021 $29,738,425 $5,915,748 Activity in 2021-22 Revenues Fees Collected 138,339 591,289 Property Rental 700 Interest Earnings 122,145 74,277 Unrealized Gain/(Loss) Investments (497,098)(401,919)------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Revenues ($235,914)$263,647 Expenditures - Salaries and Benefits (34,894) Liability Insurance (855) Operating Transfer to Capital Projects Fund (2,400,000)------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Expenditures ($35,749)($2,400,000)------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ending Balance June 30, 2022 $29,466,762 $3,779,395 Reserves Other Commitments/Appropriations - Reserve for Encumbrances (178,090) Reserve for Reappropriations (3,000,000) Reserve for Notes Receivable includes:(23,810,893) $375,000 for 3053 Emerson $3,504,850 for Tree House Apts. $747,734 for Sheridan Apts. $2,285,026 for 801 Alma $901,201 for Palo Alto Housing Project $593,952 for 2811-2825 Alma St. $203,561 for Colorado Park Housing $149,968 for El Dorado Palace $6,800,000 for Buena Vista Mobile Home Park $8,249,601 for Wilton Ct.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Reserves ($26,988,983) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Net Funds Available $2,477,779 $3,779,395 USE OF FEES:USE OF FEES: This fund is not subject to AB1600 requirements and is listed only for information purposes. Expenditures in the Fiscal Year 2022 were $36K for salaries and benefits. Reserve for Reappropriations is for Affordable Housing Project: 231 Grant Avenue Affordable Housing Project. This fund is not subject to AB1600 requirements and is listed only for information purposes. FUTURE USE OF FEES: Budgeted as part of the FY23-27 CIP: PE-08001 Rinconada Park Improvements $1.65M in FY23; PE-18006 Byxbee Park Completion $1.55M in FY24. ITEM 5 Attachment A Annual Report on Development Impact Fees FY22 Item 5: Page 12 Packet Page 209 of 792 (INFORMATION ONLY)(INFORMATION ONLY) University Avenue Parking FUND Public Art Fund In-Lieu Fund Purpose and Authority for collection Fees imposed on new commercial develoments (including mixed use projects), including new construction, remodels, additions and reconstruction that (i) have a floor area of 10,000 sq. ft. or more, and (ii) have a construction value of $200,000, or more, exclusive of costs for architecture, design, engineering, and required studies; and all new residential projects of five or more units to fund public art for private developments. Fees collected from non-residential development within the University Ave. Parking Assessment District in lieu of providing the required number of parking spaces. PAMC Ch. 16.61 PAMC Ch. 16.57 Amount of the Fee 1% of first $120.25 million construction valuation and 0.9% of construction valuation for valuation in excess of $120.25 million $115,404.00 per space Fund Balance July 1, 2021 $2,009,290 $6,424,611 Activity in 2021-22 Revenues Fees Collected 144,400 Interest Earnings 32,355 101,582 Unrealized Gain/(Loss) Investments (158,436)(507,159) Operating Transfer from General Fund 170,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Revenues $188,319 ($405,577) Expenditures Salaries and benefits (227,003) - Other Contract Services (42,080) - Liability Insurance (2,816) - Operating Transfer to Capital Projects Fund - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Expenditures ($271,899) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ending Balance June 30, 2022 $1,925,710 $6,019,034 Reserves Other Commitments/Appropriations - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Reserves - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Net Funds Available $1,925,710 6,019,034.00 USE OF FEES: USE OF FEES This fund is not subject to AB1600 requirements and is listed only for information purposes. This fund is not subject to AB1600 requirements and is listed only for information purposes. No expenditures have been made from this fund in Fiscal Year 2022. FUTURE USE OF FEES: $5.5M programmed in FY 2023 for New Downtown Parking Garage Project (PE-15007) as part of the 2023-2027 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). ITEM 5 Attachment A Annual Report on Development Impact Fees FY22 Item 5: Page 13 Packet Page 210 of 792 (INFORMATION ONLY) FUND Water and Wastewater Collection Purpose and Authority Capacity fees charged to developers that for Collection are adding load to the water and sewer systems effective July 1, 2005. California Government Code Sect 66000 Amount of the Fee Water Capacity Fees: 5/8 in., 3/4 in E- Meter. $3,750, 1 in. E-Meter $6,250, 1 1/2 in. E-Meter $18,850, 2 in. E-Meter $31,250, 4 in. Compound Meter by est. $125/FU (min. 5,000 FU) , 6 in. Compound Meter by est. $125/FU (min. 7,000 FU) Fire Service Capacity Fees: 2 in. $750, 4 in. $8,425, 6 in. $18,250, 8 in. $30,950, 10in. $48,110 Sewer Capacity Charges: 4 in. connection with 5/8 in Water Meter (WM) $5,250, 4 in connection. with 1-in WM $10,500, 4 or 6 in. connection with 1-1/2 in WM $31,668, 6 in. connection with 2 in. WM $52,500, 6 in. and larger connection with 4 in. or larger WM by est. at $210/FU Activity in 2021-22 Capacity Fees Collected Water $123,175 Wastewater Collection $31,500 ----------------------------------------------------------- Total Capacity Fees Collected $154,675 USE OF FEES: The fees are used exclusively for water and sewer system improvements. ITEM 5 Attachment A Annual Report on Development Impact Fees FY22 Item 5: Page 14 Packet Page 211 of 792 *NOT YET APPROVED* 1 261_20221128_ts24 Resolution No. _____ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Making Findings Regarding Continuing Need for Unexpended Development Fees R E C I T A L S A. Government Code Section 66001(d) requires the City to make certain findings with respect to fees that remain unexpended in the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit into the account or fund, and every five years thereafter; and B. As authorized under Chapter 16.58 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the City has collected a fee known as the “Parks Impact Fee” for the purpose of funding acquisition of land and improvements for neighborhood and district parks; and C. The sum of $3,810,535 represents the most recent audited total of fees collected pursuant to the Parks Impact Fee that remain unexpended, together with accrued interest thereon (“unexpended Parks Impact Fee Funds”); and D. As authorized under Chapter 16.58 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the City has collected a fee known as the “Community Center Impact Fee” for the purpose of funding development and improvements to community centers; and E. The sum of $739,193 represents the most recent audited total of fees collected pursuant to the Community Center Impact Fee that remain unexpended, together with accrued interest thereon (“unexpended Community Center Impact Fee Funds”); and F. As authorized under Chapter 16.58 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the City has collected a fee known as the “Library Impact Fee” for the purpose of funding development and improvements to libraries; and G. The sum of $931,093 represents the most recent audited total of fees collected pursuant to the Library Impact Fee that remain unexpended, together with accrued interest thereon (“the unexpended Library Impact Fee funds”); and H. As authorized under Chapter 16.60 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the City has collected a fee known as the “Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety Fee” for the purpose of funding pedestrian and bicyclist safety improvements; and I. The sum of $34,904 represents the most recent audited total of fees collected pursuant to the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety ITEM 5 Attachment B - Resolution Item 5: Page 15 Packet Page 212 of 792 *NOT YET APPROVED* 2 261_20221128_ts24 Fee that remain unexpended, together with accrued interest thereon (“unexpended Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety Fee funds”). The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The Council makes the following findings: Parks Impact Fee funds 1. The unexpended Parks Impact Fee funds were collected pursuant to Chapter 16.58 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, to be used solely for the purpose of funding acquisition of land and improvements for neighborhood and district parks. 2. The City plans to spend the unexpended Parks Impact Fee funds in the amount of $3,810,535 in part to complete several park improvements scheduled in the Fiscal Year 2023-2027 Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. 3. The unexpended Parks Impact Fee funds are anticipated to be transferred as provided in the Fiscal Year 2023-2027 Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. Other sources of funding for these projects include the City’s Capital Improvement Fund, Community Center Impact Fee Fund, Library Development Impact Fee Fund, Stanford University Medical Center Fund, revenue from other agencies or organizations, as specifically detailed in the FY 2023-2027 Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. Additional unexpended Parks Impact Fee funds are anticipated to be used to implement the Parks, Trails, Natural Open Space and Recreation Master Plan (adopted 2017), including to develop the empty 10-acre site adjacent to the Baylands into park uses. 4. The relationship between the fee collected and the purpose for which it is charged is demonstrated in the City of Palo Alto Park, Community Center, and Library Development Impact Fee Justification Study, dated January 15, 2021 and approved by the City Council on April 12, 2021. Community Center Impact Fee funds 5. The unexpended Community Center Impact Fee funds were collected pursuant to Chapter 16.58 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, to be used solely for the purpose of funding development and improvements to community centers. 6. The City plans to spend the unexpended Community Center Impact Fee funds in the amount of $739,193 to complete community center improvements scheduled in the Fiscal Year 2023-2027 Five Year Capital Improvement Plan; namely the Roth Building Rehabilitation Phase I. ITEM 5 Attachment B - Resolution Item 5: Page 16 Packet Page 213 of 792 *NOT YET APPROVED* 3 261_20221128_ts24 7. The unexpended Community Center Impact Fee funds are anticipated to be transferred as provided in the Fiscal Year 2023-2027 Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. Other sources of funding for this project include the City’s Capital Improvement Fund, Parks Impact Fee Fund, Library Development Impact Fee Fund, Stanford University Medical Center Fund, and revenue from other agencies or organizations, as specifically detailed in the FY 2023-2027 Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. 8. The relationship between the fee collected and the purpose for which it is charged is demonstrated in the City of Palo Alto Park, Community Center, and Library Development Impact Fee Justification Study, dated January 15, 2021 and approved by the City Council on April 12, 2021. Library Impact Fee funds 9. The unexpended Library Impact Fee funds were collected pursuant to Chapter 16.58 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, to be used solely for the purpose of funding development and improvements to libraries. 10. The City plans to spend the unexpended Library Impact Fee funds in the amount of $931,093 to (1) fund purchase and installation of higher-capacity book processing machines (Automated Materials Handling machines) to facilitate expanded book returns and sorting at additional library branches; (2) fund the Roth Building Rehabilitation Phase 1 to support library archives; and (3) fund purchase and installation of vending machines to dispense Library volumes to patrons. 11. The unexpended Library Impact Fee funds are anticipated to be transferred as provided in the Fiscal Year 2023-2027 Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. Additional allocations are expected in FY24 and FY25 as the library is in the process of designing the deployment of AMH machines at its Children’s Library as well as analyzing the use of AMH machines across the rest of the Library system. The balance of funds is expected to be used to install vending machines to dispense Library volumes to patrons. The other sources of funding for these projects are the City’s Capital Improvement Fund. 12. The relationship between the fee collected and the purpose for which it is charged is demonstrated in the City of Palo Alto Park, Community Center, and Library Development Impact Fee Justification Study, dated January 15, 2021 and approved by the City Council on April 12, 2021. Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety Fee funds 13. The unexpended Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety Fee funds were collected pursuant to Chapter 16.60 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, to be used solely for the purpose of funding pedestrian and bicyclist safety improvements, as defined in Section 16. of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. ITEM 5 Attachment B - Resolution Item 5: Page 17 Packet Page 214 of 792 *NOT YET APPROVED* 4 261_20221128_ts24 14. The City plans to spend the unexpended Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety Fee funds in the amount of $34,904 on the Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Project. 15. The unexpended Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety Fee funds are anticipated to be transferred in FY23 or FY24. Other funding sources for this project include the Capital Improvement Fund, Stanford University Medical Center Fund, Gas Tax Fund, and grants from the State of California, as detailed in the FY23, FY22, and prior years’ Capital Improvement Budgets. 16. The relationship between the fee collected and the purpose for which it is charged is demonstrated in the City of Palo Alto Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety Impact fee Nexus Study of 2005. // // // // // // // // // // // // // // // ITEM 5 Attachment B - Resolution Item 5: Page 18 Packet Page 215 of 792 *NOT YET APPROVED* 5 261_20221128_ts24 SECTION 2. The Council finds that this is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: ______________________________ ______________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ ______________________________ Assistant City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Director of Administrative Services ______________________________ Director of Community Services ______________________________ Director of Libraries ______________________________ Director of Public Works ITEM 5 Attachment B - Resolution Item 5: Page 19 Packet Page 216 of 792 1 1 2 1 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: CONSENT REPORT Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Approval of Contract with Downtown Streets Team, Inc. (C23186552) for a Total Not-to-Exceed Amount of $160,477 for Fiscal Year 2023 for Workforce Development Services RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager or their designee to execute Contract C23186552 (Attachment A) with Downtown Streets Team, Inc. to provide Workforce Development Services for a term of one year for FY2023 and a total amount not to exceed amount of $160,477. BACKGROUND On June 20, 2022, City Council approved allocating $160,477 from the General Fund for workforce development services to be provided by Downtown Streets Team, Inc. (DST). Historically, DST has been funded through the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. During Fiscal Year 2022, staff was notified that DST no longer qualified as a community based development organization due to a change in its board membership and, as a result, was no longer eligible to receive CDBG funding in FY2023. Due to this change of status and to provide continued support to the program in FY2023, staff recommended and City Council approved funding DST from the General Fund. Staff reported at the time that it would seek opportunities to potentially resolve the issue by applying for an exemption as provided for by the federal department for Housing and Urban Development. This research took several months and recently concluded with a finding that the exemption process was not likely to result in a favorable outcome and therefore will not be pursued. Accordingly, staff will continue to explore other options and return to Council. More background information is available from the June 20, 2022 staff report.1 1 June 20, 2022 Staff Report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/agendas-minutes/city-council-agendas-minutes/2022/20220620/20220620pccsm-amended-final- final.pdf#page=907. ITEM 6 Staff Report Item 6: Page 1 Packet Page 217 of 792 1 1 2 1 ANALYSIS This action follows through on the Council’s direction to fund DST services from the General Fund; DST has continued to provide services to the City in reliance on this funding. The attached contract authorizes allocating $160,477 from the General Fund for workforce development services to be provided through an agreement with the DST for Fiscal Year 2023. Downtown Streets Program The DST program provides homeless and/or extremely low-income individuals with job readiness training and employment opportunities through job search skill instruction, supportive services, and direct employment placements with partnering companies. The objective of this program is to help previously homeless individuals rebuild their self-esteem and confidence through the dignity of work. The primary goal of the program is to transition people from a state of non- worker readiness and unemployment into regular paid employment. The program provides counseling and training to assist participants develop a plan for self-sustainability by procuring housing or shelter, address physical/mental issues, receive transportation assistance, or providing other services. Training primarily focuses on building successful work habits, job readiness skills, resume writing, and employment search skills. DST will additionally recruit and work with a network of local businesses to identify and increase the number of job opportunities suitable for the targeted population from the private sector. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT Funding for this service was approved by City Council through the Fiscal Year 2023 budget adoption. Ongoing funding for this contract and services remains to be determined as staff continued to explore options. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT City and DST staff have been working collaboratively to ensure service delivery continues while exploring options to develop a long term funding strategy solution. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The recommended action is CEQA exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility of a significant effect on the environment. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Downtown Streets Team Contract, C23186552 APPROVED BY: Jonathan Lait, Planning and Development Services Director ITEM 6 Staff Report Item 6: Page 2 Packet Page 218 of 792 1 1 2 1 Report #: 2212-0461 ITEM 6 Staff Report Item 6: Page 3 Packet Page 219 of 792 1 CONTRACT NO. C23186552 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND DOWNTOWN STREETS TEAM This Contract No. C23186552 (“Contract”), dated for convenience on December 13, 2022, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation of the State of California (“CITY”), and DOWNTOWN STREETS TEAM, a corporation duly organized and existing under the Nonprofit Corporation Law of the State of California, located at 1671 THE ALAMEDA, SUITE 306, SAN JOSE, CA 95126 (“CONSULTANT”). CITY and CONSULTANT are referred to collectively as the “Parties”. RECITALS: A. CITY provides grants to organizations who deliver direct services and desires to obtain outreach services for HOMELESSNESS/OUTREACH in the community (the “Program” or “Services”), as more fully described in Exhibit “A”. B. CITY desires to engage CONSULTANT in providing the Services based on CONSULTANT’s qualifications and experience in performing the Services. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Contract, the Parties agree: SECTION 1. TERM 1.1 The term of this Contract will commence on July 1, 2022 and will terminate on June 30, 2023, unless this Contract is earlier terminated pursuant to Section 12 of this Contract. 1.2 Upon full execution of this Contract, CONSULTANT will commence work on the initial and subsequent Program tasks in accordance with the time schedule set forth in Exhibit “A”. 1.3 Time is of the essence in the performance of this Contract. 1.4 In the event that the Program is not completed within the time required through any fault of CONSULTANT, CITY’s City Manager will have the option of extending the time schedule for any period of time. This provision will not preclude the recovery of damages for delay caused by CONSULTANT. SECTION 2. SCOPE OF PROGRAM SERVICES; CHANGES & CORRECTIONS 2.1 CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in Exhibit A in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Contract. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. 2.2 CITY may require substantial changes in the scope or character of the Basic Services, or the Program, either decreasing or increasing the amount of work required of CONSULTANT. In the event that such changes are required, subject to the approval of CITY’s City Council, as may be necessary, CONSULTANT will be entitled to full compensation for all work DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 4 Packet Page 220 of 792 2 performed prior to CONSULTANT’S receipt of the notice of change and further will be entitled to an extension of the time schedule. CITY will not be liable for the cost or payment of any change in work, unless the amount of additional compensation attributable to the change in work is agreed to, in writing, by CITY before CONSULTANT commences the performance of any such change in work. Any increase in compensation for changes in the work required by CITY will require a Contract amendment executed by the Parties. SECTION 3. QUALIFICATIONS, STATUS, AND DUTIES OF CONSULTANT 3.1 CONSULTANT represents and warrants that it has the expertise and professional qualifications to furnish or cause to be furnished the Services. CONSULTANT further represents and warrants that the program director and every individual, including any consultant, charged with the performance of the Services are duly licensed or certified by the State of California (or any other relevant government or professional organization), to the extent such licensing or certification is required by law to perform the Services, and that the Program will be executed by them or under their supervision. 3.2 CONSULTANT covenants and agrees that it will execute or cause to be executed, the Program. 3.3 CONSULTANT will assign a single program director to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Program. The program director will represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the Program. If circumstances or conditions subsequent to the execution of this Contract cause the substitution of the program director, the CONSULTANT shall notify the program manager of such a change. 3.4 CONSULTANT represents, warrants and agrees that it will: 3.4.1 Procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices which may be necessary and incident to the due and lawful administration of the Program; 3.4.2 Keep itself fully informed of and comply with all Federal, State of California, and local laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees which may affect those engaged or employed under this Contract and any materials used in CONSULTANT’s performance of the Services; 3.4.3 At all times observe and comply with, and cause its employees and consultants, if any, who are assigned to the performance of this Contract to observe and comply with, the laws, ordinances, regulations, orders and decrees mentioned above; and 3.4.4 Will report immediately to the program manager, in writing, any discrepancy or inconsistency it discovers in the laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees mentioned above in relation to the deliverables. 3.4.5 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. 3.5 Any deliverables given to, or prepared or assembled by, CONSULTANT or its consultants, if any, under this Contract will become the property of CITY and will not be made DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 5 Packet Page 221 of 792 3 available to any individual or organization by CONSULTANT or its consultants, if any, without the prior written approval of the City Manager. 3.6 CONSULTANT will provide CITY with copies of any documents which are a part of the deliverables upon their completion and acceptance by CITY. 3.7 If CITY requests additional copies of any documents which are a part of the -deliverables, CONSULTANT will provide such additional copies or provide press-ready electronic files. 3.8 CONSULTANT will be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to execute the Program. All consultants of CONSULTANT will be deemed to be directly controlled and supervised by CONSULTANT, which will be responsible for their performance. 3.9 In the execution of the Program, CONSULTANT and its consultants, if any, will at all times be considered independent contractors and not agents or employees of CITY. 3.10 CONSULTANT will perform or obtain or cause to be performed or obtained any and all of the following Additional Services, not included under the Basic Services, if so authorized, in writing, by CITY: 3.10.1 Providing services as an expert witness in connection with any public hearing or meeting, arbitration proceeding, or proceeding of a court of record; 3.10.2 Incurring travel and subsistence expenses for CONSULTANT and its staff beyond those normally required under the Basic Services; 3.10.3 Performing any other Additional Services that may be agreed upon by the parties subsequent to the execution of this Contract; and 3.10.4 Other Additional Services now or hereafter described in Exhibit “A” to this Contract. 3.11 CONSULTANT shall coordinate its services with other existing organizations providing similar services in order to foster community cooperation and to avoid unnecessary duplication of services. 3.12 CONSULTANT shall seek out and apply for other sources of revenue in support of its operation or services from county, state, federal and private sources. Unless deemed inappropriate by the program manager, CITY may support CONSULTANT in its search of grants, funding, or other income by serving as a sponsoring agency, by providing letters of support, or by rendering advice on application for grants. 3.13 CONSULTANT shall include an acknowledgment of CITY funding and support in all appropriate publicity or publications regarding its programs and services using words to the effect that “services are provided in cooperation with the City of Palo Alto” or “through City of Palo Alto funding” as approved by the program manager. DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 6 Packet Page 222 of 792 4 3.14 Throughout the term of this Contract, CONSULTANT shall remain an independent, nonprofit corporation under the laws of California governed solely by a Board of Directors, with up-to-date bylaws. CONSULTANT shall operate by its Bylaws. Any changes in CONSULTANT’s Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws, or tax-exempt status shall be reported by CONSULTANT immediately to the City’s program manager. 3.15 The Board of Directors of CONSULTANT shall include representation from the broadest possible cross section of the community including: those with expertise and interest in CONSULTANT’s services, representatives from community organizations, and users of CONSULTANT’s services. 3.16 All meetings of the Board of Directors of CONSULTANT shall be open to the public, except meetings, or portions thereof, dealing with personnel or litigation matters or other matters required by law to be confidential. 3.17 CONSULTANT shall keep minutes of all regular and special meetings of its Board of Directors. SECTION 4. DUTIES OF CITY 4.1 The City Manager will represent CITY for all purposes under this Contract. The City’s assigned Program Manager will supervise the performance, progress, and execution of the Program. The Program Manager may conduct site visits of CONSULTANT’s facility(s) during the Contract term. 4.2 In the event CITY should determine from any identifiable source, including but not limited to reports submitted by CONSULTANT under this Contract or any evaluation report from any identifiable source, that there is a condition which requires correction, CITY may forward to CONSULTANT requests for corrective action. Such requests shall indicate the nature of the issue or issues which are to be reviewed to determine the need for corrective action and may include a recommendation as to appropriate corrective action. Within thirty (30) days of CITY’s request, CONSULTANT shall submit its response, which shall include its views of the problem and proposed action, if any. Upon request of either party, the parties shall meet to discuss any such request and response within the thirty-day period specified. SECTION 5. COMPENSATION 5.1 In consideration of the full performance of this Contract, CITY will compensate CONSULTANT in the amount not-to-exceed One Hundred Sixty Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Seven Dollars ($160,477.00) as follows, all subject to the provisions of 17.12 of this Contract: 5.1.1 On the billing form provided by CITY, CONSULTANT shall submit a bill on a monthly basis by the fifteenth (15th) day of the following month for services provided under this Contract during the preceding three months. The bill shall specify actual expenditures along with verification documentation directly related to this Contract, in accordance with Exhibit “B”. The fees of CONSULTANT’s subconsultants, who have direct contractual relationships with CONSULTANT, must be approved, in advance, by CITY. CITY reserves the right to refuse payment of such fees, if such prior approval is not obtained by CONSULTANT. In accordance with Exhibit “A,” Scope of DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 7 Packet Page 223 of 792 5 Program Activities, the semi-annual report shall specify the CONSULTANT’s measurement plan for evaluating the degree that the program goals and objectives have been met. 5.1.2 The full payment of charges for extra work or changes, or both, in the execution of the Program will be made, provided such request for payment is initiated by CONSULTANT and authorized, in writing, by CITY’s Program Manager. Payment will be made within thirty (30) days of submission by CONSULTANT of a statement of itemized costs covering such work or changes, or both. Prior to commencing such extra work or changes, or both, the parties will agree upon an estimated maximum cost for such extra work or changes. CONSULTANT will not be paid for extra work or changes, including, without limitation, any design work or change order preparation, which is made necessary on account of CONSULTANT’s errors, omissions, or oversights. 5.1.3 Direct personnel expense of employees assigned to the execution of the Program by CONSULTANT will include only the work and other documents pertaining to the Program, and in services rendered during the Program to the extent such services are expressly contemplated under this Contract. Included in the cost of direct personnel expense of these employees are salaries and mandatory and customary benefits such as statutory employee benefits, insurance, sick leave, holidays and vacations, pensions and similar benefits. 5.2 The schedule of payments will be made as follows: 5.2.1 Payment of the Basic Services will be made in quarterly progress payments in proportion to the quantum of services performed, or in accordance with any other schedule of payment mutually agreed upon by the Parties, as set forth in Exhibit “B”, or within thirty (30) days of submission. If CONSULTANT requests greater than 25% of contracted funding in one quarter, pre-approval from CITY must be obtained along with verification documents. Final payment will be made by CITY after CONSULTANT has submitted all deliverables, including, without limitation, reports which have been approved by the CITY’s Program Manager. 5.2.2 No deductions will be made from CONSULTANT’s compensation on account of penalties, liquidated damages, or other sums withheld by CITY from payments to general contractors. SECTION 6. PROGRAM RECORDS 6.1 Upon reasonable notice, CONSULTANT shall grant CITY’s program manager access to all CONSULTANT records, data, statements, and reports, which pertain to this Program. CONSULTANT shall secure all necessary client and/or personnel release of information forms to allow the program manager and others specifically designated, in writing by the program manager to be afforded such access. Access to clinical records will be coordinated with the client, the client’s representative and the CONSULTANT upon reasonable request from the program manager. CONSULTANT is not required to provide information, the disclosure of which is expressly prohibited by California or Federal laws. SECTION 7. ACCOUNTING, AUDITS, OWNERSHIP OF RECORDS 7.1 CONSULTANT shall appoint a fiscal agent who shall be responsible for the financial and accounting activities of CONSULTANT, including the receipt and disbursement of CONSULTANT funds. DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 8 Packet Page 224 of 792 6 7.2. CONSULTANT shall appoint from its Board a treasurer who shall review Financial Statements of CONSULTANT on a regular basis. 7.3 Records of the direct personnel expenses and expenses incurred in connection with the performance of Basic Services and Additional Services pertaining to the Program will be prepared, maintained, and retained by CONSULTANT in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and will be made available to CITY for auditing purposes at mutually convenient times during the term of this Contract and for three (3) years following the expiration or earlier termination of this Contract. 7.4 CONSULTANT shall provide for independent audit of its fiscal year transactions, records, and financial reports at least every two (2) years. The certified public accountant shall submit the report to both parties. The cost of this audit shall be borne by CONSULTANT. 7.5 The originals of the deliverables prepared by or under the direction of CONSULTANT in the performance of this Contract will become the property of CITY irrespective of whether the Program is completed upon CITY’s payment of the amounts required to be paid to CONSULTANT. These originals will be delivered to CITY without additional compensation. CITY will have the right to utilize any final and incomplete drawings, estimates, specifications, and any other documents prepared hereunder by CONSULTANT, but CONSULTANT disclaims any responsibility or liability for any alterations or modifications of such documents. SECTION 8. INDEMNITY 8.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorney’s fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements (“Claims”) resulting from, arising out of or in any manner related to performance or nonperformance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Contract, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. SECTION 9. WAIVERS 9.1 No waiver of a condition or nonperformance of an obligation under this Contract is effective unless it is in writing in accordance with Section 17.6 of this Contract. No delay or failure to require performance of any provision of this Contract shall constitute a waiver of that provision as to that or any other instance. Any waiver granted shall apply solely to the specific instance expressly stated. No single or partial exercise of any right or remedy will preclude any other or further exercise of any right or remedy. 9.2 No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Contract. SECTION 10. INSURANCE 10.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Contract, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit C, entitled DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 9 Packet Page 225 of 792 7 “INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS”. CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 10.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Contract will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Contract, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 10.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Contract. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days’ prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30) days’ notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT’s receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Chief Procurement Officer during the entire term of this Contract. 10.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT’s liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Contract. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Contract, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Contract is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 11. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION 11.1 CONSULTANT, by executing this Contract, certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and certifies that it will comply with such provisions, as applicable, before commencing the performance of the Program. SECTION 12. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF CONTRACT OR PROGRAM 12.1 The City Manager may suspend the execution of the Program, in whole or in part, or terminate this Contract, with or without cause, by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT, or immediately after submission to CITY by CONSULTANT of any completed item of Basic Services. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance under this Contract. 12.2 CONSULTANT may terminate this Contract or suspend its execution of the Program by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY or in the event CITY indefinitely withholds or withdraws its request for the initiation or continuation of Basic Services or the execution of the Program. DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 10 Packet Page 226 of 792 8 12.3 Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be compensated for the Basic Services and Additional Services performed and deliverables received and approved prior to receipt of written notice from CITY of such suspension or abandonment, together with authorized additional and reimbursable expenses then due. If the Program is resumed after it has been suspended for more than 180 days, any change in CONSULTANT’s compensation will be subject to renegotiation and, if necessary, approval of CITY’s City Council. If this Contract is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY, as such determination may be made by the City Manager in the reasonable exercise of his discretion. 12.4 In the event of termination of this Contract or suspension of work on the Program by CITY where CONSULTANT is not in default, CONSULTANT will receive compensation as follows: 12.4.1 For approved items of services, CONSULTANT will be compensated for each item of service fully performed in the amounts authorized under this Contract. 12.4.2 For approved items of services on which a notice to proceed is issued by CITY, but which are not fully performed, CONSULTANT will be compensated for each item of service in an amount which bears the same ratio to the total fee otherwise payable for the performance of the service as the quantum of service actually rendered bears to the services necessary for the full performance of that item of service. 12.4.3 The total compensation payable under the preceding paragraphs of this Section will not exceed the payment specified under Section 5 for the respective items of service to be furnished by CONSULTANT. 12.5 Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT will deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of the deliverables, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its consultants, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its consultants, if any, in connection with this Contract. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 12.6 The failure of CITY to agree with CONSULTANT’s independent findings, conclusions, or recommendations, if the same are called for under this Contract, on the basis of differences in matters of judgment, will not be construed as a failure on the part of CONSULTANT to fulfill its obligations under this Contract. SECTION 13. ASSIGNMENT 13.1 This Contract is for the services of CONSULTANT, therefore, CONSULTANT will not assign, transfer, convey, or otherwise dispose of this Contract or any right, title or interest in or to the same or any part thereof without the prior written consent of CITY. A consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be a consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of CITY will be void and, at the option of the City Manager, this Contract may be terminated. This Contract will not be assignable by operation of law. SECTION 14. NOTICES DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 11 Packet Page 227 of 792 9 14.1 All notices hereunder will be given, in writing, and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Copy to: Planning Development Services Department City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 To CONSULTANT: Downtown Streets Team 1671 The Alameda Suite, 306 San Jose, CA 95126 SECTION 15. CONFLICT OF INTEREST 15.1 In accepting this Contract, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 15.2 CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Contract, it will not employ contractors or persons having such an interest mentioned above. CONSULTANT certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest under this Contract is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. SECTION 16. NONDISCRIMINATION 16.1 As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 2.30.510, as amended from time to time, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Contract, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person due to that person’s race, skin color, gender, gender identity, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, pregnancy, genetic information or condition, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. 16.2 CONSULTANT agrees that each contract for services from independent providers fulfilling obligations under this Contract will contain a provision substantially as follows: Independent provider will provide DOWNTOWN STREETS TEAM with a certificate stating that Independent provider is currently in compliance with all Federal and State of California laws covering nondiscrimination in employment; and that it will not discriminate in the employment of any person under this contract because of the age, race, skin color, national origin, ancestry, religion, DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 12 Packet Page 228 of 792 10 disability, sexual orientation, gender or gender identity , housing status, marital status, familial status, weight, height or gender of such person. 16.3 If CONSULTANT is found in violation of the nondiscrimination provisions of the State of California Fair Employment Practices Act or similar provisions of Federal law or executive order in the performance of this Contract, it will be in default of this Contract. Thereupon, CITY will have the power to cancel or suspend this Contract, in whole or in part, or to deduct the sum of twenty-five dollars ($25) for each person for each calendar day during which such person was subjected to discrimination, as damages for breach of contract, or both. Only a finding of the State of California Fair Employment Practices Commission or the equivalent federal agency or officer will constitute evidence of a breach of this Contract. 16.4 CONSULTANT understands and agrees that pursuant to the Americans Disabilities Act (“ADA”), programs, services and other activities provided by a public entity to the public, whether directly or through a contractor or subcontractor, are required to be accessible to the disabled public. CONSULTANT will provide the Services specified in this Contract in a manner that complies with the ADA and any other applicable federal, state and local disability rights laws and regulations, as amended from time to time. CONSULTANT will not discriminate against persons with disabilities in the provision of services, benefits or activities provided under this Contract. SECTION 17. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 17.1 (Reserved). 17.2 (Reserved). 17.3 This Contract will be governed by California law, without regard to its conflict of law provisions. 17.4 In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state Superior Court for the County of Santa Clara or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 17.5 The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the terms of this Contract or arising out of this Contract may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees expended in connection with that action. 17.6 This document represents the entire and integrated Contract between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 17.7 All provisions of this Contract, whether covenants or conditions, will be deemed to be both covenants and conditions. 17.8 The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Contract will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants, as the case may be, of the parties. DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 13 Packet Page 229 of 792 11 17.9 If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Contract or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Contract and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 17.10 All exhibits referred to in this Contract and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Contract and will be deemed to be a part of this Contract. 17.11 This Contract may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which will be an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. 17.12 This Contract is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Contract will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Contract are no longer available. This Section 17.12 will take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Contract. DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 14 Packet Page 230 of 792 12 CONTRACT NO. C23186552 SIGNATURE PAGE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Contract on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO: ______________________________ City Manager Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ Deputy City Attorney DOWNTOWN STREETS TEAM: By: __________________________ Name: Title: Date: By: __________________________ Name: Title: Date: Attachments: EXHIBIT “A”: SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT “B”: SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE EXHIBIT “C”: COMPENSATION EXHIBIT “D”: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA 12/13/2022 Chief Program Officer Chris Richardson Interim CEO 12/14/2022 Jim Rettew ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 15 Packet Page 231 of 792 13 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSULTANT will provide homeless and/or extremely low‐income individuals with job readiness training and employment opportunities through job search skill instruction, supportive services, and direct employment placements with partnering companies. The objective of this program is to help previously homeless individuals rebuild their self‐esteem and confidence through the dignity of work. The primary goal of the program is to transition people from a state of non‐ worker readiness and unemployment into regular paid employment. The program will provide counseling and training to assist participants develop a plan for self‐sustainability by procuring housing or shelter, address physical/mental issues, receive transportation assistance, or providing other services. Training will primarily focus on building successful work habits, job readiness skills, resume writing, and employment search skills. Downtown Streets Team will additionally recruit and work with a network of local businesses to identify and increase the number of job opportunities suitable for the targeted population from the private sector. CONSULTANT will create economic opportunities and 14 unduplicated homeless individuals will receive gainfully employment allowing them increased access to economic opportunities. CONSULTANT will provide tangible local employment opportunities for motivated, previously homeless, or at‐risk of homeless individuals who have completed the CONSULTANT’s Employment Development Course though the following objectives: Objective # 1: Attain paid employment opportunities for unemployed and homeless individuals in the Workforce Development Program. Outcome: Previously homeless and unemployed persons will find paid employment. Numbers served: 14 unduplicated individuals will be placed in jobs through job training/employment readiness classes and outreach to local employers. Objective # 2: Build extensive network of local employers willing to hire DST program participants. Outcome: Local employers willing to hire or open/expedite interview process to a DST program participant. Number served: 14 local employers will be recruited to create/hold positions or expedite the hiring process for DST program participants in Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Objective # 3: Develop job search skills and job readiness training classes to prepare participants for employment. Outcome: Employers retain new employees beyond three months. Number served: 75% of employers retain new employees beyond three months. CONSULTANT shall provide semi-annual activity reports relating to this Scope of Services for the periods ending December 31, 2022, and June 30, 2023, within fifteen (15) days after these dates. Each report shall cover the preceding six (6) month period, and other such information as the CITY may request. The final report shall focus on the preceding (6) months, but also shall provide information on contract services for the entire year. Each report shall be prepared in the form agreed upon by the CITY and CONSULTANT. Income, as well as race and ethnicity, information will be gathered and reported on the program participants. DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 16 Packet Page 232 of 792 14 EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within timeframe as specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. Deliverables Schedule Exhibit “A” – Scope of Services Daily/Ongoing through June 30, 2023 DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 17 Packet Page 233 of 792 15 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation can also be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, and the total compensation for Additional Services do not exceed the amounts set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services, additional services, and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed the amount(s) stated in Section 4 of this Agreement. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Services and Additional Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this/these amount(s). Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth in this Agreement shall be at no cost to the CITY. BUDGET SCHEDULE: Description Total Not to Exceed Exhibit “A” – Scope of Services $160,477.00 Sub-total Basic Services $160,477.00 Reimbursable Expenses $0.00 Total Basic Consultant Services & Reimbursable Expenses $160,477.00 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: $0.00 ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expenses, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 18 Packet Page 234 of 792 16 EXHIBIT “D” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION YES EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. II. CONTRACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. B. CROSS LIABILITY THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 19 Packet Page 235 of 792 17 C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. Vendors are required to file their evidence of insurance and any other related notices with the City of Palo Alto. DocuSign Envelope ID: 8158E9A3-3C51-450C-8D59-F804F8DEE8BA ITEM 6 Attachment A - Contract C23186552 Downtown Streets Team Item 6: Page 20 Packet Page 236 of 792 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: CONSENT REPORT Lead Department: Community Services Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Parks and Recreation Commission Recommendation to Adopt an Ordinance Amending PAMC Section 22.04.220 to Regulate Electric Bicycles and Electric Coasting Devices in Parks and Open Spaces RECOMMENDATION The Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) recommends that the City Council adopt an amendment to PAMC 22.04.220 to regulate electric bicycles and electric coasting devices 1 in City parks and open spaces (Attachment A). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On January 1, 20231, new legislation, AB 1909, changed the default rule to allow the use of all classes of e-bikes (including class 3) on all trails unless prohibited by local ordinance. In response to this change in state law, the PRC voted unanimously to recommend that City Council 1) amend PAMC 22.04.220 to regulate all classes of electric bicycles and electric coasting devices in City parks and open spaces (Attachment A) and 2) that the City Manager adopt the updated Parks and Open Space Regulation R1-18 and R1-37 to regulate electric bicycles and electric coasting devices (Attachment B). The ordinance update clarifies that the park regulations provide rules on where e-bike and electric coasting devices are allowed in Open Space and Parks. The regulations are consistent with the following policy: 1 Until the end of 2022, state law prohibited the use of class 3 electric bicycles (e-bikes) on trails (including hiking, recreational, equestrian, and bike trails). Class 3 e-bikes are the fastest category of e-bike and capable of electric assist up to 28 miles per hour. Cities could opt-out of this restriction by adopting an ordinance, but the City of Palo Alto followed the default state law prohibition. ITEM 7 Staff Report Item 7: Page 1 Packet Page 237 of 792 1 4 0 5 Open Space Policy •All e-bikes (class 1, 2, and 3) are allowed on paved roads and trails and are prohibited elsewhere including on unpaved roads and trails. •Other electric powered mobility devices are allowed on paved roads and trails at the Baylands Nature Preserve and are prohibited in other open space preserves (Pearson- Arastradero Preserve, Foothills Nature Preserve, and Esther Clark Park). Parks Policy •All e-bikes (class 1, 2, and 3) are allowed on paved and unpaved trails in parks, and are prohibited elsewhere (turf, sports courts, playgrounds, landscaped areas, etc.) in parks. •Other electric powered mobility devices are allowed on paved and unpaved trails in parks, and are prohibited elsewhere (turf, sports courts, playgrounds, landscaped areas, etc.) in parks. BACKGROUND California State E-Bike Description and Policy Section 312.5 of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) defines an e-bike as having fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts. It also defines three categories of e-bikes based on the power of their electrical assistance and whether the e-bike can move without pedaling: •A “class 1 electric bicycle,” or “low-speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour. •A “class 2 electric bicycle,” or “low-speed throttle-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that may be used exclusively to propel the bicycle, and that is not capable of providing assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour. •A “class 3 electric bicycle,” or “speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 28 miles per hour and equipped with a speedometer. Note: The only difference between class 1 and class 2 is that with a class 2, the electric motor can be used exclusively to power the bicycle using a throttle (pedaling is not required). State Law Prohibited Class 3 E-Bikes on Trails Until December 2022 ITEM 7 Staff Report Item 7: Page 2 Packet Page 238 of 792 1 4 0 5 Until the end of 2022, CVC section 21207.5 (b) prohibited the use of class 3 e-bikes on recreational trails and paths unless the public agency with jurisdiction chose to permit them, and provided that a public agency may prohibit class 1 and 2 e-bikes on trails within the agency’s jurisdiction. Class 1 and 2 e-bikes are currently allowed on City of Palo Alto open space and park trails except for Foothills Nature Preserve, where bikes are not allowed on trails. On January 1, 2023, new legislation, AB 1909, removed the prohibition of class 3 e-bikes on trails and paths unless prohibited by local ordinance. Regional Policies Locally, there is mixed support for e-bike use, with varying restrictions. Many restrictions have not been updated since the CVC updated the definition of e-bikes and are based on now- outdated laws and definitions of motorized vehicles or devices. The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is one local agency that has done a significant amount of work reviewing and updating its e-bike policy. On November 20, 2019, the MROSD Board of Directors directed the General Manager to evaluate potential electric bicycle (e-bike) access in MROSD preserves. Part of the MROSD analysis included various surveys and studies related to a one-year pilot program of class 1 and class 2 e-bike use on paved, multi-use trails within Rancho San Antonio and Ravenswood Preserve and intercept surveys on Santa Clara County Parks unpaved, multi-use trails where e-bikes are currently allowed. Additionally, H. T. Harvey and Associates (an environmental consulting company) completed an e-bike noise study, focused on potential impacts to birds and bats, and the MROSD Science Advisory Panel (SAP) conducted a literature review of the impacts and benefits of e-bikes. The PRC Electric Conveyances Policy Ad Hoc Committee (Ad Hoc) and staff found the MROSD’s analysis (Staff Report/Study) informative. On June 29, 2022, the MROSD Board voted 4-2 to: •Allow class 1 and class 2 e-bike access on limited improved trails at Ravenswood Preserve •Allow class 1 and class 2 e-bike access on limited improved trails where bikes are currently allowed at Rancho San Antonio Preserve •Affirm the prohibition of e-bikes on MROSD trails except for specifically designated trails noted above Note: E-bikes are allowed on ~1.6 miles of paved asphalt trails at Ravenswood Preserve, and less than 5 miles of select, primarily paved trails at Rancho San Antonio Preserve with asphalt. E-bikes are prohibited on all MROSD trails at the 26 open space preserves under its jurisdiction, except for those noted at Ravenswood Preserve and Rancho San Antonio Preserve. ITEM 7 Staff Report Item 7: Page 3 Packet Page 239 of 792 1 4 0 5 City of Palo Alto Policy Class 1 and 2 e-bikes are currently allowed on open space and park trails except for Foothills Nature Preserve, where bikes are not allowed on trails. Class 3 e-bikes were prohibited under the state’s default prohibition under CVC 21207.5, but are now allowed as of January 1, 2023 due to the change to state law. As permitted by the updated state law, adopting this ordinance will allow the City to regulate all classes of e-bikes on trails within City parks and open spaces. ANALYSIS Starting in April 2022, the PRC Ad Hoc met numerous times to discuss and prepare a draft Open Space and Parks Electric Bicycle and Electric Conveyances Policy (Policy). The Ad Hoc identified several important factors to consider while developing the Policy: •Environmental and ecological impacts •Safety •Public access •Equity •Recreation •Enforceability •Clarity and simplicity •Compatibility with regional policies •Public demand and opposition •Bicycle transportation corridors Stakeholder Input On September 22, 2022, staff and the Ad Hoc met with Transportation staff to discuss and collect their feedback on the draft Policy. On October 3, 2022, staff and the Ad Hoc met with the Chair and Vice Chair of the Palo Alto Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC) to collect their feedback on the draft Policy. On October 25, 2022, the PRC reviewed the draft Policy (Staff Report). There was general support for the draft Policy. One issue that the PRC discussed was the PABAC Chair and Vice Chair’s recommendation that e-bikes be allowed on the unpaved trails at the Baylands Nature Preserve. Three commissioners noted that they would support allowing Class 1 e-bikes on the unpaved trails at the Baylands. On November 1, 2022, PABAC reviewed the draft Policy and passed the following motion (15:0:1): PABAC does not approve the draft E-bike guidelines for Palo Alto’s Open Spaces and Parks presented to us for review on Nov. 1. We (PABAC) recognize that e-bikes are becoming more ITEM 7 Staff Report Item 7: Page 4 Packet Page 240 of 792 1 4 0 5 popular and there is a need to create some guidelines. We (PABAC) urge the PRC to wait until the completion of the BPTP Update before submitting their recommendations to Council. The Bicycle Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) Update is scheduled to begin in early 2023 and take between 18 to 24 months to complete. PABAC formed a subcommittee to work on e-bikes. On November 10, 2022, staff and the Ad Hoc met with Transportation staff to collect additional feedback on the draft Policy. Transportation staff explained that the 2020 Safe Routes to School Elementary Parent Survey e-Bike Data shows approximately 10% e-bike ownership, and 2022 Safe Routes to School Middle/High School Travel Tally Student e-Bike Data reveals approximately 0.5% e-bike ownership. Transportation staff recommend basing bicycle restrictions on Open Space and Park trails on speed and not class, due to the challenges of discerning a bike based on its class type. They also stressed the importance of allowing e-bike commutes on park trails to support students using e-bikes to get to school and meeting the City’s sustainability goals. The Ad Hoc incorporated this feedback into an updated draft Policy. On November 22, 2022, the Ad Hoc met with the PABAC Subcommittee and Chair. There was general support for the updated draft Policy. One area of disagreement is that the PABAC members argue that e-bikes should be allowed on unpaved trails at the Baylands Nature Preserve. The Ad Hoc argued that local access and regional transportation corridors are supported at the Baylands with e-bike access on paved trails from the Friendship Bridge to Shoreline Park (Baylands Nature Preserve Trail Map), and that limiting e-bikes to paved Open Space trails allows for local access to the Baylands, prioritizes ecological preservation, and is consistent with the policy of neighboring agencies, particularly MROSD. The Ad Hoc and the PABAC Subcommittee agreed to continue to meet to discuss e-bikes. Parks and Recreation Commission Recommended Policy Update In recommending an e-bike policy, the PRC seeks to balance competing priorities, including transportation corridors, community recreation, enjoyment of nature, habitat and wildlife protection, safety, and enforceability. Local access and regional transportation corridors are supported at the Baylands with e-bike access on paved trails from the Friendship Bridge to Shoreline Park. Limiting e-bikes to paved Open Space trails allows for local access to the Baylands, prioritizes ecological preservation, and is consistent with the policy of neighboring agencies, particularly MROSD. The PRC recommends improving e-bike policy communication and education to support this policy recommendation. This should include improved and increased signage (speed limit, trail rules and etiquette) and website enhancements. ITEM 7 Staff Report Item 7: Page 5 Packet Page 241 of 792 1 4 0 5 The PRC supports a common policy for all e-bikes, without differentiating between e-bike classes. This recommendation change is based in part on further consultation with Transportation staff, advocating an e-bike usage policy promoting safe speed behavior, rather one based on e-bike classification. Distinguishing between different classes of e-bikes is difficult, if not impossible. A common policy for all e-bikes provides simplicity for pedestrians and cyclists to understand, encourages community compliance and support. The common policy also simplifies staff’s ability to explain and enforce e-bike usage regulations. The PRC and staff recognize e-bike and other electric conveyance usage is evolving. Continued monitoring of impacts, learning from the experiences of neighboring agencies, and feedback from City resources and community outreach will help inform future updates to the Policy. Agencies and City resources will include MROSD, PABAC, and the City/School Transportation Committee, and the BPTP Update (once it is completed). In consideration of the recent clarification about class 1 and 2 e-bikes being allowed on Palo Alto trails and the pending State legislation that will also allow class 3 e-bikes on Palo Alto trails, the Ad Hoc and staff believe a more immediate action is needed. On November 22, 2022, PRC voted unanimously (7:0) to recommend that City Council adopt an update to ordinance 22.04.220 to regulate the use of electric bicycles and electric coasting devices (Attachment A), and that the City Manager adopt the updated Parks and Open Space Regulation R1-18 and R1-37 to regulate electric bicycles and electric coasting devices in specific areas (Attachment B) (Staff Report). The Parks and Open Space Regulations are consistent with the following Policy: Open Space Policy •All e-bikes (class 1,2, and 3) are allowed on paved roads and trails and are prohibited elsewhere including on unpaved roads and trails. •All e-bikes (class 1,2, and 3) are allowed for city staff in open space and parks for maintenance and enforcement purposes, consistent with P.A.M.C. 22.04.150(f). •Other electric powered mobility devices are allowed on paved roads and trails at the Baylands Nature Preserve and are prohibited in other open space preserves (Pearson- Arastradero Preserve, Foothills Nature Preserve, and Esther Clark Park). Parks Policy ITEM 7 Staff Report Item 7: Page 6 Packet Page 242 of 792 1 4 0 5 •All e-bikes (class 1, 2, and 3) are allowed on paved and unpaved trails in parks, and are prohibited elsewhere (turf, sports courts, playgrounds, landscaped areas, etc.) in parks. •Other electric powered mobility devices are allowed on paved and unpaved trails in parks, and are prohibited elsewhere (turf, sports courts, playgrounds, landscaped areas, etc.) in parks. Open Space and Parks Policy •R1-20. TRAIL USE SPEED LIMIT will apply to e-bikes and other electric powered mobility devices. •The maximum speed for all trail uses is 15 miles per hour, unless a lesser maximum speed is posted, and no person shall exceed the maximum speed on any trail; however, no person shall operate a bicycle, e-bike, or other electric powered mobility device, or ride a horse or other such animal at a speed greater than is reasonable, prudent, or safe. Bicyclists, e-bike and other electric powered mobility device users, and equestrians are required to slow to 5 miles per hour when passing others or approaching blind turns. •When not in use, e-bikes and other electric powered mobility devices: o Should be parked in designated parking areas when available. o May not be left unattended on trails, vegetation, landscaped areas, or vehicle parking areas. o Are not allowed to interfere with access or use of any open space and park trail, turf, playground, sports court, facility, or amenity (park bench, picnic table, etc.). Note: these same guidelines apply to regular bikes. •The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) overlays all city policies and is specific to each individual person who may need an adjustment of city policy or regulation. People may contact Community Services Department staff to make an ADA access request pertaining to this policy. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT If City Council adopts the recommendation in this staff report, staff will purchase and install new signs (speed limit, trail rules and etiquette). The approximate cost for the signs will be $10,000. The FY 2023 Adopted Capital Budget Project Benches, Signage, Walkways, Perimeter Landscaping, and Site Amenities (PG-06003) has sufficient funding to purchase and install the signs in the current fiscal year, with no additional budgetary action required. ITEM 7 Staff Report Item 7: Page 7 Packet Page 243 of 792 1 4 0 5 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The following community meetings and hearings were held to obtain public input on the proposed policy: •April 2022 to November 2022—numerous meetings with PRC Ad Hoc Committee and staff •October 25, 2022--Parks and Recreation Commission meeting •November 1, 2022-- PABAC meeting •November 22, 2022-- Ad Hoc and PABAC Subcommittee meeting •November 22, 2022-- Parks and Recreation Commission meeting ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This ordinance is categorically exempt from CEQA under CEQA regulation 15301 (existing facilities). ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Amendment to PAMC 22.04.220 to regulate electric bicycles and electric coasting devices in City parks and open spaces Attachment B: Amendment to Open Space and Parks Regulations APPROVED BY: Kristen O'Kane, Community Services Director Report #: 2301-0723 ITEM 7 Staff Report Item 7: Page 8 Packet Page 244 of 792 *NOT YET APPROVED* 1 262_20221220_ts24 Ordinance No. ___ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 22.04.220 (Bicycles and animals) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prohibit the Use of Electric Bicycles in the City’s Parks Except as Permitted by Regulation. The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and declarations. A. California Vehicle Code section 21207.5 prohibits the use of motorized bicycles and Class 3 electric bicycles “on a bicycle path or trail, bikeway, bicycle lane established pursuant to Section 21207, equestrian trail, or hiking or recreational trail, unless it is within or adjacent to a roadway or unless the local authority or the governing body of a public agency having jurisdiction over the path or trail permits, by ordinance, that operation.” B. In 2022, the State of California approved AB 1909, which amended California Vehicle Code section 21207.5 to allow the use of Class 3 electric bicycles in the areas listed above unless an agency adopts an ordinance prohibiting such use. This amendment will be effective January 1, 2023. C. The City Council now desires to adopt this ordinance to ensure the City can retain its authority to prohibit the use of electric bicycles in certain park and open space areas as permitted by AB 1909 and California Vehicle Code section 21207.5 as amended. SECTION 2. Section 22.04.220 (Bicycles and animals) of Chapter 22.04 (Parks and Recreation Building Use and Regulations) of Title 22 (Parks) is hereby amended as follows (new text in underline, deleted text in strikethrough): 22.04.220 Bicycles and animals. (a) No person shall operate, drive or ride a bicycle, electric bicycle (e-bike), unicycle, skateboard, roller skates, scooter, jogging stroller or other coasting device (including electric coasting devices), horse or any other animal in a park or open space lands except on established paths or walkways, unless as expressly permitted to do so pursuant to park regulations. (b) Persons riding horses shall properly dispose of horse manure dropped from the animal they are riding by removing it to the side of the levee, trail or road. (c) No person shall operate or use a skateboard, roller skates, scooter, jogging stroller or other coasting device in open space lands except on the Renzel Trail and other paved off-road multi- use trails. 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 ITEM 7 Attachment A - Amendment to PAMC 22.04.220 Regulate Electric Bicycles and coasting devices in City Parks and Open Spaces Item 7: Page 9 Packet Page 245 of 792 *NOT YET APPROVED* 2 262_20221220_ts24 regard to whether any portion of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. The Council finds that this project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under sections 15301 (Existing Facilities). SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ Assistant City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Community Services ITEM 7 Attachment A - Amendment to PAMC 22.04.220 Regulate Electric Bicycles and coasting devices in City Parks and Open Spaces Item 7: Page 10 Packet Page 246 of 792 1 City of Palo Alto PARK AND OPEN SPACE REGULATIONS (Last Updated December 2022) Contents R1-1. DEFINITIONS................................................................................................................... 2 R1-2. APPLICABILITY ............................................................................................................... 2 R1-3. CLOSURE OF FACILITIES - AUTHORITY ....................................................................... 2 R1-4. CONTENTS OF PERMIT APPLICATION; SUBMISSION ................................................. 3 R1-5. ACTION ON PERMIT APPLICATION ............................................................................... 3 R1-6. FOOTHILLS PARK – RESERVATIONS AND VEHICLE ENTRY ...................................... 4 R1-7. PERMIT – EXHIBITION .................................................................................................... 5 R1-8. HOURS OF PARK CLOSURE .......................................................................................... 5 R1-9. HAZARDOUS GAMES OR ACTIVITIES ........................................................................... 5 R1-9A. USE OF METAL DETECTORS IN PARKS .................................................................... 6 R1-10. PICNIC SITE USAGE ..................................................................................................... 6 R1-10A. LYTTON, COGSWELL AND KING PLAZA................................................................... 6 R1-10B. LYTTON PLAZA NOISE REGULATION ....................................................................... 7 R1-11. RACQUET COURT (TENNIS AND PICKLEBALL) USAGE ............................................ 7 R1-12. ATHLETIC FIELD USE ................................................................................................... 8 R1-13. PEERS PARK AND JOHNSON PARK VOLLEYBALL USE ............................................ 8 R1-14. SKATEBOARD FACILITY .............................................................................................. 9 R1-15. GOLF COURSE ............................................................................................................. 9 R1-16. SWIMMING .................................................................................................................... 9 R1-17. BOAT USE ....................................................................................................................11 R1-18. BICYCLES, SKATEBOARDS AND ROLLER SKATES ..................................................12 R1-19. HUMAN FLIGHT ...........................................................................................................13 R1-20. TRAIL USE SPEED LIMITS ..........................................................................................13 R1-20A. USE OF DESIGNATED TRAILS, PATHS AND RECREATIONAL LAWN AREAS IN OPEN SPACE LANDS ..............................................................................................................13 R1-21. COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES AND SOLICITATION ........................................................13 R1-21A. COMMERCIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AND FILMING .......................................................13 R1-22. RESTROOMS ...............................................................................................................14 R1-23. UNAUTHORIZED USE OF KEYS OR LOCKS ..............................................................14 R1-24. WATER POLLUTION ....................................................................................................15 R1-25. HARMFUL SUBSTANCES ............................................................................................15 R1-26. LITTERING ...................................................................................................................15 R1-27. DISPOSAL OF EFFLUENT ...........................................................................................15 ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 11 Packet Page 247 of 792 2 R1-28. SMOKING .....................................................................................................................15 R1-29. FIREWORKS.................................................................................................................15 R1-30. ANIMALS ......................................................................................................................15 R1-31. NUISANCE DOGS ........................................................................................................16 R1-32. DOG EXERCISE AREA ................................................................................................17 R1-33. UNAUTHORIZED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ........................................................17 R1-34. USE OF UTILITIES .......................................................................................................17 R1-35. GATHERING WOOD IN OPEN SPACE AREAS ...........................................................17 R1-36. PARKING RESTRICTIONS ...........................................................................................17 R1-37. OPERATION OF MOTOR VEHICLES ...........................................................................18 R1-37A. VEHICLE WEIGHT LIMIT ON BAYLANDS ROADS AND PARKING LOTS ................18 R1-38. VIOLATION – PENALTY ...............................................................................................18 R1-39. PLAYGROUNDS ...........................................................................................................19 R1-40. COMMUNITY GARDENS ..............................................................................................19 R1-1. DEFINITIONS The following words and phrases, whenever used in these regulations, shall be construed as defined in these regulations. A. "City" means the City of Palo Alto. B. "department" means the Community Services Department of the City. C. "facility" or "park facility" means any body of water, land, campsite, garden, trail, levee, recreation area, building, structure, system, equipment, machinery or other appurtenance owned, managed, controlled or operated by the Community Services Department. D. “director” means the Director of Community Services of the City. R1-2. APPLICABILITY The provisions of these regulations apply to all facilities under the jurisdiction of the Community Services Department. R1-3. CLOSURE OF FACILITIES - AUTHORITY The director shall have the authority to close any park facility or portion thereof and require the exit of all persons therein when he or she determines that conditions exist in said facility or portion thereof which presents a hazard to the facility or to public safety. No person shall use, enter or remain in any facility, Park or Open Space which has been posted as being closed under this authority. A. The Open Space, Parks and Golf Division Manager shall have the authority to close Open Space trails which have been designated as “seasonal trails” when weather conditions predispose the trail or surrounding habitat to damage or erosion. Such trail closures will be posted on park bulletin boards and at the affected trail junctions. B. The Open Space, Parks and Golf Division Manager shall have the authority to temporarily close Open Space trails or facilities when the damage of flora or fauna are threatened by humans or their pets. Such facility closures will ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 12 Packet Page 248 of 792 3 be posted on park bulletin boards and at affected trail junctions or facilities. R1-4. CONTENTS OF PERMIT APPLICATION; SUBMISSION Whenever a permit is required by provision in these regulations, an application shall be filed with the director stating: A. The name of each applicant, sponsoring organization and the person(s) who is in charge of or responsible for the proposed activity; B. The address and telephone numbers of each person and/or entity named in subsection (A); C. The name of the Park, Open Space land, building, field or tennis courts requested for the activity, specifically identifying the location of the activity within the park or room within the building; D. The date and starting time of the proposed activity, together with the anticipated arrival time of guests; The finish time of the proposed activity, including cleanup; E. The number of persons expected to attend the activity; F. Additional City facilities requested, such as personnel, tables, chairs, etc; G. The nature of the proposed activity or activities, including equipment and vehicles to be brought into the Park or Open Space lands; nature and duration of the use of such equipment; nature and duration of the use of any amplified sound; whether fees or donations for service will be solicited or collected; and whether alcohol will be served. H. Proof of Palo Alto residency may be required for the permit application. I. The necessity for street closure in order to hold an event. J. The permit application shall be filed with the director by no later than seven (7) days prior to the date of the special event. R1-5. ACTION ON PERMIT APPLICATION The director shall issue a permit within five (5) business days after submission of a completed application if: A. The proposed activity or use of the facility will not unreasonably interfere with or detract from the general public enjoyment of the facility; B. A facility with the required occupancy load capacity is available; C. All conditions, including, where applicable, the payment of fees, approval of the Director of Community Services and insurance coverage, security deposits and/or requirements are met; D. The proposed activity or use will not entail unusual, extraordinary or burdensome expense or security operation by the department; E. If the proposed special event will have more than twenty-five (25) individuals in attendance, involve road closures, traffic control, or the need for inter- departmental review (for example, for a “fun run” or a “live music” event), an additional City-wide special event application from the Police Department may be required for the event. City-wide special event permit applications are not generally required for standard picnic reservations. Completed City-wide special event permit applications may be filed as early as one year before the event but must be received no later than 30 days before the actual event date, and no later than 90 days before the actual date of the event if the event requires a street closure. ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 13 Packet Page 249 of 792 4 F. The facilities desired have not been reserved for other use; G. Special conditions requested in applications are reasonable and feasible. H. The proposed activity will not negatively impact habitat, wildlife, or vegetation in the Park or Open Space area. I. Residency requirements, if any, have been satisfied. R1-6. FOOTHILLS PARK – RESERVATIONS AND VEHICLE ENTRY A. Resident Reservation Preference. The Towle Campground, Oak Grove Group Picnic Area, and the Interpretive Center meeting room at Foothills Park shall have Resident Reservation Preference in making reservations. No other facility existing as of December 2020 shall have Resident Reservation Preference. Resident Reservation Preference shall be one that permits residents to have access to reservations for no longer than the first 25% of the time period during which reservations for the subject facility may be made. Thus, if the facility in question is made available for reservation by residents for 4 weeks’ time prior to the date of the reservation, the facility must be made available for reservation by non-residents for at least 3 weeks’ time before the date of reservation. (Note: This rule is governed by the 2020 settlement agreement regarding Foothills Park). B. Vehicle Entry Fee. All motor vehicles entering Foothills Park shall be subject to a vehicle entry fee within the limits set by the Municipal Fee Schedule and according to the fees set below. Violators shall be subject to administrative citation for failure to comply with park regulations per PAMC 22.04.030. This regulation does not apply to City councilmembers, staff, contractors, or volunteers while conducting official City business/operations in Foothills Park. Foothills Nature Preserve Vehicle Entry Fee Foothills Nature Preserve – daily entry for vehicles that have up to 9 person capacity • $6 per vehicle per day; • Free for City-designated preserve volunteers, and vehicles with a valid disabled person parking placard or license plate. Free on the following days: • First Saturday in December • Third Monday in January (MLK Day) • First Tuesday in March • Last Wednesday in April • Third Thursday in June • First Friday in October Foothills Nature Preserve – daily entry for vehicles that have 10-24 person capacity $30 per vehicle per day Foothills Nature Preserve – daily entry for vehicles that have 25 person or more capacity $60 per vehicle per day (Only available in conjunction with group permit) ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 14 Packet Page 250 of 792 5 Foothills Nature Preserve – annual pass for motor vehicles (Annual pass allows entry for a motor vehicle with a capacity of up to 9 persons) • $65 per year for non-residents; • $50 per year for Palo Alto residents and City of PA employees; • 25% discount for seniors (65+); • 50% discount for students aged 16-24 (student must be present when entering) • Free for active military, veterans, permanent disability, and low-income visitors Foothills Nature Preserve – daily entry for vehicles in conjunction with a City- permitted student field trip Free Foothills Nature Preserve – library free pass program Free regular vehicle (up to 9 person capacity) entry with pass. Passes available at Palo Alto libraries, subject to conditions on pass. Foothills Nature Preserve – fourth grade annual pass program Free. Valid for one year, beginning in August of the year the student begins 4th grade and ending the following August 31. Pass allows entry of one regular vehicle (up to 9 person capacity) when 4th grader is present. R1-7. PERMIT – EXHIBITION No person shall fail to produce and exhibit a permit he or she claims to have upon request of any department employee, contracted park ranger or any public or peace officer who desires to inspect the permit for the purpose of enforcing compliance with any regulations of this chapter. R1-8. HOURS OF PARK CLOSURE For purposes of enforcement of the Park and Open Space closure restrictions promulgated in Chapter 22.04 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the terms “sunset” and “sunrise” are defined with reference to a table of times that is determined annually and posted at Open Space facilities. Closure times specified in Chapter 22.04 as implemented by this regulation shall be posted prominently at each Park or Open Space facility and shall be posted on the City’s web site. R1-9. HAZARDOUS GAMES OR ACTIVITIES The playing of games and/or activities involving propelled or thrown objects which are sharp or heavy (such as stones, shot puts, arrows or javelins) are prohibited except when a permit is issued by the director in areas compatible for such use. Except in designated areas of Mitchell Park where inflatable structures can be used by City staff or designated contractors as part of a City-sponsored program, inflatable structures, miniature trains designed or used for passengers, pony rides, and dunking tank attractions are prohibited in Parks or Open Space areas. ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 15 Packet Page 251 of 792 6 R1-9A. USE OF METAL DETECTORS IN PARKS Metal detectors for the purpose of scavenging can only be used within park facilities in such a fashion where turf or landscaped areas are not disturbed, cut or dug into. R1-10. PICNIC SITE USAGE Group picnic site reservations at Mitchell Park Arbor, East Meadow, Pine Grove and Redwood areas; and Rinconada Park Sequoia area are available to Palo Alto residents only. No more than 60 individuals shall occupy a group picnic site at Mitchell Park Arbor, East Meadow and Redwood areas; 100 individuals at the Pine Grove picnic area; 75 individuals at Rinconada Park Sequoia picnic area; or 150 individuals at Foothills Park Oak Grove. No more than 15 individuals shall occupy any table in an individual picnic site at Mitchell Park and Rinconada Park. With the exception of the two table/one barbecue at individual picnic sites of Mitchell Park, each group of participants shall not occupy more than one individual site. R1-10A. LYTTON, COGSWELL AND KING PLAZA A. Use of tables: For permitted events and activities, no more than four six-foot tables are permitted at one time at Cogswell Plaza; no more than ten six-foot tables are permitted at Lytton Plaza; and no more than twenty six-foot tables are permitted at King Plaza. Tables shall not be arranged in a configuration longer than twelve-foot wide span and there must be a minimum of three-feet between sets. B. The City shall be compensated the full cost of replacement of any chair, tables or other furnishings damaged by the event or special use. C. Special event organizers must cover existing trash receptacles and provide their own waste stations (compost/recycle/trash) that they will then be responsible for removing after the event. D. Damage deposits may be required for any special event or use at the discretion of City staff. E. No tables, tents or other structures shall be set up closer than ten (10) feet from the nearest structure. F. Shade canopies may be authorized in a permit so long as the shade structure measures ten-foot by ten-foot, or less. Canopies shall be weighted or anchored to prevent blowing over. G. Stage platforms shall be no higher than twenty-four inches tall and ten-feet by twelve-feet in maximum area. H. As per the Chapter 22.04 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, no alcoholic beverages may be served or consumed at these plaza parks. I. No barricades or cordoning off areas of the plaza. J. No jump/bounce houses are permitted on plaza. K. Special event organizers must supply a layout of all items to be placed within plaza and be approved by City staff before the event. L. As per Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 22.04.160, no commercial solicitation or business transactions other than those associated with and supportive of City programs or City-sponsored activities for which a permit has been issued by the director is permitted in parks or plazas. M. As per Palo Alto Municipal Code section 22.04.300, open flames, including candles, are not allowed without a permit from the Director in these Plazas. ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 16 Packet Page 252 of 792 7 R1-10B. LYTTON PLAZA NOISE REGULATION A. A permit under Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 22.04.040 is not required of any person in order to engage in the playing of an amplified musical instrument at Lytton Plaza, which otherwise meets the requirements of sections 9.10.050 and 22.04.180 and subject to the following: the playing of an amplified musical instrument occurs on a first-come, first-served basis during the following days and times of day: (a) Monday through Thursday, 5:00 PM to 10:00 PM; (b) Friday, 5:00 PM to 11:00 PM; (c) Saturday, noon to 11:00 PM; and Sunday, noon to 10:00 PM. The term “first-come, first-served” means the first person or group of persons to commence playing an amplified musical instrument at Lytton Plaza shall be entitled to play to the exclusion of all others for a period not exceeding three (3) consecutive hours. B. A City-wide special event permit application is required of any person seeking to engage in the playing of an amplified musical instrument at Lytton Plaza outside of the days and times of day specified in paragraph A above. No unpermitted amplified musical instrument may be played during the period of time for which a person holds a permit to play an amplified musical instrument. C. Paragraph A notwithstanding, a person may file a City-wide special event permit application to play an amplified musical instrument within the time period specified in R1-4. If a City-wide special event permit is issued, the permit holder’s right to play any musical instrument at Lytton Plaza will take precedence over any person claiming the right to play under the first-come, first-served basis condition set forth in paragraph A of this Rule. D. The director will post or caused to be posted to the department’s web site the days and times of days for which reservations to play musical instruments have been secured. E. The preceding paragraphs notwithstanding, the playing of any acoustic musical instrument at Lytton Plaza is permitted during posted park use hour or, if no hours are posted, during the regular park use hours. F. A City-wide special event permit application shall be filed whenever a group of more than twenty-five (25) persons attends the playing of any musical instrument or musical instruments regardless of whether any instrument is amplified or acoustic. G. The noise ordinances set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code chapters 9.10 and 22.04 shall apply to all persons playing amplified and acoustic musical instruments at Lytton Plaza. R1-11. RACQUET COURT (TENNIS AND PICKLEBALL) USAGE Any person or group using a City racquet court shall do so according to the following rules: A. No person shall operate, drive or ride a bicycle, unicycle, roller skates, roller blades, skateboard or other coasting device on City-owned tennis courts. B. No person shall provide or offer lessons for compensation on City-owned tennis courts except as part of a City-sponsored program, class or camps. C. City-owned racquet courts may be reserved for City programs and tournament play only. D. All players must use the court control board to determine which court they shall ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 17 Packet Page 253 of 792 8 play on and their playing position. E. No individual person can occupy a court by him or herself if other persons are waiting to play. F. Unleashed dogs are not permitted within courts. G. No person shall play a sport other than tennis or pickleball on City-owned courts unless expressly allowed via permit issued by the Community Services Department. H. Mitchell Park racquet courts 6 and 7 are dual-use courts with designated pickleball and tennis times. Pickleball has priority from 8:00 AM to 2:30 PM seven days a week. Tennis has priority from 3:00 PM to 10:00 PM seven days a week. If courts are not in use, anyone can use the court but must vacate the space if the priority sport arrives and needs the space. R1-12. ATHLETIC FIELD USE Any person or group using a City athletic field shall do so according to the following rules: A. No activity other than softball (or Little League baseball) is permitted at El Camino Park softball field unless expressly allowed by permit. B. No activity other than baseball is permitted at Baylands Athletic Center Baseball Field unless expressly allowed by permit. C. No activity other than softball is permitted at Baylands Athletic Center Softball Field unless expressly allowed by permit. D. No person shall use an athletic field which is posted (on-site, on-line, or by voice message) as being closed, whether the closure is for excess rainfall or for field maintenance or other reason. E. Field markings applied to athletic fields shall be allowed by permit only and must follow City of Palo Alto Open Space, Parks and Golf Division guidelines. F. Soccer goals must be anchored at all times when located on the playing fields. When goals are not being utilized for play, they must be secured off the playing fields in a manner which will not permit tipping or any hazardous condition that might cause injury to any person. When a field is being utilized for multiple purposes, goals that interfere with the intended use of the field shall be provided by the user groups that require the use of a soccer goal. These goals must be assembled and disassembled before and after each event. The storage of these goals can be coordinated with the Recreation Division. Any goal left on site will be removed and stored until a removal/storage fee of $75.00 is paid. R1-13. PEERS PARK AND JOHNSON PARK VOLLEYBALL USE Any person or group playing volleyball or related game at Peers or Johnson Parks shall do so according to the following rules: A. Drop-in volleyball or related game play is permitted only in the posted area at Johnson Park or on the north end of Peers Park. B. The volleyball area may be reserved for volleyball play, by permit, only on the first Saturday and first Thursday of each month. The director may make additional weekend days available for reservation during the months of June, July and August. ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 18 Packet Page 254 of 792 9 R1-14. SKATEBOARD FACILITY The Skateboard Facility, located in John Lucas Greer Park, is for skateboard use only. Use of roller blades, scooters, bicycles, or any other equipment other than skateboards is prohibited. Any person using or playing upon the skateboard facility shall do so according to the following rules: A. Each person skateboarding in the Skateboard Facility must wear a helmet, elbow pads and knee pads. B. Use of roller blades, scooters, bicycles, or any other equipment, other than skateboards is prohibited. C. No more than seven persons shall skate in the bowl at any given time. D. No person shall do a body flip while riding a skateboard. E. No person shall ride a skateboard facing entirely backwards. F. Two or more persons may not ride on the same skateboard. G. No person shall ride a skateboard on their knees. H. No person shall cause a skateboard to shoot out away from their feet or body. I. No persons shall skateboard in tandem within three (3) feet in front or behind another rider. J. No glass containers are allowed in the facility. K. No skateboarding is allowed when the facility is wet or while it is raining. L. Trash receptacles are to be used to dispose of waste or any other unwanted items. No person shall use, remain in or enter the Skateboard Facility outside of regular park hours between 10:30 PM and sunrise (PAMC 22.04.320). No person shall enter or remain in the Skateboard Facility when that facility is posted as being closed, whether such closure is because of excess moisture or hazard or for any other reason. R1-15. GOLF COURSE Any person or group using or playing upon the golf course shall do so according to the following rules: A. No person shall use the golf course, or any portion thereof, without first having obtained a receipt or other written authorization in due form so to do. B. No golf player shall cut in on, or double back over, any portion of the course, or to play upon the course without a receipt duly issued for the round being played. C. No golf player shall refuse to or fail to show such golf receipt or other written authorization to any employee connected with the municipal golf course, when requested to do so. D. No person shall willfully or maliciously injure any turf on the golf course or in any way destroy or injure property thereon or remove property or equipment from the golf course. E. Privately owned power golf carts are not allowed to be used on the municipal golf course. R1-16. SWIMMING No person shall swim, bathe or wade in any water or waterways within any park facility when such activity is prohibited and so posted by the director. No person shall use, remain in or enter the Rinconada Pool facility between the hours listed as follows: January 1 through June 15 9:00 PM – 6:00 AM. June 16 through December 31 10:00 ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 19 Packet Page 255 of 792 10 PM – 6:00 AM. Rules for the safe use of the Rinconada Swimming complex: A. Children 7 years of age and younger must be directly supervised by a chaperone 16 years of age or older. Chaperones must wear a swimsuit, accompany the child in the water and be within arm’s length at all times. Children may not be left unattended in the facility at any time. B. All swimmers must wear swimsuits. Clothing including undergarments is not permitted. Clean overshirts are permitted for modesty or sun protection as long as they are worn over swimsuits. Infants and toddlers who are not yet toilet trained must wear swim diapers. C. Flotation devices including water wings, padded swimsuits and inner tubes are not permitted except US Coast Guard approved lifejackets. D. Flippers, snorkel masks, and hard balls are not permitted. E. All persons entering the facility must pay, including those not intending to swim, except children 2 years of age and younger. F. Patrons must pay again to re-enter the facility after leaving. G. Walk at all times on the pool deck. H. Bicycles, rollerblades, scooters, and skateboards are not permitted on the pool deck. I. Dogs, cats and other animals are not permitted on the pool deck (does not apply to service animals as defined by state and federal law). J. Fighting, roughhousing, chicken fighting, screaming, profane language, and pretending to drown is not permitted in the facility. K. Patrons are not permitted to sit on guard chairs, lane lines, starting blocks or railings. L. Barbecues, alcohol and glass/breakable containers are not permitted in the facility. M. Food and drinks must be consumed at picnic tables, on grass and farther than 10 feet from poolside. N. Heed instructions from Lifeguards and overhead announcements at all times. O. Aquatics staff reserves the right to ask anyone who violates these rules to leave the facility. P. To maintain a safe environment, pool rules are subject to change at any time. Lap Pool: A. Swimmers must be able to swim competently for at least one lap to enter the deep end and/or use the diving boards. Lifeguards have sole discretion. Please ask for a swim test. B. Lap swimmers using lap lanes during recreation swim may use flippers, kickboards and snorkels as needed. Flippers, kickboards and snorkels are not permitted outside of the lap swim lanes. Non-lap swimmers are not permitted to swim across lap lanes. Diving boards: A. One person on the board and ladder at a time. B. Wait to dive until area is clear. C. Walk or perform a proper diving approach. Do not run on the diving board. D. Bounce only once and jump/dive off the end of the board facing forward. ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 20 Packet Page 256 of 792 11 E. Divers may not jump to anyone in the pool and must swim to the wall unassisted. After diving, swim out toward the closest ladder. Do not swim under, between or in front of the diving boards. Wading Pool: A. Swimmers must be able to reach the foot pedals to use the “Aquaducks.” Pedaling with hands is not permitted. B. Swimmers may not sit on or otherwise block the water pressure of the fountains. Slide: A. Swimmers must be no taller than the slide to use it. B. One person is permitted on the slide and ladder at a time. Form line on the ground. C. Do not stand, jump or push other swimmers off the top of the slide. D. Swimmers must go down slide sitting, feet first. R1-17. BOAT USE The dock at Foothills Park and the sailing platform at the Baylands Nature Preserve is intended for the hand launching of canoes, kayaks, small inflatable boats and boats less than sixteen feet in length. The launching of any larger vessel is prohibited. While hand carts may be used to carry boats from the parking lot to the dock or sailing platform, hand carts or other personal equipment may not be used on the docks or left unattended in the immediate vicinity of the dock or sailing platform. Items left unattended will be impounded by a park ranger or police officer. A. Sail boards, sail craft and motorized boats are prohibited on Boronda Lake in Foothills Park. ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 21 Packet Page 257 of 792 12 R1-18. BICYCLES, SKATEBOARDS AND ROLLER SKATES A. Bicycles and coasting devices are permitted or prohibited as follows: Conventional bicycle (non-motorized or electric) Class 1, 2, and 3 electric bicycle Non-electric coasting devices (incl. skateboards, roller skates/ blades, scooters) Electric powered coasting devices Open Space Preserves (Baylands, Esther Clark, Foothills, Pearson-Arastradero) Permitted in designated areas within Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, Esther Clark Park, and Baylands Nature Preserve; prohibited elsewhere. Permitted on paved trails; prohibited elsewhere (including unpaved trails) Permitted on paved, multi-use bike paths; prohibited elsewhere. Permitted on paved roads and trails at Baylands Nature Preserve; prohibited elsewhere. Parks Permitted on paved and unpaved trails; prohibited elsewhere (including courts, playgrounds, landscaped areas). Permitted on paved and unpaved trails; prohibited elsewhere (including courts, playgrounds, landscaped areas). Permitted on paved and unpaved trails; prohibited elsewhere (including courts, playgrounds, landscaped areas). Permitted on paved and unpaved trails; prohibited elsewhere (including courts, playgrounds, landscaped areas). Definitions: “Electric powered coasting devices” means skateboards, scooters, one-wheels, hoverboards, Segways, and other similar devices that are powered or power-assisted by an electric motor. This does not include electric wheelchairs. “Conventional coasting devices” means skateboards, scooters, and other similar devices that are not powered or power-assisted by an electric motor. This does not include wheelchairs. “Electric bicycle” means any of three classes of electric bicycles, as defined by the California Vehicle Code: • A “class 1 electric bicycle,” or “low-speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour. • A “class 2 electric bicycle,” or “low-speed throttle-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that may be used exclusively to propel the bicycle, and that is not capable of providing assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour. • A “class 3 electric bicycle,” or “speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 28 miles per hour, and equipped with a speedometer. "Trail” means any established public way within city open space nature preserves and parks which appear on current city maps, city open space nature preserve maps, planning documents, trail guides and/or those trails marked with city directional signs. Trails include, but are not limited to fire roads, service roads, paths, pathways and levees. “Paved” means any designated road or trail composed of asphalt or concrete, as designated on current city open space preserve maps. “Unpaved” means designated road or trail composed of base rock, gravel, decomposed granite, or dirt, as designated on current city open space preserve maps. Note: Palo Alto open space trail maps illustrate paved and unpaved trails. Examples: Arastradero Creek Trail and Wildhorse Road (Foothills Nature Preserve) are considered unpaved. A. Bicycles are prohibited on unpaved trails of Foothills Park. Skateboards, roller skates or blades, scooters, and other coasting devices are prohibited in Foothills ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 22 Packet Page 258 of 792 13 Park. B. Bicycles are prohibited on unpaved trails of Open Space parks and preserves, unless designated for bike access within the Pearson-Arastradero and Baylands Preserves. Skateboards, roller skates or blades, or other coasting devices are prohibited in Open Space parks and preserves, except on paved, multi-use bike paths. C. Helmets: No person shall operate a bicycle or similar device on Parks or Open Space preserves without wearing an A.N.S.I. or Snell-approved bicycle helmet for head protection. No parent or guardian shall allow any child under the age of 18 to ride a bicycle without a helmet. D. Unsafe operation: No person shall operate a bicycle in a reckless or negligent manner so as to endanger public property, or the life, limb, or property of any person or animal. No person shall ride in or upon a portion of a bicycle not intended for passengers. No person shall operate a bicycle while wearing earphones that interfere with hearing ambient noise. E. No person shall leave a bicycle, scooter or skateboard in any place or position where other persons may trip over or be injured by it. R1-19. HUMAN FLIGHT No person shall hang-glide, parachute, parasail or engage in any human flight on, over, or into park or Open Space, except by written permit in designated areas. R1-20. TRAIL USE SPEED LIMITS The maximum speed for all trail uses is 15 miles per hour, unless a lesser maximum speed is posted, and no person shall exceed the maximum speed on any trail; however, no person shall operate a bicycle, or ride a horse or other such animal at a speed greater than is reasonable, prudent, or safe. Bicyclists and equestrians are required to slow to 5 miles per hour when passing others or approaching blind turns. R1-20A. USE OF DESIGNATED TRAILS, PATHS AND RECREATIONAL LAWN AREAS IN OPEN SPACE LANDS No person other than authorized City staff or other persons specifically authorized by City staff shall walk, run or tread in any Open Space lands except on designated trails, paths, recreational lawn areas or roads, unless expressly permitted to do so pursuant to park regulations or a special use permit. “Designated trails” is defined as those trails which appear on current City of Palo Alto park maps, planning documents, trail guides and/or those trails marked with City directional signs. R1-21. COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES AND SOLICITATION Commercial activities are prohibited in Parks and Open Space lands unless they are associated with and supportive of City programs or City-sponsored activities for which a permit has been issued by the Director. Persons soliciting for donations or engaging in commercial activities approved by the Director shall comply with all applicable laws, including those requirements for permits issued under Title 4 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code as applicable. R1-21A. COMMERCIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AND FILMING No person shall photograph or film for commercial purposes in City Parks or Open Space ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 23 Packet Page 259 of 792 14 except pursuant to a permit authorizing such activity or except for those activities associated with and supportive of City programs or City-sponsored events. For the purpose of this section, “photograph or film for commercial purposes” means the recording, on any medium, of still or motion images that involves the use of professional models or commercial articles filmed or photographed for the purpose of commercial advertising, or the use professional casts, settings, or crews in any motion picture, television, or similar production. This section shall not apply to the commercial operation of cameras as part of the bona fide reporting of news, or for small photo or film events, consisting of a single photographer or videographer with a total group size of no more than 24 persons (permit is required for exclusive use of any area of park land), as long as all other rules and regulations are followed. A. Applications shall be submitted not less than ten (10) working days before the proposed use. B. No sound amplification equipment, which will disturb the peace, may be used in connection with any photo shoot, except when used by City employees or safety officers for purposes of crowd control. C. No permit shall be granted for any event between the hours of 8:00 PM and 9:00 AM without the prior approval of the Director. D. No permit shall be granted when the closure would result in hampering prompt access to an area or location by emergency vehicles. E. Wherever appropriate, the City will require the applicant to provide and erect barricades according to City specifications for public safety. The person or persons making the application shall be responsible for placing and dismantling all barricades. All barricades shall be removed within one-half (1/2) hour of the ending time of the event. Barricades shall also be immediately removed upon request of any authorized officer or employee of the City. In some situations, the Permittee may be required by the City to provide traffic control and a qualified flag person if City streets or parking lots are involved. R1-22. RESTROOMS Male persons shall not enter any restroom or washroom set apart for females, and female persons shall not enter any restroom or washroom set apart for males; except, this shall not apply to persons with special needs or their accompanying attendants or children under the age of six years old who are accompanied by a person who is of the sex designated for that facility and who has reason to be responsible for such person. R1-23. UNAUTHORIZED USE OF KEYS OR LOCKS No person other than one acting under the direction of the Director shall duplicate or cause to be duplicated a key used by the department for a padlock or door lock of any type or description, nor shall any person divulge the combination of any lock so equipped to any unauthorized person. No person, other than the one acting under the direction of the director, shall use a key to access any Park and/or Open Space facilities. The director may issue keys to user groups. Said user groups must use the keys for permitted activity only and return issued keys to the City upon completion of the activity. No person shall place a lock upon any gate or fence in any Park or Open Space area without prior permission from the Director. ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 24 Packet Page 260 of 792 15 R1-24. WATER POLLUTION While within the boundaries of any park facility, no person shall throw, discharge or otherwise place or cause to be placed in the waters of any fountain, pond, lake, stream, bay or other body of water or in any tributary, stream or drain flowing into such waters any substance, matter or thing, liquid or solid, including but without limitation to, particles or objects made of paper, metal, glass, garbage, rubbish, rubber, fuel, plant material, food matter, fiber and plastics. R1-25. HARMFUL SUBSTANCES No person shall possess, place, or apply any substance harmful to any person, property, wildlife, or vegetation on Park or Open Space lands. R1-26. LITTERING No person within any City Park, Open Space lands, and City operated community garden shall leave any garbage, trash, cans, bottles, papers or other refuse elsewhere than in the receptacles provided therefor. Disposing of garbage, trash, cans, bottles, papers or other refuse not generated within City Park or Open Space lands is prohibited. PAMC 22.04.230. R1-27. DISPOSAL OF EFFLUENT No person shall deposit waste water, sewage or effluent from sinks, portable toilets, or other fixtures upon or into the ground or water. R1-28. SMOKING No person shall smoke any substance in any public places or any area that is within twenty feet of bleachers, backstops, or play structures or any area designated as a playground, nature trail or nature area or in or on any park facility where smoking is posted as being prohibited. Pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Ordinance 9.14.010 (i), public places are defined as: "Public places" means enclosed areas within publicly and privately-owned buildings, structures, facilities, or complexes that are open to, used by, or accessible to the general public. Public places include, but are not limited to, stores, banks, eating establishments, bars, hotels, motels, depots and transit terminals, theaters and auditoriums, enclosed sports arenas, convention centers, museums, galleries, polling places, hospitals and other health care facilities of any kind (including clinics, dental, chiropractic, or physical therapy facilities), automotive service centers, general business offices, nonprofit entity offices and libraries. Public places further include, but are not limited to, hallways, restrooms, stairways, escalators, elevators, lobbies, reception areas, waiting rooms, indoor service lines, checkout stations, counters and other pay stations, classrooms, meeting or conference rooms, lecture rooms, buses, or other enclosed places that are open to, used by, or accessible to the general public. R1-29. FIREWORKS No person shall possess, give, sell, discharge, set off, or cause to be discharged, on or into any portion of Park or Open Space lands any firecrackers, missiles, rockets, fireworks, or explosives. R1-30. ANIMALS No person other than public or peace officers, rangers, city naturalists, animal control officers in the discharge of their duties shall: ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 25 Packet Page 261 of 792 16 A. Hunt, molest, harm, provide a noxious substance to, frighten, kill, trap, chase, tease, shoot or throw missiles at any animal within the boundaries of any park facility, nor remove nor have in his possession the young, eggs or nest of any such creature; B. Abandon any animal, dead or alive, within any park facility; C. Remove any animal not his own from within any park facility; exception is made to the foregoing in that proper season, fish may by fished and removed from areas designated for fishing by licensed persons, in accordance with the California Fish and Game Code and other related laws, and boarded horses may be removed from a park facility, upon proper notification to the department; D. Bring into or maintain in or upon any park facility any dog, cat or other animal unless such animal at all times is kept on a leash (extended no further than six (6) feet while in Open Space lands) and under full control of its owner or custodian; provided, however, the Director may designate areas and times within which persons may exercise, show, demonstrate or train unleashed animals under full control or their owners or custodians. No person shall allow a dog, cat, or domesticated animal, even if leashed, to disturb, chase, molest, injure, or take any kind of native wildlife, whether living or dead, or remove, destroy, or in any manner disturb the natural habitat of any animal on Parks or Open Space land. PAMC 22.04.155 E. Permit cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, or other animals owned by him/her or in his/her possession to graze within the boundaries of any park facility without express approval of the director; F. No person shall keep or raise cattle, horses, sheep, or other livestock on Park or Open Space land, unless pursuant to a lease, license, or other entitlement of use granted by the City of Palo Alto. G. Ride or lead a horse, pony, mule, burro or other animal onto or over any park facility, other than at times and upon roads or trails designated for riding of animals; except with approval of the Director. H. No person owning or having custody or control of any dog shall permit such dog to defecate on any public street, sidewalk, park or parkway without immediately removing the resulting excrement at the time of occurrence. The excrement so removed shall not be disposed of on any property listed in this chapter except in public refuse receptacles. Persons using service animals are exempt from this section. I. No person owning or harboring any dog or other animal shall allow or permit such dog or animal to swim, bathe or wade in any water or waterways within any park facility when such activity is prohibited and so posted by the Director. R1-31. NUISANCE DOGS No person shall allow or have on Park or Open Space land a dog that is threatening or a nuisance to people, other animals, or property. This includes, but is not limited to growling, barking, bearing of teeth, or challenging in any manner, people, animals, or property. PAMC 6.20.040 Care should be taken with leashed pets in playgrounds to ensure that their presence does not impact children’s use and they should be removed upon request from other playground users. ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 26 Packet Page 262 of 792 17 R1-32. DOG EXERCISE AREA A. Dogs may be allowed off leash only within the designated dog exercise areas in Hoover Park, Greer Park, Mitchell Park, and Peers Park. B. Dogs must be licensed, vaccinated, and wearing a collar with ID and license tag. C. Dogs must be leashed until safely inside the dog park and returned to a leash prior to exiting. D. Dog owners must remain in the fenced area and monitor and manage their dogs at all times. E. Dogs behaving aggressively must be removed from the dog park immediately. F. Dog waste must be picked up. G. Children accompanying dog owners must be closely supervised. H. No more than three dogs per person. I. No food or alcohol. J. The small dog section is for dogs 25lb and less. The mixed size dog section is for both large and small dogs. (Applicable at dog parks with this option.) K. Dog Park Hours are 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM. L. The City of Palo Alto assumes no liability for the users of this area. Use these facilities at your own risk. R1-33. UNAUTHORIZED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES No person shall deposit any earth, sand, rock, stone or other substance within any park facility, nor shall he/she dig or remove any such material from within any park facility, nor shall he/she erect or attempt to erect any building, wharf or structure of any kind by driving or setting up posts or piles, nor in any manner appropriate or encumber any portion of the real property owned by, operated, controlled or managed by the department without a permit from the director. R1-34. USE OF UTILITIES A. Electrical, phone, data communication, and cable receptacles in Parks and Open Space may only be used or accessed for private use within the terms of a special use permit granted by the Community Services Department. B. Gas fixtures, water faucet spigots and irrigation water outlets that require a key or opening device in Parks and Open Space may only be used or accessed for private use within the terms of a special use permit granted by the Community Services Department. C. Sanitary sewers or storm drains in Parks or Open Space areas may not be used for the clean-out of personal septic systems under any circumstances. R1-35. GATHERING WOOD IN OPEN SPACE AREAS Gathering wood from or possessing wood that has been gathered from Open Space areas is not permitted. R1-36. PARKING RESTRICTIONS No person shall park a motor vehicle, except an authorized emergency vehicle, or when in compliance with the directions of a peace officer, ranger, or City employee, in any of the following places: A. In areas where prohibited by "NO PARKING" or “FIRE LANE - DO NOT BLOCK” signs. ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 27 Packet Page 263 of 792 18 B. On any fire trail. C. On any equestrian or hiking trail. D. In such a place or manner as would block or obstruct any gate, entrance, or exit. E. In such a place or manner as to take up more than one marked parking space in any authorized parking area. F. In such a place or manner as to block or obstruct the free flow of traffic. G. Within 15 feet of a fire hydrant. H. Adjacent to any curb painted red. I. In any Park or Open Space land after sunset except pursuant to a written permit. J. In areas signed for permit parking on Park or Open Space land without a written permit. K. In any other place on Park or Open Space land not designated by the City as an authorized area. The gravel parking lot at the Towle Campground at Foothills Park may only be used for parking by persons with camping reservations. There is a limit of 2 vehicles for the eight person campsites and 4 vehicles for sixteen-person campsites. The parking area is restricted to passenger vehicles and small trucks. Recreational vehicles, trailers or other self-contained vehicles (regardless of size, weight or number of axles) are not allowed in the Towle Campground parking lot or beyond the gate at the edge of Orchard Glen Picnic Area. Recreation vehicles or other self-contained vehicles may not be parked in Foothills Park over-night. Non-camping guests should park in the available day-use parking lots. R1-37. OPERATION OF MOTOR VEHICLES No person shall operate, propel, or leave standing any motor vehicle on Park or Open Space land, except: A. Emergency vehicles operated within the scope of official use. B. Upon roads, trails, or paths, which may from time to time be set aside and posted by the City for the use of specifically designated vehicles. C. Upon roads and parking areas open to the public during regular open hours. D. Motor vehicle includes, but is not limited to, any vehicle as defined by section 415 and/or 670 of the California Vehicle Code, motorcycles, off-road vehicles, "dirt bikes", and similar vehicles. This section shall apply to all motorized bicycles, carts, scooters, hoverboards, skateboards, and electric personal assistive mobility devices (Segway or similar device) except those devices used by disabled persons. R1-37A. VEHICLE WEIGHT LIMIT ON BAYLANDS ROADS AND PARKING LOTS No person shall operate or park any vehicle in excess of 6,000 pounds weight on any roads or within any parking lot of the City-owned Baylands or John Fletcher Byxbee Recreational Areas. R1-38. VIOLATION – PENALTY A. The Director shall have authority to revoke a permit upon a finding of violation by the permittee or persons acting under the permit of any regulation contained in this chapter or upon a finding of violation of other City ordinance or law of this state in the exercise of the permit. B. The Director or designee shall have the authority to eject from any park facility ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 28 Packet Page 264 of 792 19 any person acting in violation of regulations contained in this chapter. R1-39. PLAYGROUNDS No person shall use personal exercise equipment, including dumbbells and exercise straps, at any playground if it inhibits children from using the playground, or if the exercise equipment negatively impacts the playground surfacing or equipment. R1-40. COMMUNITY GARDENS The City of Palo Alto provides, subject to availability and a license agreement, space for Palo Alto residents to enjoy organic gardening. All persons visiting the Community Gardens must comply with the following rules: A. No dogs are allowed within the fenced area of any garden location except service dogs. PAMC 6.16.100 B. No smoking inside the Community Garden area or on pathways around the garden. PAMC 9.14.050 C. Garden visitors must stay on designated paths, and refrain from picking any produce or flowers subject to PAMC 22.04.270. D. Wood chips at the garden are supplied only for the plot renters at the Community Garden for use within the Community Garden and shall not be removed by unauthorized persons. E. Compost bins are for Community Gardeners use only subject to PAMC 5.20.030. The Director may promulgate guidelines for the registration and use of the community gardens that do not conflict with these rules. APPROVED: City Manager Date: Director, Community Services Adopted by City Council June 24, 2002; Revised June 28, 2004; Revised January 24, 2005. Revised February 3, 2006. Revised April 14, 2008. Revised March 14, 2011. Revised November 19, 2012 Revised May 20, 2013, Revised March 5, 2018, Revised February 2, 2021. Revised June 2022. ITEM 7 Attachment B - Open Space and Park Regulations Revisions Item 7: Page 29 Packet Page 265 of 792 1 3 9 2 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: CONSENT REPORT Lead Department: Administrative Services Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Acceptance of the Macias Gini & O’Connell Audit of the City of Palo Alto’s Financial Statements as of June 30, 2022 and the Management Letter; Approval of the FY 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR); and Amendments to the FY 2022 Budget in Various Funds, as Recommended by the Finance Committee RECOMMENDATION Finance Committee and Staff recommend that the City Council: 1. Accept the City of Palo Alto’s audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022, and the accompanying reports provided by Macias Gini & O’Connell (“MGO”) LLP (Office of the City Auditor Report) Attachment I. Reports include: a. Report to the City Council (the “Management Letter”), b. Cable TV Franchise, Independent Auditor’s Report and Statements of Franchise Revenues and Expenses for the years ended December 31, 2021, and 2020, c. Palo Alto Public Improvement Corporation (a component unit of the City of Palo Alto) Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 2022, d. Regional Water Quality Control Plant, Independent Auditor’s Report and Financial Statements for the year ended June 30, 2022, e. Independent Accountant’s Report on Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures related to the Article XIII-B Appropriations (GANN) Limit for the year ended June 30, 2022. 2. Approve the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR), included in CMR 146321(Attachment B, packet page 53). An electronic copy is available on the City’s website2. 1 11/29/2022 Finance Committee Staff Report, Approval of the FY 2022 ACFR and YE Budget Amendments, pg. 53 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/finance- committee/2022/20221129/20221129pfcsm-linked.pdf#page53 2 City of Palo Alto FY 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/administrative-services/financial-reporting/comprehensive- annual-financial-reports-cafr/current-2011-cafrs/2022-acfr-final/city-of-palo-alto-acfr-fy2022-final-secured-2.pdf ITEM 8 Staff Report Item 8: Page 1 Packet Page 266 of 792 1 3 9 2 3. Amend the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Appropriation Ordinance for various funds as identified in CMR #146323 Recommended Amendments to the City Manager’s FY 2022 Budget (Attachment B packet pages 73-82); Attachment B – Exhibit 1 and various capital projects as identified in Attachment B – Exhibit 2. (Effective on first reading; five votes required.) Hard copies of linked reports within this recommendation are available upon request. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Every year, the fiscal year is closed out and the City Council publishes the City’s financial report (PAMC 2.28.200). At its November 29, 2022, meeting, the Finance Committee unanimously approved closing of the 2022 fiscal year (Attachment III). MGO issued a clean opinion on each audit report. The Appropriations Limit (or “Gann Limit”) Agreed-Upon Procedures Report noted a finding regarding the calculation of the Gann Limit. The incorrect adjustment factor was used in the calculation; staff corrected the calculation and noted that the City’s actual revenue did not exceed the corrected GANN Limit. These reports transmitted the City’s FY 2022 financials through the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ending June 30, 2022. The City also received the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting from the Government Finance Officers Association for its FY 2021 ACFR. In addition to the ACFR and audit reports, the report includes recommended budget adjustment actions to close the fiscal year. These actions adjust the budget to appropriate funds to align the budget with actual operating and capital activity, as well as adjust transfers between funds. BACKGROUND At the November 29, 2022, Finance Committee meeting, the Committee reviewed two staff reports: one transmitted by the City Auditor’s Office and one by the City Manager’s Office via the Administrative Services Department, and unanimously approved both reports for City Council consideration: 311/29/2022 Finance Committee Staff Report, Approval of the FY 2022 ACFR and YE Budget Amendments, pg. 73-82 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/finance- committee/2022/20221129/20221129pfcsm-linked.pdf#page73 ITEM 8 Staff Report Item 8: Page 2 Packet Page 267 of 792 1 3 9 2 •Office of the City Auditor: Discussion and Recommendation to the City Council to Accept the Macias Gini & O’Connell’s (MGO) Audit of the City of Palo Alto’s Financial Statements as of June 30, 2022. CMR #149844 packet pages 4-52. •Administrative Services Department: Recommendation to Approve the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and Approve FY 2022 Budget Amendments in Various Funds. CMR #14632 packet pages 53-83. In addition to these reports, the Finance Committee reviewed recommended budget adjustment actions to close the fiscal year (Attachment II, Attachment B). The Finance Committee discussed the status of the General Fund and the Budget Stabilization Reserve (BSR) balance. Compared to estimates used in the development of the FY 2023 Adopted Budget, the General Fund ended with a net $14.2 million BSR balance surplus above the Council target level of 18.5% of budgeted expenses. The BSR balance is $72.8 million, a $23.7 million or 48.3% increase compared to FY 2021. Please refer to the General Fund discussion in the Finance Committee staff report5 for information regarding the primary drivers for these General Fund results. The FY 2023 Adopted Operating Budget projected a $54.7 million BSR balance as of June 30, 2022, compared to the actual balance of $72.8 million. The BSR balance increase was driven by revenue trending higher than estimated in the City’s major tax categories and program expense, coupled with lower expenses across all departments (primarily staff costs due to vacancy). Much of this variance was forecasted and discussed as a core component of the FY 2023 Adopted Budget and two-year budget balancing strategy. Table 4 in the Finance Committee report6 outlines the already approved uses of the BSR in FY 2023 and includes FY 2023 recommended adjustments to the BSR balance to be considered by the City Council during mid-year budget review scheduled in February 2023. Including the recommended adjustments to the BSR balance, the current projected BSR balance is $45.8 million. ANALYSIS Government-wide As outlined in the staff report to the Finance Committee, at the close of FY 2022, the City’s total Net Position is $1.27 billion, an increase of $40.6 million or 3.2% over the prior fiscal year. The 4 11/29/2022 Discussion & Recommendation to the City Council to Accept MGO’s audit of the City’s FY 2022 Financial Statements. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas- minutes/finance-committee/2022/20221129/20221129pfcsm-linked.pdf#page4 5 Finance Committee, November 29, 2022, Agenda Item #2, packet page 54 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/finance- committee/2022/20221129/20221129pfcsm-linked.pdf#page=54 6 Finance Committee, November 29, 2022, Agenda Item #2, packet page 63 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/finance- committee/2022/20221129/20221129pfcsm-linked.pdf#page=63 ITEM 8 Staff Report Item 8: Page 3 Packet Page 268 of 792 1 3 9 2 total increase of $40.6 million consists of $51.0 million from governmental activities partially offset by a decrease of $10.4 million from business-type activities. The largest portion of the City’s net position ($1.175 billion or 92.4%) is its net investment in capital assets such as land, buildings, infrastructure, vehicles, and intangible assets – right to use leased assets less any related outstanding debt that was used to acquire these assets. The restricted portion of the City’s net position ($76.2 million or 6.0%) represents resources that are subject to external restrictions on how they may be used. The remaining balance of $20.0 million, across all funds, representing 1.6% of the City’s net position, is unrestricted and may be used to meet the City’s ongoing obligations to its citizens and creditors. General Fund General Fund ended with a $72.8 million Budget Stabilization Reserve (BSR), a $23.7 million, or 48.3 percent, increase when compared to FY 2021. This increase is driven mainly by both actuals higher than budgeted revenues and actuals lower than budgeted expenditures (detailed in Attachment II packet page 72). Much of this variance was forecasted, discussed, and a core component of the FY 2023 Adopted Budget and two-year budget balancing strategy. The Council recognized these higher than budgeted estimate and used these funds to bridge the transition as the City and community emerged from the pandemic while ensuring stability for the organization. The chart below outlines the already approved uses of the BSR in FY 2023. These adjustments, totaling $13.0 million, results in a BSR balance of $59.8 million; approximately 24.2% of the FY 2022 Adopted expenses of $247.4 million. This level is approximately $14.2 million above the target level of 18.5% ($45.6 million). Table 1: Year-End Budget Stabilization Reserve (BSR) Summary (in millions) General Fund BSR Balance, June 30, 2022 $72,835 Uses of the FY 2022 Surplus FY 2023 Approved Adjustments to the BSR Balance FY 2023 Adopted Budget ($9,072) FY 2023 Services Reinvestment ($3,700) Downtown Streets Team (CMR 14526)($167) Reappropriations (CMR 14728)($100) Subtotal: Approved Adjustments to the BSR Balance ($13,039) Subtotal: BSR Balance, After Approved Adjustments $59,796 FY 2023 RECOMMENDED Adjustments to the BSR Balance (to be considered in FY 2023 Mid-Year Budget) Reserve for Economic Uncertainty ($5,000) Transfer to Section 115 Pension Trust Fund ($5,000) ITEM 8 Staff Report Item 8: Page 4 Packet Page 269 of 792 1 3 9 2 Table 1: Year-End Budget Stabilization Reserve (BSR) Summary (in millions) Transfer to Infrastructure Reserve (IR) in the Capital Improvement Fund ($4,000) Subtotal: RECOMMENDED Adjustments to the BSR Balance ($14,000) Current Projected FY 2022 BSR Level, (June 30, 2023)$45,796 Micro and macro-economic conditions are adjusting daily, with rising inflation, changes in jobs, and recessionary trends creating significant uncertainty. As the State of California Legislative Analyst Office (LAO) wrote in their annual Fiscal Outlooks for California “Economic Conditions Weigh on Revenues, [the] booming economy has led to high inflation…efforts to tame inflation are slowing the economy…inflation pressures remain, raising risk of recession…fiscal outlooks revenues balance competing risks7.” Therefore, the recommended adjustments outlined in Table 1 are in line with the City Manager’s authority for transfer of excess BSR, adjusted for a recommendation to reserve funds to safeguard the stability the City has strived to achieve in the recent year by re-establishing an economic uncertainty reserve. Staff anticipates returning to Council in February 2023 with the FY 2023 Mid-Year Review and recommendations in alignment with the allocation below for the appropriation of BSR funds above the 18.5% level. Staff recommends a transfer to the Infrastructure Reserve as inflationary costs are impacting capital project needs including anticipated significant price increases in the Automated Parking Guidance Project, as well as a need to provide safety improvements to critical assets such as the artificial turf playing fields. Business Type Activities (Enterprise Funds & Internal Service Funds) As of June 30, 2022, the City’s Enterprise Funds reported a total net position of $796.8 million, a decrease of $10.4 million or 1.3% from the prior year. All funds showed positive balances: Net Investment in Capital Assets ($670.8 million), Restricted for Debt Service ($3.3 million), and Unrestricted ($122.7 million). Details that were presented at the November 29, 2022, meeting are included in Attachments I and II. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT The actions recommended in CMR 14632 (Attachment II), Attachment B, both Exhibits 1 and 2, recommend adjustments to the FY 2022 appropriated level of funds to align budgeted levels with year-end activities. Overall, these transactions ensure all funds remain in a positive financial picture. 7 The 2023-24 Budget California’s Fiscal Outlook, California Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), November 16, 2022 https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4646 ITEM 8 Staff Report Item 8: Page 5 Packet Page 270 of 792 1 3 9 2 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT This report has been prepared by the Administrative Service Department Accounting division and coordinated with the Office of the City Auditor and the Office of Management and Budget. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Council action on this item is not a project as defined by CEQA because the acceptance of the audited financial reports for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022 , approval of the ACFR for Fiscal Year 2022, and the amendment to the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Appropriation Ordinance are fiscal activities which do not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4). ATTACHMENTS Attachment I: Discussion and Recommendation to the City Council of the MGO's Audit of the City of Palo Alto’s FY 2022 Financial Statements Attachment II: Staff Report #14632, Approval of FY2022 ACFR & Budget Amendments Attachment III: Action Minutes, Finance Committee 11/29/2022 APPROVED BY: Kiely Nose, Assistant City Manager Report #: 2301-0715 ITEM 8 Staff Report Item 8: Page 6 Packet Page 271 of 792 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14984) Finance Committee Staff Report Meeting Date: 11/29/2022 Report Type: City of Palo Alto Page 1 Title: Discussion and Recommendation to the City Council Accept the Macias Gini & O’Connell’s (MGO) Audit of the City of Palo Alto’s Financial Statements as of June 30, 2022 From: City Manager Lead Department: City Auditor Recommendation The City Auditor recommends that the Finance Committee review and forward to the City Council for approval the City of Palo Alto’s audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022 and the accompanying reports provided by Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP. Discussion The City Charter requires that the City Council, through the City Auditor, engage an independent public accounting firm to conduct the annual financial audit. The selected firm reports the results of the audit, in writing, to the City Council. Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP, a certified public accounting firm, conducted the audits of the City’s financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022. The City Auditor is providing copies of the following financial statements and reports as prepared by MGO: • Auditor’s Report to the City Council (the “Management Letter”) – Attachment A • Cable TV Franchise, Independent Auditor’s Report and Statements of Franchise Revenues and Expenses for the Years Ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 – Attachment B • Palo Alto Public Improvement Corporation Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2022 – Attachment C • Regional Water Quality Control Plant Independent Auditor’s Report and Financial Statements for the Year Ended June 30, 2022 – Attachment D • Independent Accountant’s Report on Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures Related to the Article XIII-B Appropriations Limit for the Year Ended June 30, 2022 – Attachment E 1 Packet Pg. 4 ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 7 Packet Page 272 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 2 Note that the final audit report, the Single Audit, will be completed and presented at a subsequent meeting. The Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR), a separate item on this agenda, includes the following Independent Auditor’s report: • Independent Auditor’s Reports on the Financial Statements (pgs. 1-3) Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP issued a clean opinion on each audit report and reported no findings within the Agreed-Upon Procedures report. The City Auditor would like to express appreciation to Macias Gini & O’Connell LLC Administrative Services Department staff for their hard work and cooperation during the audit. Attachments: • Schedule A - Auditor's Report to the City Council • Schedule B - Cable TV Franchise Auditor's Report • Schedule C - Public Improvement Corporation Annual Financial Report • Schedule D - Regional Water Quality Control Plant Auditor's Report • Schedule E - GANN Limit Agreed Upon Procedures Report 1 Packet Pg. 5 ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 8 Packet Page 273 of 792 1.a Packet Pg. 6 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e A - A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 9 Packet Page 274 of 792 Table of Contents Page 1.a Packet Pg. 7 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e A - A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 10 Packet Page 275 of 792 www.mgocpa.com Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP 2121 N. California Boulevard, Suite 750 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Government Auditing Standards deficiency in internal control material weakness Reasonably possible Probable 1.a Packet Pg. 8 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e A - A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 11 Packet Page 276 of 792 1.a Packet Pg. 9 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e A - A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 12 Packet Page 277 of 792 Accounting for Interest Cost Incurred before the End of a Construction Period Omnibus 2020 Replacement of Interbank Offered Rates Certain Component Unit Criteria, and Accounting and Financial Reporting for Internal Revenue Code Section 457 Deferred Compensation 1.a Packet Pg. 10 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e A - A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 13 Packet Page 278 of 792 Plans – an Amendment of GASB Statements No. 14 and No. 84, and a Supersession of GASB Statement No 32 Omnibus 2022 Fair value of investments Estimated allowance for losses on notes and loans receivable Depreciation estimates for capital assets, including depreciation methods and useful lives assigned to depreciable assets Landfill post-closure liability. Net pension and Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB) liabilities, contributions, expenses, and other related balances. 1.a Packet Pg. 11 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e A - A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 14 Packet Page 279 of 792 Claims loss reserve. Discount rate used for the calculation of lease liability and lease receivable 1.a Packet Pg. 12 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e A - A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 15 Packet Page 280 of 792 Required Supplementary Information Supplementary Information and Other Sections 1.a Packet Pg. 13 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e A - A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 16 Packet Page 281 of 792 Other Information Leases 1.a Packet Pg. 14 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e A - A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 17 Packet Page 282 of 792 1.b Packet Pg. 15 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e B - C a b l e T V F r a n c h i s e A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 18 Packet Page 283 of 792 Table of Contents Page 1.b Packet Pg. 16 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e B - C a b l e T V F r a n c h i s e A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 19 Packet Page 284 of 792 www.mgocpa.com Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP 2121 N. California Boulevard, Suite 750 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Opinion Basis for Opinion Emphasis of a Matter Management’s Responsibilities for the Financial Statements 1.b Packet Pg. 17 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e B - C a b l e T V F r a n c h i s e A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 20 Packet Page 285 of 792 Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements Restriction on Use 1.b Packet Pg. 18 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e B - C a b l e T V F r a n c h i s e A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 21 Packet Page 286 of 792 1.b Packet Pg. 19 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e B - C a b l e T V F r a n c h i s e A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 22 Packet Page 287 of 792 1.b Packet Pg. 20 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e B - C a b l e T V F r a n c h i s e A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 23 Packet Page 288 of 792 1.b Packet Pg. 21 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e B - C a b l e T V F r a n c h i s e A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 24 Packet Page 289 of 792 1.c Packet Pg. 22 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 25 Packet Page 290 of 792 Table of Contents Page 1.c Packet Pg. 23 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 26 Packet Page 291 of 792 www.mgocpa.com Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP 2121 N. California Boulevard, Suite750Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Opinions Basis for Opinions Responsibilities of Management for the Financial Statements 1.c Packet Pg. 24 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 27 Packet Page 292 of 792 Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements Required Supplementary Information 1.c Packet Pg. 25 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 28 Packet Page 293 of 792 Basic Financial Statements - and Management’s Discussion and Analysis - for State and Local Governments. 1.c Packet Pg. 26 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 29 Packet Page 294 of 792 1.c Packet Pg. 27 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 30 Packet Page 295 of 792 1.c Packet Pg. 28 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 31 Packet Page 296 of 792 1.c Packet Pg. 29 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 32 Packet Page 297 of 792 1.c Packet Pg. 30 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 33 Packet Page 298 of 792 1.c Packet Pg. 31 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 34 Packet Page 299 of 792 Government-wide Statements: Fund Financial Statements: Debt Service Fund 1.c Packet Pg. 32 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 35 Packet Page 300 of 792 Restricted Net Position Restricted Fund Balance 1.c Packet Pg. 33 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 36 Packet Page 301 of 792 Leases Accounting Changes and Error Corrections – An Amendment of GASB Statement No. 62 1.c Packet Pg. 34 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 37 Packet Page 302 of 792 1.c Packet Pg. 35 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 38 Packet Page 303 of 792 1.c Packet Pg. 36 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 39 Packet Page 304 of 792 1.c Packet Pg. 37 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 40 Packet Page 305 of 792 1.c Packet Pg. 38 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e C - P u b l i c I m p r o v e m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 41 Packet Page 306 of 792 1.d Packet Pg. 39 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e D - R e g i o n a l W a t e r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l P l a n t A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 42 Packet Page 307 of 792 Table of Contents Page 1.d Packet Pg. 40 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e D - R e g i o n a l W a t e r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l P l a n t A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 43 Packet Page 308 of 792 www.mgocpa.com Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP 2121 N. California Boulevard, Suite 750 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Opinion Basis for Opinion Emphasis of a Matter Management’s Responsibilities for the Financial Statements 1.d Packet Pg. 41 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e D - R e g i o n a l W a t e r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l P l a n t A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 44 Packet Page 309 of 792 Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements Restriction on Use 1.d Packet Pg. 42 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e D - R e g i o n a l W a t e r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l P l a n t A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 45 Packet Page 310 of 792 1.d Packet Pg. 43 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e D - R e g i o n a l W a t e r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l P l a n t A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 46 Packet Page 311 of 792 1.d Packet Pg. 44 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e D - R e g i o n a l W a t e r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l P l a n t A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 47 Packet Page 312 of 792 1.d Packet Pg. 45 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e D - R e g i o n a l W a t e r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l P l a n t A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 48 Packet Page 313 of 792 1.d Packet Pg. 46 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e D - R e g i o n a l W a t e r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l P l a n t A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 49 Packet Page 314 of 792 1.d Packet Pg. 47 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e D - R e g i o n a l W a t e r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l P l a n t A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 50 Packet Page 315 of 792 1.d Packet Pg. 48 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e D - R e g i o n a l W a t e r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l P l a n t A u d i t o r ' s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 51 Packet Page 316 of 792 1.e Packet Pg. 49 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e E - G A N N L i m i t A g r e e d U p o n P r o c e d u r e s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 52 Packet Page 317 of 792 www.mgocpa.com Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP 2121 N. California Boulevard, Suite 750 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Agreed-upon Procedures Applied to the Appropriations Limit Prescribed by Article XIII-B of the California Constitution 1.e Packet Pg. 50 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e E - G A N N L i m i t A g r e e d U p o n P r o c e d u r e s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 53 Packet Page 318 of 792 1.e Packet Pg. 51 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e E - G A N N L i m i t A g r e e d U p o n P r o c e d u r e s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 54 Packet Page 319 of 792 1.e Packet Pg. 52 At t a c h m e n t : S c h e d u l e E - G A N N L i m i t A g r e e d U p o n P r o c e d u r e s R e p o r t ( 1 4 9 8 4 : M G O A u d i t o f t h e F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 ) ITEM 8 Attachment A - Recommendation to to Accept MGO's Audit of CPA ACFR FY 2022 Item 8: Page 55 Packet Page 320 of 792 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14632) Finance Committee Staff Report Meeting Date: 11/29/2022 Report Type: Action Items City of Palo Alto Page 1 Title: Approval of the FY 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and Year-End Budget Amendments in Various Funds From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Finance Committee forward to the City Council for its approval: 1. The City’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR); and 2. Amend the FY 2022 Budget Appropriation Ordinance for various funds as identified in the attached Recommended Amendments to the City Manager’s FY 2022 Budget (Operating Budget: Attachment B – Exhibit 1; Capital Budget: Attachment B – Exhibit 2). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City’s fiscal year ended on June 30, 2022, financial records closed, and financial reports summarizing the fiscal year were prepared. The reports, along with the City’s financial data, were audited by Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP (MGO), Certified Public Accountants, a firm hired by the City Auditor. MGO issued an unmodified (clean) audit opinion on the financial position of the City’s activities and, together with the City’s financial statements and other information, comprises the City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). The full report can be found in Attachment C. In addition to the ACFR, this report includes recommended budget adjustment actions to close the fiscal year. These technical actions reallocate and realign the budget to appropriate funds in alignment with actual operating and capital expenditures and revenue collected as well as adjust transfers between funds. Financial Highlights for FY 2022 Government-wide At the close of FY 2022, the City’s total Net Position is $1.27 billion, an increase of $40.6 million or 3.2% over the prior fiscal year. The Statement of Net Position (p. 31 of the ACFR) reports Governmental Activities Net Position (the City’s basic services which are generally funded by taxes, and by specific program revenues such as fees and grants) at $474.1 million, a $51.0 2 Packet Pg. 53 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 56 Packet Page 321 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 2 million increase from the prior year, and Business-Type Activities Net Position (the City’s enterprise activities which are funded in whole or in part by fees charged to external parties) at $796.8 million, a $10.4 million decrease. Various factors contributed to these changes, including accounting adjustments required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). General Fund The General Fund ended with a net Budget Stabilization Reserve (BSR) surplus of $14.2 million, compared to estimates used in the development of the FY 2023 Adopted Budget and the Council’s target reserve level of 18.5% of budgeted expenses. Overall, a total $100.1 million fund balance of both restricted and unrestricted balances is $24.4 million higher than the prior year balance of $75.6 million. The BSR is $72.8 million, a $23.7 million or 48.3% increase from FY 2021. This increase is driven by both higher than budgeted revenues and lower than budgeted expenditures. Much of this variance was forecasted, discussed, and a core component of the FY 2023 Adopted Budget and two-year budget balancing strategy to ensure continued stability for the organization and community through uncertain times. Once the BSR is adjusted for Council approved uses to balance the FY 2023 Adopted Budget1 and other needs through the first quarter of FY 2023, the City’s actual $59.8 million BSR balance is above the Council’s 18.5% target ($45.6 million) for FY 2023 by $14.2 million. Major tax revenues such as sales tax, property tax, transient occupancy tax, utility user tax, and documentary transfer tax were higher than budgeted while expense savings were realized across many of the departments (detailed in Attachment A). Although all the major taxes are higher than the Adjusted Budget, the pandemic continues to impact the City’s revenue with sales tax, transient occupancy tax, and utility user tax, remaining lower compared to pre- pandemic revenues. Business Type Activities (Enterprise Funds & Internal Service Funds) As of June 30, 2022, the City’s Enterprise Funds reported a total net position of $796.8 million, a decrease of $10.4 million or 1.3% from the prior year. All funds showed positive balances: Net Investment in Capital Assets ($670.8 million), Restricted for Debt Service ($3.3 million), and Unrestricted ($122.7 million). Internal Service Funds ended the fiscal year with $86.0 million net position balance. All funds showed positive balances except the Printing and Mailing and Workers Compensation Insurance Program Funds. The Printing and Mailing Fund reported a $0.2 million negative balance due to the pension liability per GASB 68 and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) liability per GASB 75. Workers Compensation Insurance Program Fund showed a $0.6 million negative balance due to unrealized market losses on investments. Once adjusted for these noncash transactions, both funds remain with a positive fund balance. 1 City Council June 30, 2022, Agenda Item #28; CMR #14352; https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/city-council- agendas-minutes/2022/20220620/20220620pccsm-amended-final-final.pdf#page=557 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 57 Packet Page 322 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 3 BACKGROUND The City’s fiscal year ends on June 30, at which time its financial records are closed for the year and financial reports are prepared. The reports, along with the City’s financial data, are audited by Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP (MGO), Certified Public Accountants, a firm hired by the City Auditor. MGO issues an audit opinion on the financial position of the City’s activities and, together with the City’s financial statements and other information, comprises the City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) that can be found in Attachment C. Attachment B outlines technical recommended amendments to the FY 2022 Budget. These recommended actions close the fiscal year by reallocating and realigning budget to appropriate funds for actual operating and capital expenditures and revenue collected as well as adjust transfers between funds. The General Fund Summary found in Attachment A, provides detailed information of revenue and expenditures by department. The Discussion section of this staff report includes Results by Fund which discusses position of fund balances, major revenue sources, and expense highlights. The ACFR includes government-wide statements and fund level financial statements that provide a snapshot of fund balances and activity for the year. An overview of financial results, information on how to navigate the ACFR document, and highlights of key fiscal issues affecting the City can be found in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) section (ACFR p. 5). The MD&A also provides a discussion and analysis of the City’s current fiscal health and includes financial statements and analysis compared to the prior year, along with capital asset and debt administration data. Throughout this report, pronouncements released by GASB are referred to by issuance number. For example, GASB Pronouncement No. 68 is referenced in this report as GASB 68. A full list of pronouncements can be found on GASB’s website. DISCUSSION & ANALYSIS There are two methods of displaying the City’s financials that are included in the FY 2022 ACFR, 1) Government Wide Statements and 2) Fund Financial Statements. The discussion below is organized by these two reporting standards and the results contained within. To assist in the terminology below is a brief overview of these; each of these displays of the City’s financial statements are governed by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) as modified regularly by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). Neither of these views are the same as the City’s annual budget; however, Fund Financial Statements is most closely aligned. ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 58 Packet Page 323 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 4 Government Wide Financial Statements Fund Financial Statements • Governmental Activities – City’s basic services generally funded by taxes, and/or by specific program revenues such as fees and grants (full accrual) + includes portion of internal service funds • Business Type Activities – City’s enterprise activities which are funded in whole or in part by fees charged to external parties (full accrual) + includes portion of internal service funds • Governmental Funds – similar to “governmental activities” EXCEPT on a modified accrual basis of accounting + excludes internal service funds. • Proprietary Funds – same as “business type activities” EXCEPT includes internal service funds. Includes what we refer to as “enterprise funds” (full accrual) Government-wide Statements Statement of Net Position The Statement of Net Position presents information of all the City’s assets plus deferred outflows of resources, and liabilities plus deferred inflows of resources, with the reported net position. The City’s net position was $1.271 billion on June 30, 2022, compared to a balance of $1.230 billion on June 30, 2021. The total increase of $40.6 million, or 3.2%, consists of $51.0 million from governmental activities partially offset by a decrease of $10.4 million from business-type activities. The largest portion of the City’s net position ($1.175 billion or 92.4%) is its net investment in capital assets such as land, buildings, infrastructure, vehicles, and intangible assets – right to use leased assets less any related outstanding debt that was used to acquire these assets. The restricted portion of the City’s net position ($76.2 million or 6.0%) represents resources that are subject to external restrictions on how they may be used. The remaining balance of $20.0 million, across all funds, representing 1.6% of the City’s net position, is unrestricted and may be used to meet the City’s ongoing obligations to its citizens and creditors. The unrestricted net position for the governmental activities portion is negative mainly due to the recognition of the net pension liabilities required by GASB Statement No. 68 and net OPEB liabilities required by GASB Statement No. 75. The $102.7 million deficits for governmental activities include the $286.6 million impact of net pension liabilities and its related deferred outflows of resources (GASB 68) and $78.3 million impact of net OPEB liabilities and its related deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources (GASB 75). Excluding these impacts, the Governmental Activities’ unrestricted net position is $262.2 million. The net position of both governmental and business type activities reduced by $50.6 million due to unrealized market losses on the City’s investment. Actual investment earnings on the City’s portfolio are $9.0 million; however, the net interest earnings reported in the financial 2 Packet Pg. 56 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 59 Packet Page 324 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 5 statement have a negative balance of $41.6 million due to accounting for unrealized losses on the City’s investments. Per GASB 31, public agencies are required to report the change in the valuation of City’s portfolio, and due to the rising interest rates, the portfolio’s fixed income securities have a “paper” loss as of June 30. The City’s long-standing practice is to hold investments to maturity and due to this practice, there will likely be no actual losses incurred on these investments. TABLE 1 STATEMENT OF NET POSITION As of June 30, 2022 (in millions) 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 Cash and investments 400.7$ 443.4$ 241.3$ 285.6$ 642.0$ 729.0$ Other assets 82.4 76.6 50.7 47.7 133.1 124.3 Capital assets 674.2 602.0 735.2 693.2 1,409.4 1,295.2 Deferred outflows 59.2 60.8 24.7 21.1 83.9 81.9 Total assets and deferred outflows 1,216.5 1,182.8 1,051.9 1,047.6 2,268.4 2,230.4 Net pension and OPEB liabilities 316.5 438.2 109.5 159.7 426.0 597.9 Long-term debt 210.2 217.5 64.3 68.9 274.5 286.4 Other liabilities 102.9 87.6 33.1 23.8 136.0 111.4 Deferred inflows 112.8 16.3 48.2 6.4 161.0 22.7 Total Liabilities 742.4 759.6 255.1 258.8 997.5 1,018.4 Net Position Net investment in capital assets 503.9 480.6 670.8 642.0 1,174.7 1,122.6 Restricted 72.9 80.3 3.3 3.4 76.2 83.7 Unrestricted (102.7)(137.7)122.7 161.8 20.0 24.1 Total Net Position 474.1$ 423.2$ 796.8$ 807.2$ 1,270.9$ 1,230.4$ Governmental Business-type Government-wide Activities Activities Totals Statement of Activities The major sources of the City’s revenues are Program Revenues and General Revenues. Program Revenues consist of charges for services (both governmental and business type activities) as well as operating and capital grants and contributions. General Revenues include property tax, sales tax, utility user tax, transient occupancy tax, documentary transfer tax, other taxes and miscellaneous revenue. 2 Packet Pg. 57 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 60 Packet Page 325 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 6 Revenues for the City in FY 2022 were $565.4 million, an increase of $11.7 million or 2.1% above FY 2021, due to a $21.6 million increases in Governmental Activities partially offset by a $9.9 million decrease from Business Activities. Governmental Activities increased $21.6 million due to program and general revenues. The increases in program revenues are due to resumption and increase of in-person classes, paramedic revenues, ARPA funding totaling $8.2 million, and $25.7 million donation from Friends of the Junior Museum & Zoo (JMZ). The increases in general revenues are from major taxes partially offset by decreases in investment earnings from the negative impact of fair market value adjustments. Business Activities revenue decreased $9.9 million mainly due to decreases in Water Fund revenues resulting from conservation efforts in response to the drought. This was partially offset by an increase in Gas Fund revenues driven by a 3% rate increase and portion of the commodity price increases is passed through to customers. Another factor driving the decrease of the revenue is the decrease of investment earnings resulting from negative fair market value adjustments. Expenses for the City in FY 2022 were $524.8 million, a decrease of $24.1 million or 4.4% below FY 2021, due to a $45.6 million decrease from Governmental Activities that is partially offset by a $21.6 million increase from Business-type expenses. The decrease in Governmental Activities expenses is mainly due to the decrease in pension and OPEB related adjustments for GASB 68 and GASB 75, primarily due to higher actual than expected interest earnings of City’s pension and OPEB plan. Administrative Services expenses decreased $8.0 million, primarily due to the $12.6 million set aside established in FY 2021 for Green v. City of Palo Alto. Additional expenses of $4.9 million were set aside in 2022 to settle the case. The City has a total claim payable of $17.5 million for the Green case on its governmental activities’ financial statements Public Works expenses, which decreased $21.5 million mainly due to review and reclassification of construction in progress balances and determined that certain expenses, specifically various repairs and maintenance of streets, sidewalks, facilities, and parks, should not have been capitalized per Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The expense to correct these construction progress balances was recorded as part Public Works functional expenses in FY 2021. These actions are consistent with recent staff review, affirmed by an audit completed by BakerTilly (the City Auditor), to more accurately account for capitalized assets. The increase of Business Type Activities is driven by several cost categories and resulted in higher costs compared to prior year, including energy purchase cost, operations and maintenance in Electric Fund, and commodity purchases in Gas Fund. These increases were partially offset by the decrease in pension and OPEB related adjustments for GASB 68 and GASB 75, primarily due to higher actual than expected interest earnings of City’s pension and OPEB plan. 2 Packet Pg. 58 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 61 Packet Page 326 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 7 TABLE 2 2 Packet Pg. 59 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 62 Packet Page 327 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 8 Capital Assets The City’s capital assets for its governmental and business-type activities as of June 30, 2022 amounts to $1.409 billion (net of accumulated depreciation), which is a $98.9 million or 7.5% increase over FY 2021. The increase was primarily due to various projects such as the Charleston Arastradero Corridor, Public Safety Building, Highway 101 Bicycle and Pedestrian Bridge, Water Main Replacement, Smart Grid Technology Installation, Electric System Improvements, and Primary Sedimentation Tank Rehabilitation. In addition, due to the $29.2 renovated Junior Museum and Zoo (JMZ) of which $25.7 million was a donation from the Friends of JMZ City implemented GASB 87 – Leases which resulted in an increase of Intangible Asset – right to use leased assets amounting to $9.1 million, net of amortization. TABLE 3 Capital Assets 2022 2021 (Decrease) Governmental activites Land and improvements 82.1$ 82.1$ -$ Street trees 15.0 14.8 0.2 Construction in progress 121.9 143.4 (21.5) Building and improvements 350.6 272.1 78.5 Intangible assets 3.8 3.8 - Equipment 82.9 80.3 2.6 Roadway network 359.1 335.3 23.8 Recreation and open space network 37.0 35.2 1.8 Less accumulated depreciation (385.2) (365.0) (20.2) Intangible assets-right to use leased assets 9.8 - 9.8 Less accumulated amortization (2.8) - (2.8) Total Governmental Activities 674.2 602.0 72.2$ Business-Type Activities Land 5.0$ 5$ -$ Construction in progress 136.9 129.0 7.9 Buildings and improvements 80.5 74.5 6.0 Infrastructure 0.6 0.6 - Transmission, distribution and treatment systems 948.9 914.8 34.1 Less accumulated depreciation (438.8) (415.4) (23.4) Intangible assets-right to use leased assets 2.9 - 2.9 Less accumulated amortization (0.8) - (0.8) Total Business-Type Activities 735.2$ 708.5$ 26.7$ Total Capital Assets 1,409.4$ 1,310.5$ 98.9$ 2 Packet Pg. 60 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 63 Packet Page 328 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 9 Liabilities As of June 30, 2022, the City’s liabilities totaled $831.6 million, which is a $164.1 million or 16.5% decrease below FY 2021. The decrease was due City’s Net Pension Liabilities and Net Other Post-Employment Benefit (OPEB) Liabilities decreasing by $171.9 million, driven primarily due to investment earnings that increased the OPEB Plan’s Net Position, scheduled debt service payments, and refinancing activities. The decrease was partially offset by an increase of lease liabilities amounting to $10.0 million due to GASB 87 – Leases implementation. Fund Financial Statements General Fund General Fund Reserves The General Fund ended with a net Budget Stabilization Reserve (BSR) surplus of $14.2 million, when compared to estimates used in the development of the FY 2023 Adopted Budget and the Councils target reserve level of 18.5% of budgeted expenses. Overall, at the end of the current fiscal year, the General Fund’s fund balance was $100.1 million of both restricted and unrestricted balances. This fund balance is comprised of several reserves: the Budget Stabilization Reserve (BSR or City’s general reserve), reappropriations, notes and loans, inventory, prepaid items, and other general government special purpose reserves (this includes reserves for encumbrances and donations). In FY 2022, $1.7 million was set aside for the Reserve for Excess Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) for the at-risk amount related to the lawsuit filed in November 2021 by the California School Boards of Association and its Education Legal Alliance against the Controller of the State of California for over the calculation methodology of the Excess ERAF. As described in the BSR reserve policy approved by the Council, the reserve is to remain 15-20% of the General Fund operating budget, with a target goal of 18.5%. Any reserve balance in excess of the 18.5% target may be transferred to the Infrastructure Reserve (IR) in the Capital Improvement Fund, and/or the City's Section 115 Pension Trust, as outlined in the Pension Funding Policy at the discretion of the City Manager. The FY 2023 Adopted Operating Budget projected a $54.7 million BSR balance as of June 30, 2022, compared to the actual balance of $72.8 million (this is a component of the General Fund, fund balance noted above). The BSR is above projected levels due to higher major taxes and program revenues, and lower expenses due to higher vacancy savings and lower expenses across departments for internal costs to run the City such as utilities, printing and mailing, and vehicle maintenance. Much of this variance was forecasted, discussed, and a core component of the FY 2023 Adopted Budget and two-year budget balancing strategy. The Council recognized these higher than budgeted estimate and used these funds to bridge the transition as the City and community emerged from the pandemic while ensuring stability for the organization. The chart below outlines the already approved uses of the BSR in FY 2023. These adjustments, totaling $13.0 2 Packet Pg. 61 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 64 Packet Page 329 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 10 million, results in a BSR balance of $59.8 million; approximately 24.2% of the FY 2022 Adopted expenses of $247.4 million. This level is approximately $14.2 million above the target level of 18.5% ($45.6 million). Micro and macro-economic conditions are adjusting daily, with rising inflation, changes in jobs, and recessionary trends creating significant uncertainty. As the State of California Legislative Analyst Office (LAO) wrote in their annual Fiscal Outlooks for California “Economic Conditions Weigh on Revenues, [the] booming economy has led to high inflation…efforts to tame inflation are slowing the economy…inflation pressures remain, raising risk of recession…fiscal outlooks revenues balance competing risks.2” Therefore, below are recommended adjustments in line with the City Manager’s authority for transfer of excess BSR, adjusted for a recommendation to reserve funds to safeguard the stability the City has strived to achieve in the recent year by re-establishing an economic uncertainty reserve. Staff anticipates returning to Council in February 2023 with the FY 2023 Mid-Year Review and recommendations in alignment with the allocation below for the appropriation of BSR funds above the 18.5% level. Staff do recommend a transfer to the Infrastructure Reserve as inflationary costs are impacting capital project needs including anticipated significant price increases in the Automated Parking Guidance Project, as well as a need to provide safety improvements to critical assets such as the artificial turf playing fields. 2 The 2023-24 Budget California’s Fiscal Outlook, California Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), November 16, 2022, https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4646 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 65 Packet Page 330 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 11 TABLE 4 Year-End Budget Stabilization Reserve (BSR) Summary (in millions) General Fund BSR Balance, June 30, 2022 $72,835 Uses of the FY 2022 Surplus FY 2023 Approved Adjustments to the BSR Balance FY 2023 Adopted Budget ($9,072) FY 2023 Services Reinvestment ($3,700) Downtown Streets Team (CMR 14526) ($167) Reappropriations (CMR 14728) ($100) Subtotal: Approved Adjustments to the BSR Balance ($13,039) Subtotal: BSR Balance, After Approved Adjustments $59,796 FY 2023 RECOMMENDED Adjustments to the BSR Balance (to be considered in FY 2023 Mid-Year Budget) Reserve for Economic Uncertainty ($5,000) Transfer to Section 115 Pension Trust Fund ($5,000) Transfer to Infrastructure Reserve (IR) in the Capital Improvement Fund ($4,000) Subtotal: RECOMMENDED Adjustments to the BSR Balance ($14,000) Current Projected FY 2022 BSR Level, (June 30, 2023) $45,796 General Fund Revenues General Fund revenues for FY 2022 were $190.4 million, which is $23.6 million or 14.1% higher than the prior year. Year-over-year changes in each of the major tax revenue categories are summarized in the following table. The majority of these higher than budgeted revenues were forecasted and discussed as part of the FY 2023 Adopted Budget, in May 2022, staff and the Finance Committee discussed use of a projected $14 million excess revenues to develop a two- year budget strategy and begin reinvestments. TABLE 5 General Fund Major Tax Revenues (in millions) Category FY 2022 FY 2021 % Change Increase (Decrease) Property tax $ 59,353 $ 56,572 4.9% Sales tax 32,705 29,127 12.3% Utility user tax 15,599 14,642 6.5% Transient occupancy tax 16,946 5,179 227.2% Documentary transfer tax 11,990 10,627 12.8% 2 Packet Pg. 63 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 66 Packet Page 331 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 12 Property tax revenue increased $2.8 million or 4.9% due to property assessed value growth that was driven by the change of ownership, and an increase of $1.1 million in the Excess Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) distribution. Sales tax receipts were $3.6 million or 12.3% higher than the prior year. The increase is due to the strong performance of apparel and department stores, furniture/appliance, and food products categories which include restaurants, and transportation such as new auto sales. The City’s revenue base also benefits from many high-end goods and dining options at regional destinations, such as Stanford Shopping Center. Utility user tax revenues are $1.0 million or 6.5%, higher compared to prior year. The economic recovery resulted in increased business activity and workers returning to the office/business site resulting an increased use of services subject to UUT. Transient occupancy tax (TOT) ended the year $11.8 million or 227% higher than prior year. The increase is exceptionally high because this is compared to a time when there was a high- level of health, safety and travel restrictions however remains lower than the pre-pandemic levels. In FY 2022, the average occupancy rate was 63.5%, a 57.4% increase and the average room rate was $194.89, a 68.6% increase over the prior year. The entire 15.5% TOT rate from new hotels, plus 3.5% from all other hotels, has been allocated to the Infrastructure Plan pursuant to City Council direction. This results in additional TOT for the Infrastructure plan of $2.2 million. These additional funds, coupled with the recommended excess BSR funds will assist in ensuring capital projects may continue as planned, adjusting for the rising costs due to the current inflationary economic conditions. The following is a comparative breakdown of the allocation of transient occupancy tax receipts: TABLE 6 Allocation of Transient Occupancy Tax FY 2022 FY 2021 % Change Increase (Decrease) General Fund $ 8,828 $ 2,796 215.7 % Infrastructure Plan New hotels – 12% 4,292 1,214 253.5 % All hotels – 3.5% 3,826 1,169 227.3 % Subtotal Infrastructure 8,118 2,383 240.7 % Total TOT Receipts $ 16,946 $ 5,179 227.2 % Documentary transfer tax increased $1.4 million or 12.8% compared to prior year due to nine large commercial property transactions that occurred in FY2022. The number of transactions was comparable to the prior year This revenue source is volatile since it is highly dependent on sales volume and property values and the mix of commercial and residential sales. 2 Packet Pg. 64 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 67 Packet Page 332 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 13 Charges for services increased $4.2 million or 16.7% compared to prior year mainly due to resumption of program and classes and offered both virtually and in-person with the lifting of many State and County Public Health restrictions. Other revenues decreased $2.8 million or 56.0% compared to prior year, due to decrease of investment earnings, mainly from unrealized market losses on investments, partially offset by the American Rescue Plan Act distribution of $8.2 million recognized as revenue in FY 2022. The following is a chart which depicts the relative contribution of each tax category over the past seven years (2016 through 2022), as well as the current budgeted year (2022). CHART 1 General Fund Tax Revenues Actual Fiscal Years 2016 – 2022 Budget Fiscal Year 2022 ($ in thousands) General Fund Expenditures General Fund expenditures for FY 2022, including encumbrances and reappropriations, totaled $209.5; an increase of 14.0% from the prior year, primarily due to the increase in salary and benefit costs, and indirect charges. The increase in salaries and benefits are due to overtime, specifically police and fire, paid leave, and pension. The indirect charges were higher in the 2 Packet Pg. 65 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 68 Packet Page 333 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 14 current year primarily due to liability insurance charges, vehicle equipment maintenance service and information technology (IT) support. The increase in liability insurance charges is based on actuarial analysis of the City’s liabilities costs over the past few years and provides an 85 percent confidence level. Another factor driving the increase was due to reappropriations of $12.4 million claims for a class action lawsuit. The Adopted Budget of $194.4 million was increased to the Final Adjusted Budget amount of $215.1 million, primarily due to increased funding from prior year encumbered and reappropriated balances and increases for several departments throughout the year also occurred based on City Council direction per recommendations contained in City Manager Reports. The following is a chart which compares actual departmental costs, including encumbrances and reappropriations, excluding Cubberley lease over the past seven years and budgeted costs for FY 2023. 2 Packet Pg. 66 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 69 Packet Page 334 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 15 CHART 2 General Fund Departments Actual Expenditures Fiscal Years 2016– 2022 (including reappropriations and encumbrances) Budgeted Expenditures Fiscal Year 2023 ($ in thousands) 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000 200,000 220,000 FY 2023 Budget FY 2022 Actual FY 2021 Actual FY 2020 Actual FY 2019 Actual FY 2018 Actual FY 2017 Actual FY 2016 Actual FY 2023 Budget FY 2022 Actual FY 2021 Actual FY 2020 Actual FY 2019 Actual FY 2018 Actual FY 2017 Actual FY 2016 Actual Public Safety 89,724 83,339 77,795 83,616 77,592 75,975 72,815 65,005 Community Services 32,866 31,712 27,769 31,489 30,201 28,395 26,573 25,262 Admin Depts 41,302 39,762 26,165 28,169 29,304 23,538 22,157 22,059 Public Works 20,134 19,448 18,553 18,932 17,928 18,908 17,475 15,084 Planning and Development Services 22,615 21,231 18,782 21,098 22,606 23,006 22,400 21,784 Office Of Transportation 1,718 1,648 2,010 2,360 Library 10,211 8,904 8,636 10,092 9,491 9,357 9,266 8,217 The Development Services Department was combined with the Planning and Community Environment in FY 2020 and renamed to the Planning and Development Services Department. The Office of Transportation Department, which previously was a division of the Planning and Community Environment Department was established in FY 2020. Capital Projects Fund The Capital Projects Fund ended the year with a fund balance of $117.9 million, comprised of the following: 2 Packet Pg. 67 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 70 Packet Page 335 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 16 TABLE 7 Capital Projects Fund – Fund Balance Fund Balance Component Amount ($ in millions) Restricted for Library projects $ 251 Reserved for Roth Building rehabilitation 5,184 Reserved for Cubberley expenditures 5,720 Restricted for Public Safety Building 48,216 Assigned for all other Capital projects 58,567 Total Capital Projects Fund Balance $ 117,938 Restricted for Library projects $0.3 million is the portion of fund balance dedicated to the remaining Mitchell Park Library expenditures which, if considered bond expenses will be paid for with cash from bond proceeds. Non-bondable expenditures such as salaries and benefits are funded from the Infrastructure Reserve (ending fund balance in the Capital Projects Fund), as established at the time of the bond issuance. The Mitchell Park Library project is already completed but the roof defects need to be fixed using this reserve. Restricted for Public Safety Building $48.2 million represents the remaining bond funding dedicated to the construction of the public safety building. This project is currently under construction with estimated completion in Fall 2023. Assigned for all other Capital projects $58.6 million represents the amount of unspent funds associated with Adopted Capital projects and other noted items. Outside funding sources such as grants, donations and future debt issues are not factored into this component of the fund balance until they are received. Enterprise Funds The City’s Enterprise Funds reported a total Net Position of $790.7 million, a $12.6 million, or 1.6% decrease from the prior year. The table below summarizes the overall change in Net Position for each Enterprise Fund. Compared to FY 2021, the Change in Net Position for Enterprise funds decreased $34.8 million driven primarily by the Electric Fund, Water, Fiber Optics and Gas Funds – details of these funds are summarized following this table. 2 Packet Pg. 68 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 71 Packet Page 336 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 17 TABLE 8 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Change in Net Position for the Year Ended June 30 (in millions) Increase/ Fund Name 2022 2021 (Decrease) Water 0.7$ 6.6$ (5.9)$ Electric (24.2)(4.8)(19.4) Fiber Optics (1.2)1.5 (2.7) Gas (0.6)3.5 (4.1) Wastewater Collection 1.2 0.7 0.5 Wastewater Treatment 1.4 3.1 (1.7) Refuse (0.2)1.9 (2.1) Storm Drainage 2.6 3.0 (0.4) Airport 7.7 6.7 1.0 Total Change in Net Position (12.6)$ 22.2$ (34.8)$ Overall, Changes in Net Position decreased $34.8 million for Enterprise Funds, mainly due to accounting adjustments that resulted in over $21.5 million net unrealized market loss. In addition, the Water Fund experienced lower revenue due to residential conservation efforts. The Electric Fund also reported negative net change from the prior year due to increases in purchases of electricity which were primarily driven by higher than historical forward energy prices (future delivery), increased resource adequacy costs (capacity supply and demand), and lower hydroelectric supply. The Gas Fund showed a $4.1 million negative change due to higher commodity prices partially offset by a 3% rate increase and increased revenue from a portion of the commodity price increases being passed directly to customers. The Airport Fund reported a $1.0 million positive net change due to federal grants received for the Apron Reconstruction project. The table below details the Change in Unrestricted Net Position in the Enterprise Funds. Enterprise Fund Rate Stabilization, Operations and other reserve balances are shown in detail in the ACFR (p. 96). Overall, except for the Wastewater Treatment Fund and the Airport Fund, each Enterprise Funds maintained a positive unrestricted net position balance as of June 30, 2022. Adjustments for the Pension Reserve (as required by GASB 68) and OPEB Reserve (as required by GASB 75) total $130.2 million and unrealized market losses on investments total $21.5 million (as required by GASB 31) for all Enterprise Funds and reduce each fund’s unrestricted net position. The Wastewater Treatment Fund reflects a $14.8 million Unrestricted Reserve deficit and is mainly driven by $ $26.1 million in Pension Reserves and OPEB Reserves adjustments. The Airport Fund reports a $3.0 million Unrestricted Reserve deficit which is attributed to the 2 Packet Pg. 69 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 72 Packet Page 337 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 18 $1.1 million Pension Reserve and OPEB Reserve adjustments. Second, the fund deficit in the Airport Fund is also a result of cumulative fund deficits over the life of the fund as fiscal operations at the airport stabilize and capital projects near completion. The $7.7 million change in net position of Airport Fund in current year is $0.6 million from operations and $7.1 million grants received in current year. TABLE 8 Increase/ Fund Name 2022 2021 (Decrease) Water 27.8$ 33.0$ (5.2)$ Electic 46.5 74.5 (28.0) Fiber Optics 32.1 34.5 (2.4) Gas 6.4 11.6 (5.2) Wastewater Collection 2.1 0.7 1.4 Wastewater Treatment (14.8) (10.8) (4.0) Refuse 13.9 14.1 (0.2) Storm Drainage 5.5 4.0 1.5 Aiport (3.0) (3.7) 0.7 Total Changes in Reserves (Unrestricted)116.5$ 157.9$ (41.4)$ Enterprise Funds Changes in Unrestricted (Deficit) Net Position (In Million) RESOURCE IMPACT Recommended actions in the report will align the FY 2022 appropriations with final financial activities as outlined in Attachment B. Overall, the City ended the FY 2022 in a positive net position. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The review and writing of this report was coordinated among various divisions within the Administrative Services Department, along with Departments who assisted in staff’s analysis. The actions recommended in this report were discussed and communicated to the impacted departments. ENVIRONEMENTAL REVIEW This is not a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. . Attachments: 2 Packet Pg. 70 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 73 Packet Page 338 of 792 City of Palo Alto Page 19 • Attachment A: General Fund Summary (Budget and Actuals) • Attachment B: Recommended FY 2022 Year-End Budget Actions • Attachment C: FY2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report 2 Packet Pg. 71 ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 74 Packet Page 339 of 792 2.a Packet Pg. 72 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t A : G e n e r a l F u n d S u m m a r y ( B u d g e t a n d A c t u a l s ) ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 75 Packet Page 340 of 792 Department Adjustment Adjustment GENERAL FUND (102) City Attorney's  Office Contract Services This action reallocates funding as a result of higher than anticipated contract services expenses in FY 2022.  These higher expenditures are primarily due to special projects including the Roth Building rehabilitation,  wireless ordinance update, employee investigations, and capital project construction contract claims. ‐$                            103,000$                  City Auditor's  Office Salaries & Benefits and Contract Services This action reallocates funding as a result of salary and benefit expenses in FY 2022 that were unbudgeted as  well as higher than anticipated contract services expenses related to FY 2021 audits that were paid during FY  2022. ‐$                            25,000$                    Community  Services Departmental Expense Savings This action reallocates departmental cost savings within the General Fund in order to offset departments with  higher than anticipated expenses in FY 2022. The Community Services Department realized a net savings,  primarily in salaries and benefits, as a result of a large number of vacancies as well as savings from lower than  anticipated utility charges.    ‐$                            (253,000)$                 Fire Charges for Services and Revenue from Other Agencies/Salaries & Benefits This action reallocates funding as a result of higher than anticipated salary and benefit expenses and recognizes  and appropriates higher than anticipated paramedic services revenue and revenue from the State of California.  The higher expenditures, specifically in overtime costs, are primarily due to an above average amounts of  vacancies, employee leave, and employee turnover (voluntary and retirement) as maintaining minimum  staffing levels requires the use of overtime for backfill. The higher expenditures are partially offset by increased  paramedic transport services revenue as well as additional revenue from the State of California as  reimbursements for participating in Strike Teams and other statewide fire services. 600,000$                   725,000$                  Non‐ Departmental Transient Occupancy Tax Revenue/Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund This action increases the transfer to the Capital Improvement Fund as it relates to Transient Occupancy Tax  (TOT) revenues earmarked for city‐wide infrastructure improvements due to higher than anticipated TOT  collections in FY 2022. 2,219,000$                2,219,000$               GENERAL FUND (102) SUBTOTAL 2,819,000$                2,819,000$              CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S FY 2022 BUDGET Revenues Expenses ATTACHMENT B, EXHIBIT 1 2.b Packet Pg. 73 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : R e c o m m e n d e d F Y 2 0 2 2 Y e a r - E n d B u d g e t A c t i o n s ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 76 Packet Page 341 of 792 Department Adjustment Adjustment CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS GENERAL FUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (471) Capital Capital Improvement Project Adjustments   This action reflects the combined impact from adjustments to projects as outlined in  Attachment B, Exhibit 2. ‐$                  419,000$                 Capital Transfer from General Fund This action increases the transfer from the General Fund related to TOT revenue Council  earmarked to use for city‐wide infrastructure improvements due to actual revenue collected  being higher than budgeted in FY 2022. 2,219,000$        ‐$                          Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                  1,800,000$              GENERAL FUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (471) SUBTOTAL 2,219,000$       2,219,000$              CUBBERLEY PROPERTY INFRASTRUCTURE FUND (472) Public Works Revenue from Other Agencies/Salaries and Benefits This action appropriates funding for increased costs related to facilities maintenance work at  the Cubberley Property and recognizes and appropriates increased revenue from the Palo Alto  United School District (PAUSD) to reimburse the City for their share of the costs as outlined in  the Cubberley lease agreement between the City and PAUSD. 22,000$            22,000$                   CUBBERLEY PROPERTY INFRASTRUCTURE FUND (472) SUBTOTAL 22,000$            22,000$                   CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S FY 2022 BUDGET Revenues Expenses ATTACHMENT B, EXHIBIT 1 2.b Packet Pg. 74 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : R e c o m m e n d e d F Y 2 0 2 2 Y e a r - E n d B u d g e t A c t i o n s ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 77 Packet Page 342 of 792 Department Adjustment Adjustment ENTERPRISE FUNDS ELECTRIC FUND (513 & 523) Capital Capital Improvement Project Adjustments   This action reflects the combined impact from adjustments to projects as outlined in  Attachment B, Exhibit 2. ‐$                  145,000$                 Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                  (145,000)$                ELECTRIC FUND (513 & 523) SUBTOTAL ‐$                   ‐$                         FIBER OPTICS FUND (533) Capital Capital Improvement Project Adjustments   This action reflects the combined impact from adjustments to projects as outlined in  Attachment B, Exhibit 2. ‐$                  18,000$                   Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                  (18,000)$                  FIBER OPTICS FUND (533) SUBTOTAL ‐$                   ‐$                         GAS FUND (514 & 524) Capital Capital Improvement Project Adjustments   This action reflects the combined impact from adjustments to projects as outlined in  Attachment B, Exhibit 2. ‐$                  4,000$                     Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                  (4,000)$                    GAS FUND (514 & 524) SUBTOTAL ‐$                   ‐$                         REFUSE FUND (525) Public Works Refuse Collection, Hauling, and Disposal As described in CMR 14275, at the end of each fiscal year staff estimates the expenses needed  for the next contract year for GreenWaste of Palo Alto (GWPA) and conducts a technical clean‐ up of expenses to ensure that any excess carryforward amount from the contract  encumbrance is returned to the fund balance. An error occurred in FY 2021 and too much was  returned to the fund balance, leaving insufficient funds for the contract in FY 2022. CMR  14275 approved a $0.9 million budget adjustment but this $1.4 million technical correction  augments the adjustment made in CMR 14275 to fully align the budget with the total  expenses for services provided by GWPA in FY 2022.  ‐$                  1,443,000$              Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                  (1,443,000)$             REFUSE FUND (525) SUBTOTAL ‐$                   ‐$                         CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S FY 2022 BUDGET Revenues Expenses ATTACHMENT B, EXHIBIT 1 2.b Packet Pg. 75 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : R e c o m m e n d e d F Y 2 0 2 2 Y e a r - E n d B u d g e t A c t i o n s ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 78 Packet Page 343 of 792 Department Adjustment Adjustment ENTERPRISE FUNDS CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S FY 2022 BUDGET Revenues Expenses ATTACHMENT B, EXHIBIT 1 STORMWATER MANGEMENT FUND (528) Capital Capital Improvement Project Adjustments   This action reflects the combined impact from adjustments to projects as outlined in  Attachment B, Exhibit 2. ‐$                  5,000$                     Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                  (5,000)$                    STORMWATER MANGEMENT FUND (528) SUBTOTAL ‐$                   ‐$                         WASTEWATER COLLECTION FUND (527) Capital Capital Improvement Project Adjustments   This action reflects the combined impact from adjustments to projects as outlined in  Attachment B, Exhibit 2. ‐$                  90,000$                   Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                  (90,000)$                  WASTEWATER COLLECTION FUND (527) SUBTOTAL ‐$                   ‐$                         WATER FUND (522) Capital Capital Improvement Project Adjustments   This action reflects the combined impact from adjustments to projects as outlined in  Attachment B, Exhibit 2. ‐$                  145,000$                 Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                  (145,000)$                WATER FUND (522) SUBTOTAL ‐$                   ‐$                         2.b Packet Pg. 76 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : R e c o m m e n d e d F Y 2 0 2 2 Y e a r - E n d B u d g e t A c t i o n s ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 79 Packet Page 344 of 792 Department Adjustment Adjustment INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS VEHICLE REPLACEMENT & MAINTENANCE FUND (681) Capital Capital Improvement Project Adjustments   This action reflects the combined impact from adjustments to projects as outlined in  Attachment B, Exhibit 2. 140,000$           140,000$                  VEHICLE REPLACEMENT & MAINTENANCE FUND (681) SUBTOTAL 140,000$           140,000$                  WORKERS' COMPENSATION FUND (688) Human  Resources Claims Costs/Reimbursements  This net‐neutral action increases the estimate for workers' compensation claims by $115,000,  from $5.9 million to $6.0 million, due to higher than anticipated claims costs in FY 2022. This  amount is fully offset by additional revenue for excess insurance reimbursements received  during the period.  115,000$           115,000$                  WORKERS' COMPENSATION FUND (688) SUBTOTAL 115,000$           115,000$                  CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S FY 2022 BUDGET Revenues Expenses ATTACHMENT B, EXHIBIT 1 2.b Packet Pg. 77 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : R e c o m m e n d e d F Y 2 0 2 2 Y e a r - E n d B u d g e t A c t i o n s ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 80 Packet Page 345 of 792 Department Adjustment Adjustment SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS PUBLIC ART FUND (207) Community  Services Contract Services This action increases the appropriation for contract services in the Public Art Fund to align with the  costs associated with the City's CodeArt Festival.  ‐$                   48,000$                   Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                   (48,000)$                  PUBLIC ART FUND (207) SUBTOTAL ‐$                   ‐$                          CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S FY 2022 BUDGET Revenues Expenses ATTACHMENT B, EXHIBIT 1 2.b Packet Pg. 78 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : R e c o m m e n d e d F Y 2 0 2 2 Y e a r - E n d B u d g e t A c t i o n s ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 81 Packet Page 346 of 792 Department Adjustment Adjustment DEBT SERVICE & AGENCY TRUST FUNDS 2021 PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING COP FUND (363) Administrative  Services Debt Service Payment This action appropriates funding to cover the capitalized interest payment for the Certificates of  Participation to fund the New Public Safety Building capital project (PE‐15001). These funds  were set aside as part of bond sale in this Fund in order to make this payment; however, they  were not appropriated as part of the FY 2022 Budget. ‐$                    3,133,000$               Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                    (3,133,000)$             2021 PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING COP FUND (363) SUBTOTAL ‐$                     ‐$                           LIBRARY PROJECTS FUND (370) Administrative  Services Bond Proceeds/Debt Service Payment This action recognizes and appropriates bond proceed revenue from refinancing of Library  General Obligation (GO) Bonds (CMR 13438). This action also appropriates funding to pay off  the previous GO Bond amount. The refinancing occurred in June 2022, so this action is needed  to true up the budget with the actual amounts for the bond sales. 41,197,000$     44,071,000$            Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                    (2,874,000)$             LIBRARY PROJECTS FUND (370) SUBTOTAL 41,197,000$     44,071,000$            UNIVERSITY AVENUE PARKING ASSESSMENT AGENCY FUND (775) Administrative  Services Contract Services This action increases the appropriation for Contract Services within the fund to align budget  levels with actual expenditures in FY 2022. ‐$                    2,000$                       Fund Balance Adjustment to Fund Balance This action adjusts the fund balance to offset adjustments recommended in this report. ‐$                    (2,000)$                     UNIVERSITY AVENUE PARKING ASSESSMENT AGENCY FUND (775) SUBTOTAL ‐$                     ‐$                           CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S FY 2022 BUDGET Revenues Expenses ATTACHMENT B, EXHIBIT 1 2.b Packet Pg. 79 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : R e c o m m e n d e d F Y 2 0 2 2 Y e a r - E n d B u d g e t A c t i o n s ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 82 Packet Page 347 of 792 Project Number Title Revenue Expense Comments PE‐19002 Animal Shelter Renovation  $              74,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  FD‐21000 Automated External Defibrillators  $            (50,000) Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐18006 Byxbee Park Completion  $          (500,000) Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PF‐14004 Cal Avenue Parking District Parking  Improvements  $                1,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PG‐14002 Cameron Park Improvements  $              16,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  AS‐10000 Capital Improvement Fund Administration  $       (1,040,000) Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐13011 Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Project  $            205,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐20001 City Bridge Improvements  $            (19,000) Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐09003 City Facility Parking Lot Maintenance  $            (61,000) Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐17010 Civic Center Electrical Upgrade & EV  Charger Installation  $                6,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐18016 Civic Center Fire Life Safety Upgrades  $              34,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐15020 Civic Center Waterproofing and Repairs  $            114,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PG‐18001 Dog Park Installation  $              36,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PL‐14000 El Camino/Churchill Enhanced Bikeway  $          (518,000) Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  FD‐14002 Fire Ringdown System Replacement  $              14,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated contract service expenditures to  close out the project.  PE‐15003 Fire Station No. 3 Replacement  $              87,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated contract service expenditures to  close out the project.  PE‐18002 High and Bryant Street Garages  Waterproofing and Repairs  $                6,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐11011 Highway 101 Pedestrian/Bicycle Overpass  Project  $            524,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures ($315k). Increase to project due to  higher than anticipated contract service  expenditures to close out the project ($209k)  CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND ATTACHMENT B, EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S FY 2022 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 2.b Packet Pg. 80 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : R e c o m m e n d e d F Y 2 0 2 2 Y e a r - E n d B u d g e t A c t i o n s ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 83 Packet Page 348 of 792 Project Number Title Revenue Expense Comments ATTACHMENT B, EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S FY 2022 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM LB‐21000 Library Automated Materials Handling  $            (50,000) Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PF‐17000 Municipal Service Center A, B, & C Roof  Replacement  $              80,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐18000 New California Avenue Area Parking  Garage  $              34,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  OS‐00001 Open Space Trails & Amenities  $            135,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  OS‐09001 Off‐Road Pathway Resurfacing and Repair  $            (16,000) Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PG‐09002 Park and Open Space Emergency Repairs  $              37,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PG‐19000 Park Restroom Installation  $            (71,000) Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PG‐14000 Ramos Park Improvements  $              29,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐08001 Rinconada Park Improvements  $            236,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures ($127k). Increase to project with  corresponding reduction in FY23 due to project  expenses for construction oversight    anticipated in FY23 being completed in FY22  ($109k). FY23 reduction action approved by  Council on 10/24/22 in CMR 14728.  PO‐89003 Sidewalk Repairs  $            533,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐86070 Street Maintenance  $            518,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  PE‐21004 University Avenue Streetscape Update  $              25,000  Adjustment to allocate Salaries and Benefits  across capital projects based on actual  expenditures.  Total  $                         ‐   $            419,000  EL‐06001 115 kV Electric Intertie  $              28,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated expenditures.  EL‐19001 Colorado Power Station  $          (730,000) Decrease to project due to lower than  anticipated expenditures to offset overspent  projects.  EL‐89028 Electric Customer Connections  $         1,100,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated expenditures, with a $650k  reduction in EL‐17007, and a $450k reduction in  EL‐17002, both of which had some project  savings.  EL‐17007 Facility Relocation for Caltrain  $          (650,000) Decrease to project due to lower than  anticipated expenditures to offset overspent  projects.  EL‐11014 Smart Grid Technology Installation  $              18,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated expenditures.       ELECTRIC FUND 2.b Packet Pg. 81 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : R e c o m m e n d e d F Y 2 0 2 2 Y e a r - E n d B u d g e t A c t i o n s ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 84 Packet Page 349 of 792 Project Number Title Revenue Expense Comments ATTACHMENT B, EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S FY 2022 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM EL‐17002 Substation Breakers  $          (450,000) Decrease to project due to lower than  anticipated expenditures to offset overspent  projects.  EL‐89044 Substation Facility Improvements  $              99,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated expenditures.  EL‐16003 Substation Security  $         1,100,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated expenditures with a $730k  reduction in EL‐19001, and a $370k reduction in  EL‐19004, both of which had some project  savings.  EL‐19004 Wood Pole  $          (370,000) Decrease to project due to lower than  anticipated expenditures to offset overspent  projects.  Total  $                         ‐   $            145,000  FO‐16000 Fiber Optics Network ‐ System Rebuild  $              18,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated expenditures.  Total  $                         ‐   $              18,000  GS‐11002 Gas System Improvements  $                4,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated expenditures.  Total  $                         ‐   $                4,000  SD‐22000 East Bayshore Road & East Meadow Drive  Storm Drain System Upgrade  $                5,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated expenditures.  Total  $                         ‐   $                5,000  VR‐22000 Scheduled Vehicle and Equipment  Replacement ‐ Fiscal Year 2022  $            140,000  $            140,000  Adjustment to align project budget with mid‐ year amendments to the operating budget for  the purchase of a tractor ($100K) and a code  enforcement vehicle ($40K).  Total  $            140,000  $            140,000  WC‐99013 Sewer Manhole Rehab/Replacement  $              85,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated expenditures.  WC‐80020 Sewer System, Customer Connections  $                5,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated expenditures.  Total  $                         ‐   $              90,000  WS‐80013 Water System Customer Connections  $            145,000  Increase to project due to higher than  anticipated expenditures.  Total  $                         ‐   $            145,000  TOTAL CIP ADJUSTMENTS  $                         ‐   $            718,000  GAS FUND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FUND WATER FUND WASTEWATER COLLECTION FUND FIBER FUND VEHICLE FUND 2.b Packet Pg. 82 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : R e c o m m e n d e d F Y 2 0 2 2 Y e a r - E n d B u d g e t A c t i o n s ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 85 Packet Page 350 of 792 Fiscal Year 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report This document may be viewed at the City’s website: Financial Reporting – City of Palo Alto, CA https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/administrative-services/financial-reporting/comprehensive-annual-financial-reports-cafr/current-2011-cafrs/2022-acfr-final/ city-of-palo-alto-acfr-fy2022-final.pdf ATTACHMENT C 2.c Packet Pg. 83 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : F Y 2 0 2 2 A n n u a l C o m p r e h e n s i v e F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( 1 4 6 3 2 : A p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 2 2 A C F R a n d B u d g e t Y E A d j u s t m e n t s ) ITEM 8 Attachment B - Staff Report Item 8: Page 86 Packet Page 351 of 792 FINANCE COMMITTEE ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 2 Special Meeting November 29, 2022 The Finance Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Community Meeting Room and by virtual teleconference at 5:30 P.M. Present In-Person: Filseth, Kou Present Virtually: DuBois (Chair) Absent: Agenda Items 1. Discussion and Recommendation to the City Council Accept the Macias Gini & O’Connell’s (MGO) Audit of the City of Palo Alto’s Financial Statements as of June 30, 2022 MOTION: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Chair DuBois to recommend the City Council approve the City of Palo Alto’s audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022 and the accompanying reports provided by Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 2. Approval of the FY 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and Year-End Budget Amendments in Various Funds MOTION: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Chair DuBois to recommend the City Council approve: 1. The City’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR); and ITEM 8 Attachment C - Finance Committee Action Minutes Item 8: Page 87 Packet Page 352 of 792 ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 2 Sp. Finance Committee Meeting Action Minutes: 11/29/2022 2. Amend the FY 2022 Budget Appropriation Ordinance for various funds as identified in the attached Recommended Amendments to the City Manager’s FY 2022 Budget (Operating Budget: Attachment B – Exhibit 1; Capital Budget: Attachment B – Exhibit 2). MOTION PASSED: 3-0 3. Staff Recommends the Finance Committee Recommend the City Council Adopt a Resolution Amending Electric Rate Schedule E-HRA (Electric Hydro Rate Adjuster) Increasing the Current E-HRA Rate to $0.050/kWh Effective January 1, 2023 MOTION: Chair DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to recommend the City Council adopt a Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Electric Hydro Rate Adjuster rate schedule (E-HRA), Increasing the Current E-HRA Rate to $0.048/kWh Effective January 1, 2023, to reflect current hydrological conditions and market purchase costs. This would replace the existing EHRA surcharges and discounts across all levels, and increase the current E-HRA rate from $0.013/kWh to $0.048/kWh. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 4. Discussion and Update on Sanitary Sewer Main Replacement Acceleration Alternatives NO ACTION Future Meetings and Agendas Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:02 P.M. ITEM 8 Attachment C - Finance Committee Action Minutes Item 8: Page 88 Packet Page 353 of 792 1 5 0 6 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: CONSENT REPORT Lead Department: City Clerk Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Adoption of a Resolution to Extend the Appointment of Adriane D. McCoy of Baker Tilly US, LLP as Interim City Auditor Through April 30, 2023 RECOMMENDATION The City Council is recommended to adopt a resolution extending the appointment of Adriane D. McCoy, Certified Internal Auditor (CIA) of Baker Tilly US, LLP, as Palo Alto’s Interim City Auditor through April 30, 2023. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This action extends the appointment of Adriane D. McCoy as Interim City Auditor from January 31, 2023 through April 30, 2023. This additional time will allow the Council Appointed Officer’s Committee to meet to address the next steps for filling the City Auditor position for the medium to long term. BACKGROUND The Palo Alto Charter provides that the City Council appoint an Auditor who serves at the Council’s will. The Charter describes the Auditor’s key duties. (See Charter, Art. IV, sections 1 and 12.) In February 2020, the Council directed the Council Appointed Officers (CAO) Committee to conduct a solicitation for outsourced internal auditing services. After an extensive procurement process, the CAO Committee recommended finalists for Council consideration. On September 28, 2020, the Council approved a contract beginning October 1, 2020 with Baker Tilly US, LLP, as Palo Alto’s City Auditor and other supporting personnel. with specific employees of the company to be formally appointed to the City Auditor position. The original contract ended June 30, 2022, for a not-to-exceed amount of $1,300,000 and on May 9, 2022, the Council approved an amendment to the contract to: 1) extend the term to June 30, 2025, 2) revise the project scope, and 3) increase the contract amount by $2,126,250 to a not-to-exceed amount of $3,426,250 over five years. ITEM 9 Staff Report Item 9: Page 1 Packet Page 354 of 792 1 5 0 6 On August 17, 2022, the City received notification from Baker Tilly informing the City that a change in the Palo Alto City Auditor appointment would be necessary due to staffing changes at the company. On August 22, 20221 the City Council took action to “request up to three individuals to interview from Baker Tilly to act as an interim Auditor, and the Council Appointed Officers Committee to meet to address the next steps for filling the Auditor position for the medium to long term.” The City’s contract with Baker Tilly (Exhibit A, Scope of Services under “Designation of City Auditor”) addresses the potential for a vacancy in the City Auditor appointment. On August 30, the Council interviewed three candidates and on September 19, 2022, the Council adopted a resolution appointing Adriane D. McCoy of Baker Tilly US, LLP as the Interim City Auditor through January 31, 20232. ANALYSIS This action recommends a three (3) month extension to the interim appointment of the City Auditor from January 31, 2023 through April 30, 2023. This additional time is requested to provide the 2023 City Council, sworn into office on January 9, 2023, and the Council Appointed Officer’s Committee, time to meet and determine next steps for the medium- and long-term appointment of a City Auditor. Further action will be brought forward upon feedback from the Council Appointed Officer’s Committee. Baker Tilly is a comprehensive professional services firm with a group dedicated to state and local governmental clients. Baker Tilly’s experience extends across more than 40 states with specific public sector clients in California such as the cities of Carlsbad, Riverside, Burbank, Modesto and Richmond and several utility clients including Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Imperial Irrigation District, Northern California Power Agency, San Diego Gas & Electric, Glendale Utilities, Pasadena Water and Electric, Anaheim Public Utilities, and the California Public Utilities Commission. This is notable as Palo Alto owns and operates its own utilities. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT There is no resource impact associated with this interim appointment. The BakerTilly contract is executed and budgeted in the FY 2023 Adopted Budget. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT This work has been based on extensive prior discussion and direction from the City Council during multiple public meetings beginning in 2020. Staff in coordination with Baker Tilly and the City Council completed the interviews to bring forward this interim appointment in September 1 City Council August 22, 2022, Item #AA3, CMR: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/city-council- agendas-minutes/2022/20220822/20220822pccsm-amended-redacted-linked.pdf#page=335 2 City Council September 19, 2022, Item #4, CMR #14760, https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Public/CompiledDocument?meetingTemplateId=9054&compileOutputType= 1 ITEM 9 Staff Report Item 9: Page 2 Packet Page 355 of 792 1 5 0 6 2022. Further discussion and engagement is expected with the Council Appointed Officers Committee, as directed by Council, to meet to address the next steps for filling the Auditor position for the medium to long term. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This action is exempt from CEQA and requires no further environmental review. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Resolution Extending Appointment of Adriane D. McCoy as Palo Alto Interim City Auditor APPROVED BY: Lesley Milton, City Clerk Report #: 2301-0759 ITEM 9 Staff Report Item 9: Page 3 Packet Page 356 of 792 NOT YET APPROVED Resolution No. ____ A Resolution of the City Council for the City of Palo Alto Extending the Appointment of Adriane D. McCoy, Director with Baker Tilly US, LLP, as the Palo Alto Interim City Auditor. R E C I T A L S A. The Palo Alto City Charter specifies the duties and functions of the City Auditor for the City of Palo Alto; B. The Charter further specifies that the City Council shall appoint the City Auditor; C. The Council received notification that its current City Auditor, Kyle O’Rourke, is no longer with the City’s service provider, Baker Tilly US, LLP and will no longer serve as Palo Alto’s City Auditor; D. The Council requested up to three candidates from Baker Tilly US, LLP and conducted interviews with candidates to serve as City Auditor; E. The Council, on September 19, 2022, appointed Adriane D. McCoy, Director for Baker Tilly US, LLP, as interim City Auditor for the City of Palo Alto for a term ending January 31, 2023; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The Council hereby extends the appointment of Adriane D. McCoy, Director for Baker Tilly US, LLP, as interim City Auditor for the City of Palo Alto; SECTION 2. Adriane D. McCoy shall serve as interim City Auditor at the will of the Council as provided by the Charter, and shall further serve according to all of the terms and provisions of the Charter, the Municipal Code and the agreement for outsourced internal auditing services between the City of Palo Alto and Baker Tilly US, LLP; and SECTION 3. Nothing in this action confers employment or other employee rights, responsibilities and obligations to Adriane D. McCoy or Baker Tilly US, LLP.; and / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / ITEM 9 Attachment A - Resolution Extending Appointment of Adriane McCoy Item 9: Page 4 Packet Page 357 of 792 NOT YET APPROVED SECTION 4. This resolution shall be effective immediately. The appointment of Adriane D. McCoy as interim City Auditor shall end on April 30, 2023 or on the expiration of the agreement for outsourced internal auditing services between the City of Palo Alto and Baker Tilly US, LLP, including any amendment, extension or termination approved by the Council, whichever is sooner. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ City Attorney ITEM 9 Attachment A - Resolution Extending Appointment of Adriane McCoy Item 9: Page 5 Packet Page 358 of 792 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: CONSENT Lead Department: Community Services Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Approval of Contract with CivicPlus, LLC (C23186719) for CivicRec Recreation Management Software for a Period of Six Years in an Amount Not to Exceed $735,065 (Including a 5% Contingency for Additional Services Amount of $29,229) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager or their designee to execute Contract No. C23186719 with CivicPlus, LLC for CivicRec recreation and facility management software renewal for six years from January 1, 2023 to December 31, 2028, in an amount not to exceed $735,065 (including a 5% percent contingency for Additional Services in the amount of $29,229). BACKGROUND The Community Services Department (CSD) uses a Recreation Management Software, CivicRec, to process program registrations, facility rentals, membership sales, ticket sales, and point of sale transactions throughout the department. The system allows customers to view the Enjoy! Catalog and self-register for classes and camps, purchase tickets and reserve facility spaces. The system can also generate custom reports such as number of registrations, including by residents and non-residents, class waitlists, and others. The reporting features in CivicRec are quite robust and gives staff the ability to create reports based on specific informational needs by adjusting the filters and fields in each report. CivicRec also allows staff to send periodic email announcements and reminders to registered users. CivicRec provides an export of CSD programming for the Enjoy! Catalog that is produced five (5) times a year. Some of the features of CivicRec that directly benefits customers and class instructors include: •Automatically directs the customer to a specific grouping of activities, programs, or facility rentals. •Capability for customers to save their credit cards with end-to-end encryption resulting in a quicker checkout process for customers who are signing up for activities (in-person and from home) and enables auto-pay set up for rental customers. ITEM 10 Staff Report Item 10: Page 1 Packet Page 359 of 792 •At the end of an activity or rental, CivicRec generates and auto-sends a custom survey to participants for feedback. •From the customer interface, the customer can view their position on a waitlist, check facility rental availability, and view transaction receipts. •Instructors and contractors have limited access to the system to view class rosters and important information such as emergency contacts for participants. •Instructors of drop-in pass programs, such as the BOOST! adult fitness program, have the ability to scan in participants at the start of class. CivicRec is currently in use by both the Palo Alto Junior Museum and Zoo and the Children’s Theatre for ticket sales. However, due to the one-time nature of these ticket purchase transactions, these facilities will transition to a new ticketing system in Fiscal Year 2023 to make the user experience for these facilities more efficient for the customer. Request for Proposals Process In November 2018, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for recreation management software, as the contract term for the previous system, ActiveNet, was ending in December 2019. After a competitive solicitation process, bids from six different service providers were reviewed and a contract was awarded to CivicRec on August 19, 2019. More information on the original RFP and service provider selection process can be found in Staff Report #10440. The transition to CivicRec on December 3, 2019 was only possible after extensive research during the RFP process, historical data preservation from ActiveNet, data transfer into CivicRec, CivicRec system configuration, and hardware setup. The configuration process for City staff to use CivicRec to its fullest capability required a lot of assistance from the IT Department, and due to the pandemic was a process that took nearly two years to complete. Staff training is an ongoing and continual process. An exemption to competitive solicitation was approved by the City Manager pursuant to PAMC 2.30.260(b)(2). To ensure there is no disruption of services provided to the community, and no increased demands on staff time to configure a new system, staff recommends continuing with CivicRec for an additional six years to maximize the return on our investment since its 2019 implementation. In addition, staff does not anticipate significant changes in registration and facility booking technology and expects pricing to remain competitive. DISCUSSION The contract covers the term of January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2028, for a not-to-exceed amount of $735,065. This is in alignment with the fee schedule included in the current contract that states in year three and beyond, the service rates will increase 5% per year. A 5% per year contingency amount is included to use for special system build requests to add features to improve efficiencies for both staff and customers. ITEM 10 Staff Report Item 10: Page 2 Packet Page 360 of 792 Fiscal Year Annual Fee Contingency Funds Total/fiscal year FY23 Jan 1 – June 30 $50,378 $0 $50,378 FY24 $105,793 $5,290 $111,083 FY25 $111,082 $5,555 $116,636 FY26 $116,636 $5,832 $122,468 FY27 $122,469 $6,124 $128,592 FY28 $128,591 $6,430 $135,021 FY29 July 1- Dec 31 $70,887 $0 $70,887 Total Contract Amount:$735,065 FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT Staff is making the recommendation to extend the existing contract instead of issuing a new RFP to ensure that the user experience of the City’s 48,173 number of registered CivicRec users is not disrupted, to leverage the significant staff resources used to implement the current system, and ensure other priorities can be focused on instead of the dedication and time needed to issue a new RFP and onboard a new system. The Community Services Department’s FY 2023 Adopted Operating Budget has sufficient funding the absorb the cost of the contract, with no additional budget action being required for the current fiscal year. Funding for future years will be subject to Council’s adoption of future budgets, and if necessary, requests for additional funding in alignment with escalating contract costs will be brought forward as a part of the City’s annual budget development process. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Although Community Services Department staff is satisfied with the performance of CivicRec and would like to continue with the software, staff did take into consideration other vendors providing similar Recreation Management Software. Staff consulted with the IT Department on the resources that would be required to migrate to a different system while also retaining historical information. Staff also assessed the time and resources required to learn and configure a new system. In consideration of the comprehensive resources that would be required and inconvenience to community members who use the current system, staff is recommending a renewal of the contract with CivicPlus. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Council action on this item is not a project as defined by CEQA because the approval of a recreation management software does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in potentially significant impact on the environment per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), section 15378(b)(4). ITEM 10 Staff Report Item 10: Page 3 Packet Page 361 of 792 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: CivicPlus Contract C23186719 APPROVED BY: Kristen O'Kane, Community Services Director Report #: 2301-0764 ITEM 10 Staff Report Item 10: Page 4 Packet Page 362 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 1 of 38 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C23186719 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND CIVICPLUS, LLC This Agreement for Professional Services (this “Agreement”) is entered into as of the 1st day of January , 2023 (the “Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and CIVICPLUS, LLC, a Kansas Limited Liability Company, located at 302 S. 4th Street, Suite 500, Manhattan, Kansas, 66502(“CONSULTANT”). The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement and are fully incorporated herein by this reference: RECITALS A.CITY intends to award a contract (the “Project”) and desires to engage a consultant tocontinue to provide support for CivicRec Recreation Management Software in connection with the Project (the “Services”, as detailed more fully in Exhibit A). B.CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if any, possess thenecessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/orcertifications to provide the Services. C.CITY, in reliance on these representations, desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide theServices as more fully described in Exhibit A, entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in Exhibit A in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. Optional On-Call Provision (This provision only applies if checked and only applies to on-call agreements.) CITY may elect to, but is not required to, authorize on-call Services up to the maximum compensation amount set forth in Section 4 (Not to Exceed Compensation). CONSULTANT DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 5 Packet Page 363 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 2 of 38 shall provide on-call Services only by advanced, written authorization from CITY as detailed in this Section. On-call Services, if any, shall be authorized by CITY, as needed, with a Task Order assigned and approved by CITY’s Project Manager, as identified in Section 13 (Project Management). Each Task Order shall be in substantially the same form as Exhibit A-1 entitled “PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER”. Each Task Order shall contain a specific scope of services, schedule of performance and maximum compensation amount, in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. Compensation for on-call Services shall be specified by CITY in the Task Order, based on whichever is lowest: the compensation structure set forth in Exhibit C, the hourly rates set forth in Exhibit C-1, or a negotiated lump sum. To accept a Task Order, CONSULTANT shall sign the Task Order and return it to CITY’s Project Manager within the time specified by the Project Manager, and upon authorization by CITY (defined as counter-signature by the CITY Project Manager), the fully executed Task Order shall become part of this Agreement. The cumulative total compensation due to CONSULTANT for all Task Orders issued under this Agreement shall not exceed the amount of compensation set forth in Section 4. CONSULTANT shall only be compensated for on- call Services performed under an authorized Task Order and only up to the maximum compensation amount set forth in Section 4. Performance of and payment for any on-call Services are subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through December 31, 2028 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 (Termination) of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement. Both parties acknowledge Exhibit “B” is a non-binding estimate only and not governed by the time is of the essence requirement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CONSULTANT shall not be liable for any delays caused by the actions of inactions of the CITY. SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services shall be based on the compensation structure detailed in Exhibit C, entitled “COMPENSATION,” including any reimbursable expenses specified therein, and the maximum total compensation shall not exceed Seven Hundred Five Thousand, Eight Hundred Thirty-Six Dollars ($705,836.00). The hourly schedule of rates, if applicable, is set out in Exhibit C-1, entitled “SCHEDULE OF RATES.” Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum compensation set forth DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 6 Packet Page 364 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 3 of 38 in this Section 4 shall be at no cost to the CITY. Optional Additional Services Provision (This provision applies only if checked and a not- to-exceed compensation amount for Additional Services is allocated below under this Section 4.) In addition to the not-to-exceed compensation specified above, CITY has set aside the not- to-exceed compensation amount of Twenty-Nine Thousand, Two Hundred Twenty-Nine Dollars ($29,229.00) for the performance of Additional Services (as defined below). The total compensation for performance of the Services, Additional Services and any reimbursable expenses specified in Exhibit C, shall not exceed Seven Hundred Thirty-Five Thousand, Sixty-Five Dollars ($735,065.00), as detailed in Exhibit C. “Additional Services” means any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described at Exhibit A. CITY may elect to, but is not required to, authorize Additional Services up to the maximum amount of compensation set forth for Additional Services in this Section 4. CONSULTANT shall provide Additional Services only by advanced, written authorization from CITY as detailed in this Section. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized by CITY with a Task Order assigned and authorized by CITY’s Project Manager, as identified in Section 13 (Project Management). Each Task Order shall be in substantially the same form as Exhibit A-1, entitled “PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER”. Each Task Order shall contain a specific scope of services, schedule of performance and maximum compensation amount, in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. Compensation for Additional Services shall be specified by CITY in the Task Order, based on whichever is lowest: the compensation structure set forth in Exhibit C, the hourly rates set forth in Exhibit C-1, or a negotiated lump sum. To accept a Task Order, CONSULTANT shall sign the Task Order and return it to CITY’s Project Manager within the time specified by the Project Manager, and upon authorization by CITY (defined as counter-signature by the CITY Project Manager), the fully executed Task Order shall become part of this Agreement. The cumulative total compensation to CONSULTANT for all Task Orders authorized under this Agreement shall not exceed the amount of compensation set forth for Additional Services in this Section 4. CONSULTANT shall only be compensated for Additional Services performed under an authorized Task Order and only up to the maximum amount of compensation set forth for Additional Services in this Section 4. Performance of and payment for any Additional Services are subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit annual invoices to the CITY describing the Services performed and the applicable charges (including, if applicable, an identification of personnel who performed the Services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon Exhibit C or, as applicable, CONSULTANT’s schedule of rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 7 Packet Page 365 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 4 of 38 completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT’s invoices shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to CITY’s Project Manager at the address specified in Section 13 (Project Management) below. CITY will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt of an acceptable invoice, such acceptance shall not be unreasonably withheld. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subcontractors, if any, possess the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subcontractors, if any, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all applicable licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services. All Services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and in compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement, as amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services. SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT is solely responsible for costs, including, but not limited to, increases in the cost of Services, solely arising from or caused by solely CONSULTANT’s errors and omissions, including, but not limited to, the costs of corrections such errors and omissions, any change order markup costs, or costs arising from delay caused by the errors and omissions or unreasonable delay in correcting the errors and omissions. SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. This section intentionally omitted. SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. CONSULTANT acknowledges and agrees that CONSULTANT and any agent or employee of CONSULTANT will act as and shall be deemed at all times to be an independent contractor and shall be wholly responsible for the manner in which CONSULTANT performs the Services requested by CITY under this Agreement. CONSULTANT and any agent or employee of CONSULTANT will not have employee status with CITY, nor be entitled to participate in any plans, arrangements, or distributions by CITY pertaining to or in connection with any retirement, health or other benefits that CITY may offer its employees. CONSULTANT will be responsible for all obligations and payments, whether imposed by federal, state or local law, including, but not limited to, FICA, income tax withholdings, workers’ compensation, unemployment compensation, insurance, and other similar responsibilities related to CONSULTANT’s performance of the Services, or any agent or employee of CONSULTANT DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 8 Packet Page 366 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 5 of 38 providing same. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as creating an employment or agency relationship between CITY and CONSULTANT or any agent or employee of CONSULTANT. Any terms in this Agreement referring to direction from CITY shall be construed as providing for direction as to policy and the result of CONSULTANT’s provision of the Services only, and not as to the means by which such a result is obtained. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s obligations hereunder without the prior written approval of the City Manager. Any purported assignment made without the prior written approval of the City Manager will be void and without effect. Subject to the foregoing, the covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators and assignees of the parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Consultant may assign and transfer all of its rights under this Agreement by a sale of all of its assets or merger. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. Option A: No Subcontractor: CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the Services to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the City Manager or designee. In the event CONSULTANT does subcontract any portion of the work to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible for all acts and omissions of subcontractors. Option B: Subcontracts Authorized: Notwithstanding Section 11 (Assignment) above, CITY agrees that subcontractors may be used to complete the Services. The subcontractors authorized by CITY to perform work on this Project are: CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subcontractors and for any compensation due to subcontractors. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation of subcontractors. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of subcontractors. CONSULTANT shall change or add subcontractors only with the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. After execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT will assign a the CONSULTANT’s Project Manager to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day performance of the Services. CONSULTANT, at CITY’s reasonable request, may promptly remove CONSULTANT personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Services or a threat to the safety of persons or property. CITY’s Project Manager is Cayla Koga, cayla.koga@cityofpaloalto.org Community Services DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 9 Packet Page 367 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 6 of 38 Department, 1305 Middlefield, Palo Alto, CA, 94301, Telephone: (650) 463-4902. CITY’s Project Manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. CITY may designate an alternate Project Manager from time to time. SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon full and complete payment of amounts owed for project development under this Agreement, City will own the website graphic designs, webpage or Services content, module content, importable/exportable data, and archived information (“City Content”) created by Consultant on behalf of City pursuant to this Agreement. “City Content” also includes any elements of text, graphics, images, photos, designs, artworks, logos, trademarks, services marks, and other materials or content which City provides or inputs into any website, software or module in connection with any Services. City Content excludes any content in the public domain; and any content owned or licensed by Consultant, whether in connection with providing Services or otherwise. Upon completion of the project development, City will assume full responsibility for City Content maintenance and administration. City, not Consultant, shall have sole responsibility for the accuracy, quality, integrity, legality, reliability, appropriateness, and intellectual property ownership or right to use of all City Content. City hereby grants Consultant a worldwide, non- exclusive right and license to reproduce, distribute and display the City Content as necessary to provide the Services, and such license shall terminate upon termination of this Agreement. City represents and warrants that City owns all City Content or that City has permission from the rightful owner to use each of the elements of City Content; and that City has all rights necessary for Consultant to use the City Content in connection with providing the Services. At any time during the term of this Agreement, City will have the ability to download the City Content and export the City data through the Services. City may request Consultant to perform the export of City data and provide the City data to City in a commonly used format at any time, for a fee to be quoted at time of request and approved by City. Upon termination of this Agreement for any reason, whether or not City has retrieved or requested the City data, Consultant reserves the right to permanently and definitively delete the City Content and City data held in the Services thirty (30) days following termination of this Agreement. During the thirty (30) day period following termination of this Agreement, regardless of the reason for its termination, City will not have access to the Services. Intellectual Property in the software or other original works created by or licensed to Consultant, including all source code, documents, and materials used in the Services (“CivicPlus Property”) will remain the property of Consultant. CivicPlus Property specifically excludes City Content. City shall not (i) license, sublicense, sell, resell, reproduce, transfer, assign, distribute or otherwise commercially exploit or make available to any third party any CivicPlus Property in any way, except as specifically provided in this Agreement; (ii) adapt, alter, modify or make derivative works based upon any CivicPlus Property; (iii) create internet “links” to the CivicPlus Property software or “frame” or “mirror” any CivicPlus Property administrative access on any other server or wireless or internet-based device that may allow third party entities, other than City, to use the Services; (iv) reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble or otherwise attempt to obtain the source code to all or any portion of the Services; or (v) access any CivicPlus Property in order to (a) build a competitive product or service, (b) build a product using similar ideas, features, functions or graphics of any CivicPlus Property, or (c) copy any ideas, features, functions or graphics of any CivicPlus DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 10 Packet Page 368 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 7 of 38 Property. The CivicPlus name, the CivicPlus logo, and the product and module names associated with any CivicPlus Property are trademarks of Consultant, and no right or license is granted to use them outside of the licenses set forth in this Agreement. Provided City complies with the terms and conditions herein, and license restrictions set forth in this section, Consultant hereby grants City a limited, nontransferable, nonexclusive, license to access and use the CivicPlus Property associated with this Agreement for the term of this Agreement.Neither CONSULTANT nor its subcontractors, if any, shall make any of such work product available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the Scope of Services Furthermore, Consultant will not be liable for any act, omission of act, negligence or defect in the quality of service of any third-party provider of internet hosting or cloud computing (including but not limited to Amazon AWS, Google Cloud, or ISPs that provide general internet services to Consultant); however, Consultant agrees to use its best efforts to enforce any quality-of-service provisions or guarantees with such providers. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT agrees to permit CITY and its authorized representatives to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for four (4) years from the date of final payment, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement, including without limitation records demonstrating compliance with the requirements of Section 10 (Independent Contractor), at the CITY’s sole expense. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain accurate books and records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for at least four (4) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement or the completion of any audit hereunder, whichever is later. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. [Option B applies to any consultant who does not qualify as a design professional as defined in Civil Code Section 2782.8.] 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all third party demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including reasonable attorney’s fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements (“Claims”) resulting from, or directly related to the extent of the negligent performance or nonperformance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. 16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from a Claim arising from the active negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party that is not contributed to by any act of, or by any omission to perform a duty imposed by law or agreement by, CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 11 Packet Page 369 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 8 of 38 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s Services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16.A. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. 16.A.1. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY OF CONSULTANT. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THIS AGREEMENT, IN NO EVENT SHALL CONSULTANT BE LIABLE TO CITY, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ANY CLAIM IS BASED ON CONTRACT OR TORT, FOR SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, INDIRECT OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES OR FOR ANY LOSS OF PROFIT OR LOSS OF BUSINESS BY CITY, EVEN IF CONSULTANT HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF ANY SUCH POTENTIAL CLAIM, LOSS OR DAMAGE. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THE IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING SENTENCE, IN NO EVENT SHALL THE TOTAL AGGREGATE LIABILITY UNDER THIS AGREEMENT OF CONSULTANT TO CITY EXCEED ONE MILLION ($1,000,000) DOLLARS. CONSULTANT'S LIABILITY LIMIT SET FORTH HEREIN SHALL NOT APPLY TO (1) DAMAGES CAUSED BY CONSULTANT'S GROSS NEGLIGENCE, WILLFUL MISCONDUCT, OR CRIMINAL CONDUCT, (2) CONSULTANT'S OBLIGATIONS TO INDEMNIFY AND DEFEND CITY PURSUANT TO SECTION 16 (“INDEMNIFICATION”) OF THIS AGREEMENT, (3) LIMIT CLAIMS OR GENERAL DAMAGES THAT FALL WITHIN THE INSURANCE COVERAGE OF THIS AGREEMENT, (4) STATUTORY DAMAGES, AND (5) WRONGFUL DEATH CAUSED BY CONSULTANT. 16.A.2. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY OF CITY. CITY’S PAYMENT OBLIGATIONS UNDER THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE PAYMENT OF THE COMPENSATION PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 4 (“NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION”) OF THIS AGREEMENT. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THIS AGREEMENT, IN NO EVENT SHALL CITY BE LIABLE, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ANY CLAIM IS BASED ON CONTRACT OR TORT, FOR ANY SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, INDIRECT OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOST PROFITS, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT OR THE SERVICES PERFORMED IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT. CITY’S LIABILITY LIMIT SET FORTH HEREIN SHALL NOT APPLY TO DAMAGES CAUSED BY CITY’S GROSS NEGLIGENCE, WILLFUL MISCONDUCT, OR CRIMINAL CONDUCT. SECTION 17. WAIVERS. No waiver of a condition or nonperformance of an obligation under this Agreement is effective unless it is in writing in accordance with Section 29.4 of this Agreement. No delay or failure to require performance of any provision of this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of that provision as to that or any other instance. Any waiver granted shall apply solely to the DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 12 Packet Page 370 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 9 of 38 specific instance expressly stated. No single or partial exercise of any right or remedy will preclude any other or further exercise of any right or remedy. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit D, entitled “INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS”. CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days’ prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30) days’ notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT’s receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Chief Procurement Officer during the entire term of this Agreement. 18.4. . Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may without cause, by giving sixty (60) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT fails to perform any of its material obligations under this Agreement, in addition to all other remedies provided under this Agreement or at law, either Party may terminate this Agreement sooner upon thirty days’ advance written notice of termination, provided the other Party does not cure the failure within the thirty day period. Upon receipt of any notice of suspension or termination, CONSULTANT will discontinue its performance of the Services on the effective date in the notice of suspension or termination. DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 13 Packet Page 371 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 10 of 38 19.2. In event of termination, CONSULTANT will deliver to the City Manager on or before the effective date in the notice of suspension or termination, any and all work product, as detailed in Section 14 (Ownership of Materials), whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in the performance of this Agreement. Such work product is the property of CITY, as detailed in Section 14 (Ownership of Materials). 19.3. In event of termination, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered and work products delivered to CITY in accordance with the Scope of Services up to the effective date in the notice of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s Services provided in material conformity with this Agreement. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 17, 19.2, 19.3, 19.4, 20, 25, 27, 28, 29 and 30. 19.4. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement, unless made in accordance with Section 17 (Waivers). SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the Project Manager at the address of CONSULTANT recited on the first page of this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provide written notice to CITY of any change of address. SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In executing this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subcontractors or other persons or parties having such an interest. CONSULTANT DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 14 Packet Page 372 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 11 of 38 certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California, as amended from time to time. CONSULTANT agrees to notify CITY if any conflict arises. 21.3. If the CONSULTANT meets the definition of a “Consultant” as defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT will file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended from time to time. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION; COMPLIANCE WITH ADA. 22.1. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 2.30.510, as amended from time to time, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person due to that person’s race, skin color, gender, gender identity, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, pregnancy, genetic information or condition, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. 22.2. CONSULTANT understands and agrees that pursuant to the Americans Disabilities Act (“ADA”), programs, services and other activities provided by a public entity to the public, whether directly or through a contractor or subcontractor, are required to be accessible to the disabled public. Upon delivery of the services, CONSULTANT will provide the Services specified in this Agreement in a manner that complies with the ADA and any other applicable federal, state and local disability rights laws and regulations, as amended from time to time. CONSULTANT will not discriminate against persons with disabilities in the provision of services, benefits or activities provided under this Agreement. SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the CITY’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at CITY’s Purchasing Department, hereby incorporated by reference and as amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of CITY’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include, first, minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste; and, third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, CONSULTANT shall comply with the following Zero Waste requirements: (a) All printed materials provided by CONSULTANT to CITY generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post- consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by CITY’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post- DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 15 Packet Page 373 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 12 of 38 consumer material and printed with vegetable-based inks. (b) Goods purchased by CONSULTANT on behalf of CITY shall be purchased in accordance with CITY’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Department’s office. (c) Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by CONSULTANT, at no additional cost to CITY, for reuse or recycling. CONSULTANT shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. [Reserved]. This section intentionally omitted. SECTION 25. NON-APPROPRIATION. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code, as amended from time to time. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This Section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Client shall remain liable for payment of services provided before the date of CONSULTANT’s receipt of notice for termination for non-appropriation. SECTION 26. PREVAILING WAGES AND DIR REGISTRATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS. 26.1. This Project is not subject to prevailing wages and related requirements. CONSULTANT is not required to pay prevailing wages and meet related requirements under the California Labor Code and California Code of Regulations in the performance and implementation of the Project if the contract: (1) is not a public works contract; (2) is for a public works construction project of $25,000 or less, per California Labor Code Sections 1782(d)(1), 1725.5(f) and 1773.3(j); or (3) is for a public works alteration, demolition, repair, or maintenance project of $15,000 or less, per California Labor Code Sections 1782(d)(1), 1725.5(f) and 1773.3(j). SECTION 27. CLAIMS PROCEDURE FOR “9204 PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS”. For purposes of this Section 27, a “9204 Public Works Project” means the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any public structure, building, road, or other public improvement of any kind. (Cal. Pub. Cont. Code § 9204.) Per California Public Contract Code Section 9204, for Public Works Projects, certain claims procedures shall apply, as set forth in Exhibit F, entitled “Claims for Public Contract Code Section 9204 Public Works Projects”. DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 16 Packet Page 374 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 13 of 38 This Project is not a 9204 Public Works Project. SECTION 28. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. 28.1. In the performance of this Agreement, Each Party may have access the other Party’s Confidential Information (defined below). Each Party will hold Confidential Information in strict confidence, not disclose it to any third party, and will use it only for the performance of its obligations to the other Party under this Agreement and for no other purpose. Each Party will maintain reasonable and appropriate administrative, technical and physical safeguards to ensure the security, confidentiality and integrity of the Confidential Information. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Each Party may disclose Confidential Information to its employees, agents and subcontractors, if any, to the extent they have a need to know in order to perform Each Party’s obligations to the other PARTY under this Agreement and for no other purpose, provided that Each Party informs them of, and requires them to follow, the confidentiality and security obligations of this Agreement. 28.2. “Confidential Information” means all data, information (including without limitation “Personal Information” about a California resident as defined in Civil Code Section 1798 et seq., as amended from time to time) and materials, in any form or media, tangible or intangible, provided or otherwise made available to either Party, directly or indirectly, pursuant to this Agreement. Except for documents containing “Personal Information”, a party shall mark any document with the word CONFIDENTIAL prominently on each section or page of the document that is intended to be confidential. An email signature that contains a confidentiality clause or disclaimer shall not be considered marking a document CONFIDENTIAL within the meaning of this section. Confidential Information excludes information that can show by appropriate documentation: (i) was publicly known at the time it was provided or has subsequently become publicly known other than by a breach of this Agreement; (ii) was rightfully in a Party’s possession free of any obligation of confidence prior to receipt of Confidential Information; (iii) is rightfully obtained by either Party from a third party without breach of any confidentiality obligation; (iv) is independently developed by employees of a Party without any use of or access to the Confidential Information; or (v) a Party has written consent to disclose signed by an authorized representative of the other Party. 28.3. Notwithstanding the foregoing, either Party may disclose Confidential Information to the extent required by law, order of a court of competent jurisdiction or governmental body, provided that such Party will notify the other Party in writing of such order immediately upon receipt and prior to any such disclosure (unless prohibited by law from doing so), to give the other Party, at their own expense, an opportunity to oppose or otherwise respond to such order. 28.4. CONSULTANT will notify City within forty-eight business hours upon learning of any breach in the security of its systems or unauthorized disclosure of, or access to, Confidential Information in its possession or control, and if such Confidential Information consists of Personal Information, CONSULTANT will provide information to CITY sufficient to meet the DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 17 Packet Page 375 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 14 of 38 notice requirements of Civil Code Section 1798 et seq., as applicable, as amended from time to time. 28.5. Prior to or upon termination or expiration of this Agreement, either Party will honor any request from the other Party to return or securely destroy all copies of Confidential Information. 28.6. If selected in Section 30 (Exhibits), this Agreement is also subject to the terms and conditions of the Information Privacy Policy and Cybersecurity Terms and Conditions. SECTION 29. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 29.1. This Agreement will be governed by California law, without regard to its conflict of law provisions. 29.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 29.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third parties. 29.4. This Agreement, including all exhibits, constitutes the entire and integrated agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and supersedes all prior agreements, negotiations, representations, statements and undertakings, either oral or written. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the authorized representatives of the parties and approved as required under Palo Alto Municipal Code, as amended from time to time. No terms or conditions stated in a CITY purchase order or other order documentation will be incorporated into or form any part of this Agreement, all such terms or conditions will be null and void, unless such term is made part of this Agreement by written mutual consent. 29.5. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement will remain in full force and effect. 29.6. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the exhibits hereto (per Section 30) or CONSULTANT’s proposal (if any), the Agreement shall control. In the event of a conflict between the exhibits hereto and CONSULTANT’s proposal (if any), the exhibits shall control. 29.7. The provisions of all checked boxes in this Agreement shall apply to this DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 18 Packet Page 376 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 15 of 38 Agreement; the provisions of any unchecked boxes shall not apply to this Agreement. 29.8. All section headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and are not intended to define or limit the scope of any provision of this Agreement. 29.9. This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which, when executed by the authorized representatives of the parties, shall together constitute a single binding agreement. 29.10. Consultant warrants that the Services will perform substantially in accordance with documentation and marketing proposals, and free of any material defect. Consultant warrants to the City that, upon notice given to Consultant of any defect in design or fault or improper workmanship, Consultant will remedy any such defect. Consultant makes no warranty regarding, and will have no responsibility for, any claim arising out of: (i) a modification of the Services made by anyone other than Consultant, even in a situation where Consultant approves of such modification in writing; or (ii) use of the Services in combination with a third party service, web hosting service, or server not authorized by Consultant. SECTION 30. EXHIBITS. Each of the following exhibits, if the check box for such exhibit is selected below, is hereby attached and incorporated into this Agreement by reference as though fully set forth herein: EXHIBIT A: SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT A-1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER EXHIBIT A-2 REQUIREMENTS APPENDIX EXHIBIT B: SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE EXHIBIT C: COMPENSATION EXHIBIT C-1: SCHEDULE OF RATES EXHIBIT D: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS EXHIBIT E: INFORMATION PRIVACY POLICY EXHIBIT F: CYBERSECURITY TERMS AND CONDITIONS THIS AGREEMENT IS NOT COMPLETE UNLESS ALL SELECTED EXHIBITS ARE ATTACHED. DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 19 Packet Page 377 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 16 of 38 CONTRACT No. C23186719 SIGNATURE PAGE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO ____________________________ City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ City Attorney or designee CIVICPLUS, LLC Officer 1 By: Name: Title: Officer 2 By: Name: Title: DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A Amy Vikander Senior Vice President of Customer Success Senior Vice President of Operations Cole Cheever ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 20 Packet Page 378 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 17 of 38 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSULTANT shall provide the Services detailed in this Exhibit A, entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”. Annual services, including but not limited to hosting, support and maintenance services for the Recreation Management Software System that was implemented by CONSULTANT in August 2019. 1. Recreation Management Software Licensing 2. Software Maintenance Including Service Patches and System Enhancements 3. 24/7 Technical Support and Access to the CivicPlus Community 4. Dedicated Client Success Manager 5. Training Overview CONSULTANT agrees to provide a Recreation Management Software System that meets the current and future needs of CITY’s Community Services Department. This shall be a RMSS that is commercially available and requires minimal customization to meet the CITY’s needs. CONSULTANT shall provide a fully hosted (web) solution with minimal local client (PC) software install which provides staff and customers the greatest flexibility in accessing the software. The product shall provide a secured Data Center that separates credit card information from the CITY’s network and overall makes Payment Card Industry (PCI) compliance less costly for the CITY. The software solution will enable the CITY to provide excellent customer service both in person and online for its main business activities including, but not limited to, daily recreation program administration and registration, facility and field reservations, memberships, payment processing and reporting. In addition, the system will provide for efficient and effective business processes and management tools to assist in program administration. Overall ease of use, including robust data management and reporting capabilities, is critical. The Department wants to automate and incorporate as many processes as possible. The software solution must include the ability to create custom catalog and brochures based on program and activity data. The ideal software will provide an online catalog and brochure builder that facilitates custom page layouts based on program and activity data, and have the ability to style, publish and print activity brochures, export data into Adobe InDesign software, and will be adaptive to the changing needs of the organization and its customers. The CONSULTANT will provide implementation, project management, technical installation expertise and on-site training to help speed employee and public acceptance and usage of the system. The CONSULTANT will coordinate with the CITY to implement the proposed DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 21 Packet Page 379 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 18 of 38 Project Schedule. CONSULTANT shall offer a coordinated approach and will specify the type and level of support anticipated from CITY staff. Part of the project implementation will include weekly, written status reports, in electronic format, by the vendor’s project manager at a mutually agreed upon time after contract award or verbally whenever requested by CITY’s project lead. These status reports will recap work done and bring attention to anything that may cause a delay in completing implementation. Software Components The RMSS must be user friendly and must be able to manage the creation, operation, billing and management of a wide variety of recreational programs and rental facilities operated by the CITY and offered to its residents. The features required are listed in Exhibit A-2 of this Agreement. For the purposes of obtaining merchant account services through CP Pay, CITY may utilize the designated merchant account for CivicRec through an integrated partnership with Elavon Converge (“CP Pay Merchant”). In the event CITY chooses CP Pay Merchant, CITY will enter into a merchant account agreement with Elavon Converge. Such agreement’s terms and conditions will solely ensure to the benefit and obligation of CITY; CONSULTANT shall not be a party to such agreement. In the event CITY chooses CP Pay Merchant, CONSULTANT will facilitate CITY and CP Pay Merchant communication for contracting purposes and shall integrate the CP Pay Merchant account processor at no charge to CITY. CITY agrees to comply with all terms and conditions of the resulting merchant account agreement and pay all fees required to maintain the services. If CITY desires to use an integrated merchant account processor gateway besides the designated CP Pay Merchant, an integration fee will be included in CITY’s implementation fees. CITY agrees to comply with all terms and conditions of the resulting merchant account agreement and pay all fees required to maintain the services. CITY acknowledges that the fees set forth in this SOW do not include any transaction, processing or other fees imposed by CITY’s merchant account processor. CITY is fully responsible for their relationship with their selected processor. In no event will CONSULTANT: (i) take part in negotiations, (ii) pay any fees incumbent on the CITY or merchant account, or (iii) acquire any liability for the performance of services of any chosen merchant account processor, including CP Pay Merchant. CITY acknowledges switching to a different merchant account processor after signing this Agreement may incur additional fees and require a written and signed modification to this Agreement. CITY shall continue to be responsible for negotiating and executing any merchant account agreement as described herein for any additional merchant account processor changes. When CITY uses CP Pay, then CITY may take online credit card payments for certain services or products they provide via the CITY websites supported by CONSULTANT. As such, through CP Pay, CONSULTANT facilitates an automated process for redirecting credit card DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 22 Packet Page 380 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 19 of 38 payments to CITY’s chosen payment gateways / merchant account processors. For card payments, CONSULTANT will redirect any payments processing to the CITY’s merchant account processor gateway, and the merchant account processor gateway presents the payment form page and processes the card payment. CONSULTANT does not transmit, process or store cardholder data and does not present the payment form. CONSULTANT implements and maintains PCI compliant controls for the system components and applications that provide the redirection services only. CITY understands and agrees that CONSULTANT is not liable for any failure of service or breach of security by any merchant account processor gateway provider selected by CITY, whether such provider is an Integrated Partner or not. Technical and Customer Support CONSULTANT will provide the CITY will a dedicated Client Success Manager to help implement the tools needed to successfully meet the level of community engagement that the CITY desires. Upon Go Live, CITY will have a dedicated Client Success Manager to provide further information on how to utilize the tools in the CITY’s new CONSULTANT system. The client success manager will help keep CITY apprised of new CivicPlus products and optimize the RMS. CONSULTANT will also provide 24/7 access to the CONSULTANT online Help Center where users can review articles, user guides, FAQs, and can get tips on best practices. The Help Center also provides our release notes to keep customers in the loop on upcoming enhancements and maintenance. The Community Forum allows customers to interact with each other, send CivicPlus feedback and suggestions for future system enhancements, and view trending topics among members - along with other functional and engaging features and capabilities. CONSULTANT will also provide maintenance and technical support with the following parameters: Data Security CONSULTANT shall utilize industry standards, insurance requirements, and PCI requirements to ensure that CONSULTANT is only accessed in the manner it’s intended to be accessed and by people who are authorized to do so. Methods include: DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 23 Packet Page 381 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 20 of 38 • Physical security data centers: Netsolace (Tier II), Digital Reality (Tier III), and Rackspace (Tier III) • Server firewalls • Anti-virus scanning • IP logging and filtering • Application security monitoring All data centers provide a network operation center with 24/7/365 monitoring of the data center environment, system availability, and performance. The data centers are SSAE 16 compliant. CONSULTANT shall have policies and procedures in place to ensure continuity and disaster recovery. CONSULTANT shall utilize local, replicated servers to ensure that copies of data, software, and files are always available and up to date. These servers can be rolled over in the event of hardware failure or other local issues. In addition, shall have a process that encrypts backups once each day and sends them off site for purposes of disaster recovery. This process shall ensure that they can reconstitute the entire product and underlying data structure with limited downtime and loss of data. CP Pay shall maintain a secure, Level 1 PCI DSS certified payment gateway integrated within the CivicPlus Platform that CITY can use within any CivicPlus solution or third-party product. In addition, CONSULTANT shall follow the requirements of Exhibits E (“Information Privacy Policy) and F (“Vendor Cybersecurity Terms & Conditions”) to this Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 24 Packet Page 382 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 21 of 38 EXHIBIT A-1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER CONSULTANT shall perform the Services detailed below in accordance with all the terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced in Item 1A below. All exhibits referenced in Item 8 are incorporated into this Task Order by this reference. CONSULTANT shall furnish the necessary facilities, professional, technical and supporting personnel required by this Task Order as described below. CONTRACT NO. OR PURCHASE ORDER REQUISITION NO. (AS APPLICABLE) 1A. MASTER AGREEMENT NO. (MAY BE SAME AS CONTRACT / P.O. NO. ABOVE): 1B. TASK ORDER NO.: 2. CONSULTANT NAME: 3. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: START: COMPLETION: 4 TOTAL TASK ORDER PRICE: $__________________ BALANCE REMAINING IN MASTER AGREEMENT/CONTRACT $_______________ 5. BUDGET CODE_______________ COST CENTER________________ COST ELEMENT______________ WBS/CIP__________ PHASE__________ 6. CITY PROJECT MANAGER’S NAME & DEPARTMENT:_____________________________________ 7. DESCRIPTION OF SCOPE OF SERVICES (Attachment A) MUST INCLUDE: SERVICES AND DELIVERABLES TO BE PROVIDED SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE MAXIMUM COMPENSATION AMOUNT AND RATE SCHEDULE (as applicable) REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES, if any (with “not to exceed” amount) 8. ATTACHMENTS: A: Task Order Scope of Services B (if any): _____________________________ I hereby authorize the performance of the work described in this Task Order. APPROVED: CITY OF PALO ALTO BY:____________________________________ Name __________________________________ Title___________________________________ Date ___________________________________ I hereby acknowledge receipt and acceptance of this Task Order and warrant that I have authority to sign on behalf of Consultant. APPROVED: COMPANY NAME: ______________________ BY:____________________________________ Name __________________________________ Title___________________________________ Date ___________________________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 25 Packet Page 383 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 22 of 38 EXHIBIT A-2 REQUIREMENTS APPENDIX (see next page) DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 26 Packet Page 384 of 792 Must Have Nice to Have Type Feature Yes No Notes X Accounts Each account includes Address (primary and secondary - i.e. P.O. Box for mailing, street for residency), Phone Number (primary and secondary), Birthdate, Email Address for each adult, school grade, primary and emergency contacts, demographic indicators, scholarship (financial assistance) status, special notes (e.g. food allergy, asthma, physical disability, etc.) X X Accounts Ability to create accounts for organizations; ability for to pay via organization credit card vs individual user X X Accounts Effective search with the ability to search for patron by multiple criteria and partial information in order to access patron record, transaction history, facility permits, etc.X X Accounts Individual user accounts within family account X X Accounts Ability to share children's accounts with divorced parents (one child account with the two separate parents accounts). All credits or refunds stay with the paying parent's account.X X Accounts Ability to remove member of the family from the family account to their own account (divorce or adult children). This should be reversible.X X Accounts Ability to deactivate/hide patron that is deceased so they don't show on family account receipt. This should be reversible.X X Accounts Ability to search based on text (or text fragment) on any field in a patron account record. X Since CivicRec is browser based the browser search/find functions should serve to meet this need. X Accounts Ability to merge duplicate accounts without loss of history or transactions. Duplicates could include groups, families, and patrons.X X Accounts Staff is notified if there seems to be a duplicate account for the patron he/she is helping. X X Accounts Ability to suspend an account (make inactive)X X Accounts Easily identify residents vs nonresidents by street address. System should import list of residents, but prefer GIS integration.X X Accounts Ability for staff to edit residency of individual patrons.X X Accounts Allow for selection of preferred method of communication (e.g., email vs. phone vs. text), at the preferred email address, number, etc.X X Accounts Option for patron to opt-out of marketing emails & texts X X Accounts Ability to make notes only seen by staff. Notes should appear in an obvious place.X X Accounts Ability for staff to make financial adjustments to patron account X X Accounts Accept 3rd party payments (Someone outside account is paying)X X Accounts Track patron transaction history X X Accounts Ability to enter zip code and city and state fields are automatically populated at terminal or online X X Accounts Ability for administrators to assign permissions to override/amend fees across all modules (e.g. POS item, class registration, event ticket)X X Accounts Ability to assign patron types (e.g., resident, non-resident, non-profit) in order to apply separate charges to each type X X Accounts Ability to track account demographics (income, ethnicity)X Staff may use Custom Data Fields to record data about users beyond that which is normally captured by CivicRec. X Accounts Automatically promote grade level for all patrons annually by an administrator- defined date. Individual patron grade level should be manually adjustable by staff.X X Accounts Ability for staff to attach/insert documents/scanned forms (e.g. medical waiver, field trip authorization, etc.) to patron's account X Waivers, Receipts, Photos, etc are all tracked in CivicRec. For document upload of sensitive Protected Health Information (PHI) and Personally Identifying Information (PII), we are addressing this need through product development to enhance this experience and will be avaialble to the City at no additional expense once completed. X Accounts Ability to export patron list based on participation history for e-blasts, news items, newsletters, flyers, etc.X X Accounts Ability to create attractive, colorful e-blasts for news items, newsletters, and flyers targeted based on patron history X Software will export activity data into a file for use with a desktop publishing program for the production of an activity guide, course catalog, or activity flyers. X Accounts Ability for staff to print liability waivers that were signed online and include evidence of patron's consent X X Accounts Staff accounts include option to record certifications (with expiration).X Account notes can contain such information. For document upload of sensitive Protected Health Information (PHI) and Personally Identifying Information (PII), we are looking at integrations with services like Dropbox and Google Drive for document storage. X Accounts Ability for ongoing Level (prerequisite) Tracking with Pass/Fail indication. Notification sent to parent via email or as an alert in their account online. Patrons cannot sign up for classes without proper prerequisite(s). Should be available to instructors online. WĂƌƚŝĂů ŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŽŽůƐƚŽŚĞůƉĞŶĨŽƌĐĞƉƌĞͲƌĞƋƵŝƐŝƚĞƐĨŽƌƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐŽĨďůŽĐŬŝŶŐƌĞŐŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶƵŶƚŝůƚŚĞƉƌĞͲƌĞƋƵŝƐŝƚĞŚĂƐďĞĞŶŵĞƚĂŶĚǁĞŚĂǀĞƉůĂŶŶĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƚŽƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŚĞƚƌĂĐŬŝŶŐŽĨƉĂƐƐͬĨĂŝůĨŽƌĐŽŵƉůĞƚŝŽŶŝŶϮϬϮϬ͕ǁĞĂƌĞŶŽƚĂďůĞƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚĞĂďŝůŝƚLJƚŽƐĞŶĚŶŽƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐƚŽƉĂƌĞŶƚƐĂŶĚŝŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŽƌƐĂƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚĂƚƚŚŝƐƚŝŵĞĂŶĚŝƐŶŽƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐ^Kt͘ X Accounts Ability for ongoing Skill (progress) Tracking with Pass/Fail indication. Notification sent to parent via email or as an alert in online portal. Should be available to instructors online.WĂƌƚŝĂů ŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐŶŽƚLJĞƚƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŚĞƚƌĂĐŬŝŶŐŽĨƉƌŽŐƌĞƐƐǁŝƚŚWĂƐƐͬ&ĂŝůŝŶĚŝĐĂƚŝŽŶǁĞŚĂǀĞƉůĂŶŶĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƚŽƐƵƉƉŽƌƚŝŶϮϬϮϬ͘ŝǀŝĐZĞĐŝƐŶŽƚĂďůĞƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚĞĂďŝůŝƚLJƚŽƐĞŶĚŶŽƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐƚŽƉĂƌĞŶƚƐĂŶĚŝŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŽƌƐĂƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚĂŶĚŝƐŶŽƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐ^Kt X Child Care Check in/out process meeting state requirements ŝǀŝĐWůƵƐǁŽƵůĚŶĞĞĚƚŽƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚǁŚĂƚƚŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƐƚĂƚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĞŶƚĂŝůͲƚŽďĞĚŝƐĐƵƐƐĞĚĂŶĚƐĐŽƉĞĚ͘tŚŝůĞ ŝǀŝĐZĞĐ ĚŽĞƐ ƐƵƉƉŽƌƚ ĐŚĞĐŬͲŝŶ ĨŽƌ ďŽƚŚ ĂĐƚŝǀŝƚŝĞƐ ĂŶĚ ƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ ĐŚĞĐŬͲŽƵƚ ƚŽŽůƐ ĂƌĞ ŶŽƚ LJĞƚĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĨŽƌĂůůĂƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚ͘ X Child Care Check in/out (unique to each child/family) that records date, time, & name of person checking in/out WĂƌƚŝĂů X Child Care Auto-generate monthly bill with detailed usage (check in/out)X X Child Care Ability to store patron photo in his/her account X X Facilities Ability to manage reservations for multiple facilities, facility types, and centers. Issue permit for each reservation.X X Facilities Ability to create rooms/areas within a facility that can be reserved separately or together X X Facilities Automatically generate rental permit number X X Facilities Ability to enter new reservations and automatically create a permit to include patron/ organization name, address, date, facilities reserved, detailed rental charges, etc.X X Facilities Ability to set up prompts for unique administrator-defined facility-specific questions during facility reservation process (e.g., Will you be serving alcohol?). Questions would also appear for facilities with online reservations enabled. X X Facilities Ability to modify dates, fees, etc. on closed reservations without having to delete the reservation and creating a new one with the adjustments X X Facilities Ability to cancel any reservation X X Facilities Ability to create recurring reservations (e.g., every Tuesday and Thursday for the next four months) in one process; and ability to create recurring reservations in the past.X X Facilities Ability to create random recurring reservations with any combination of any date sequence in one process; and ability to create recurring reservations in the past.X X Facilities Ability for staff to reserve multiple facilities, for any date range, in a single process without requiring duplicate data entry.X X Facilities Prior to completion of a multi-date reservation, all reservations must be displayed to allow for adjustment or deletion without need to process another transaction X Instructions: Complete this requirements list by responding to each line by putting an "x" in the Yes (This requirement currently exists and can be demonstrated.) or No (This requirement is not supported and/or is not provided as part of this proposal) column. If No, use the Notes column in each row to describe alternative methods to achieve features, if space allows. Attach any additional details and clearly reference each corresponding alternative in the Notes column. d tŚŝůĞŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐƐƵƉƉŽƌƚĐŚĞĐŬͲŝŶĨŽƌďŽƚŚĂĐƚŝǀŝƚŝĞƐĂŶĚƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ĐŚĞĐŬͲŽƵƚƚŽŽůƐĂƌĞŶŽƚLJĞƚĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĨŽƌĂůůĂƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚ͘ŝǀŝĐZĞĐŝƐƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐŽŶƚŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂƐĂƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽĚƵĐƚďĂĐŬůŽŐĂŶĚǁŝůůďĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞƚŽƚŚĞŝƚLJŽŶĐĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 27 Packet Page 385 of 792 X Facilities Refunds should only be linked to the reservation that was canceled, unless manually applied to other transactions by staff.X X Facilities Automatically calculate total fees for reservation X X Facilities Ability to edit (override) fees at time of reservation or thereafter, based on staff security clearance X X Facilities Ability to amend charges, add extra fees, allow partial payments, rental damage deposits and refunds, payment reversals, and credit balance refunds X X Facilities Allow for tracking, billing, and collecting of fees for billable services such as staff costs, overtime fees, facility damage, lighting, clean-up, and security X X Facilities Ability for administrators to assign default fees for facility and/or patron types X X Facilities Ability to assign multiple fees to each facility X X Facilities Easily add hourly and/or flat rate fees to reservation for nonresident, setup, custodial, etc.X X Facilities Identify Non-profit/private/etc. and show only corresponding rental rates, with option to view all rates.X X Facilities Staff view of facility reservation only lists site-specific fees & options (e.g. for athletic fields don't show gym fees or options)X X Facilities If per-transaction fees are charged, internal bookings are exempt from fees X For purposes of merchant processing fees are associated to all CC/Debit transactions. No additional fees for staff booking internally for non-fee based reservations. X Facilities Option to send permits, room set-up diagrams, receipts, etc. via email X X Facilities All email correspondence with patrons should be managed by system. Email from patrons should be routed to the staff working on a reservation interaction (not general department email box). Staff responses should not come from her/his personal City email address. As a result, system should retain both sides of communication history with patron. X Facilities Option to automatically reserve facilities when creating/coding classes X X Facilities Class reservation of a facility includes setup or breakdown time in facility reservation. Setup time must not be included in class schedule online or in brochure export (Adobe InDesign format). X X Facilities Ability for staff to attach/insert scanned application and other related documents to permit X CivicRec is currently addressing the need to attach additional document as described through product roadmap and once completed the City will have available for use at no additional expense. X Facilities Facility booking tracks "still due" paperwork or forms (insurance certificate, etc.)X Additional development is being addressed for automated reminders that should serve to meet this need. Once completed the City will have this available at no additional expense. X Facilities Facility booking emails to remind patron of "still due" paperwork or forms (insurance certificate, etc.)X Additional development is being addressed for automated reminders that should serve to meet this need. Once completed the City will have this available at no additional expense. X Facilities Integrate with insurance certificate tracking software X X Facilities Ability for staff to print, preview, or e-mail receipts, rental permits, etc. with reprint and/or multi-copy options X X Facilities Ability to print reservation confirmation, with reprint and/or multi-copy options X X Facilities Ability to reprint a permit from facility calendar without having to go to a different screen X X Facilities System must create and track invoices X X Facilities Ability for staff to search for available space based on defined parameters (e.g. room for 30 people on Wednesday nights for one hour)WĂƌƚŝĂů X Facilities Program facility set-up/maintenance needs can be linked to each program. Ability to print facility schedule with set-up notes X X Facilities Ability to define unique operating hours for each facility (open and close)X X Facilities Ability to disallow facility reservations on certain days for holidays, City closures, etc. Should be defined separately for each facility.X X Facilities Ability to view facility schedules by year, month, week, day, hours, half hour.X CivicRec allows the viewing of facility schedules by month, week, and day. X Facilities Ability to reserve in minute increments. Should be available from calendar view.X X Facilities System must allow reservations at least three years in the future.X X Facilities Prevent reservations of a facility if already reserved (prevent double-bookings)X X Facilities Drag and drop rental conflict resolution d X Facilities Alert staff if a booking conflict exists prior to completion of a reservation.X X Facilities Display on-screen, in calendar view, reservation schedules for multiple facilities at once, by day, week, month or year. Schedule default and alternate views can be customized by each staff. X X Facilities Display reservation and usage information of a single facility or multiple facilities in a grid or calendar format. In this format, staff can click or hover over on a reservation to view more detailed information without the need to go into the reservation itself. X X Facilities Ability to edit existing rental permits, based on staff permissions X X Facilities Ability for staff to color-code different types of reservations on-screen and on calendars based personal preference X X Facilities Ability to create internal/administration/maintenance bookings without necessity to link to any family or organization X X Facilities Permits list administrator-defined site-specific information (do's & don'ts, site contact info, etc.). Sites: gym, park, etc.X X Facilities Option to include administrator-conditions of use letter along with rental permit.X X Facilities Automatically remove facility bookings for cancelled classes.X X Facilities Online System allows detailed facility information to be displayed including, availability, schedules, comments, fees, and facility photos and videos X X Facilities Online Detailed, user-friendly facility search function which allows patrons to search for available facilities online. Search criteria to include types, locations, amenities, keywords, dates, times, capacity, and day of week. Ability to clearly display available facilities based on user-defined parameters X X Facilities Online System allows online facility reservation requests which require staff approval before permit is issued to patron. This is a request for reservation, not an online booking. A message should be sent to responsible staff for approval. Payment is taken with the reservation request, but should not be processed until reservation request is approved by staff. X X Facilities Online Only facilities selected by administrators will be reservable online. For facilities excluded from online reservations, system should still allow administrators to make their details and/or availability viewable online. X X Facilities Online Ability to set minimum and maximum number of days/months in advance that a reservation can be made. System automatically determines if a reservation falls within that time frame. X X Facilities Online System displays liability waivers with “I Agree and “I Disagree” options for patron input. If patron selects “I Disagree” option, the reservation cannot be completed. Allow patron to print or email liability waiver to themselves. X hƐŝŶŐWƌŽŵƉƚƐƚŚĞĐůŝĞŶƚĐĂŶĐŽŶĨŝŐƵƌĞĂĐƵƐƚŽŵƉƌŽŵƉƚĨŽƌΗ/ŝƐĂŐƌĞĞΗ͕ďƵƚŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐŶŽƚLJĞƚƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŚĞĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶĂůŝƚLJŝĨƚŚĞLJƐĞůĞĐƚΗ/ ŝƐĂŐƌĞĞΗƚŚĞƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶĐĂŶŶŽƚďĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ͘/ŶŽƌĚĞƌƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚŝƐ͕ƚŚĞŝƚLJǁŽƵůĚŶĞĞĚƚŽƵƐĞŝǀŝĐZĞĐΖƐǁĂŝǀĞƌĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚŵĂŬĞƚŚĞŵƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽďĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚŝŶŽƌĚĞƌƚŽĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞŝŶƚŚĞƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ͘^ŚŽƵůĚƚŚĞƵƐĞƌĞůĞĐƚŶŽƚƚŽĂŐƌĞĞƚŽƚŚĞǁĂŝǀĞƌͬĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƚŚĞLJǁŝůůŶŽƚďĞĂůůŽǁĞĚƚŽĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞŝŶƚŚĞĐŚĞĐŬŽƵƚͬƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽĐĞƐƐƚŽŚĞůƉƚŚĞŝƚLJĂĐĐŽŵƉůŝƐŚƚŚĞŝƌŐŽĂů͘ X Facilities Online Ability for staff to print liability waivers with evidence of patron's consent.X X Facilities Online Online facility booking process that can track special requirements (insurance, jump house application, etc.) for each facility. Tracking might include ability to upload documents such as an insurance endorsements. Additional special requests trigger another level of rules & requirements (e.g. filter or contingency questions). WĂƌƚŝĂů tĞŚĂǀĞƉůĂŶƐĨŽƌĂĨĞǁƚŚŝŶŐƐůŝŬĞĐŽůůĞĐƚĞĚĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ͕ďƵƚǁĞƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚƚŚŝƐĂƐĂƐŬŝŶŐĨŽƌĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞǁŽƌŬĨůŽǁŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚƚŽŽůƚŚĂƚŚĂƐŶŽƚLJĞƚďĞĞŶƐĐŽƉĞĚĂŶĚĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚ͘dŚĞƌĞĨŽƌĞ͕ŝǀŝĐZĞĐŝƐŶŽƚĂďůĞƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶĂůŝƚLJĂƐ ĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚ͘,ŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕Waivers, Receipts, Photos, etc are all tracked in CivicRec. For document upload of sensitive Protected Health Information (PHI) and Personally Identifying Information (PII), we are addressing this need through product development to enhance this experience and will be avaialble to the City at no additional expense once completed. WĂƌƚŝĂů tŚŝůĞŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƚŽŽůƐĨŽƌƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐŽĨƐĞŶĚŝŶŐďŽƚŚĞŵĂŝůĂŶĚ^D^ŵĞƐƐĂŐĞƐƚŽƉĂƚƌŽŶƐ͕ŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐŶŽƚLJĞƚƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŚĞĂďŝůŝƚLJƚŽƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂů^D^ŵĞƐƐĂŐĞƐƐĞŶƚƚŽƉĂƚƌŽŶƐĨƌŽŵƐƚĂĨĨĂŶĚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶĂůŝƚLJĂŶĚͬŽƌŵĂŶĂŐĞͬŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶŚŝƐƚŽƌLJŽĨĐŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐĞŶƚďĂĐŬĨƌŽŵƉĂƚƌŽŶƚŽĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐƚĂĨĨ tŚŝůĞŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐŶŽƚLJĞƚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJƐƵƉƉŽƌƚĞĚĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶĂůŝƚLJĂƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚ͕ŝŶĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶƚŽŚŽǁŝǀŝĐZĞĐĐĂŶƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐŽŵĞŽĨƚŚŝƐŶĞĞĚŽƵƚŽĨƚŚĞďŽdžƚŚĞƌĞĂƌĞƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůǁŽƌŬĂƌŽƵŶĚƐǁĞΖƌĞŚĂƉƉLJƚŽĚĞŵŽŶƐƚƌĂƚĞŝŶŽƌĚĞƌƚŽďĞƐƚĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞŝĨƚŚŽƐĞŵŝŐŚƚŚĞůƉŝŶƚŚĞƐŚŽƌƚͲƚĞƌŵ͘ EĞĞĚƐĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƐĐŽƉŝŶŐƚŽƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĞŶƚĂŝůĞĚ͕ DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 28 Packet Page 386 of 792 X Facilities Online Ability for patron to scan and attach any required documents for reservation (e.g., proof of residence/ business status, non-profit status, proof of insurance, etc.)X While not currently available this is being addressed through product development and will be available to the City at no additional expense once completed. X Facilities Online Allow patrons to view reserved times without the ability to see details (e.g., who has reserved the time or what it was reserved for)X X Facilities Online Patron view of facility reservation only lists site-specific fees & options (e.g. for athletic fields don't show gym fees or options)X X Facilities Online Suggest other similar facility if requested facility is booked X X Facilities Online Allow cart to expire after certain period of time if patron does not check out X X Facilities Online Show transaction timer for cart expiration. (e.g. Ticketmaster)X X Facilities Reports Customizable facility report formats X X Facilities Reports Ability to print or preview facility calendars including all rooms in a facility by date range or by individual rooms with fit-to-page option.X X Facilities Reports Ability to print and/or email facility calendars by date, facility, or specific room. Calendars must include beginning and ending reservations times and staff-defined rental title.X X Facilities Reports Ability to create report for easy analysis of reservations by various parameters (facility, type of rental, resident, non-resident, non-profit)X X Facilities Reports Ability to track reservations into staff-defined statistics and reporting groups (e.g., all wedding reservations)X X Facilities Reports Ability to produce reports that include one, some, or all of the following options and data elements: All reservations for a specific facility type, such as a meeting room or field, all reservations for a specific facility, all reservations for a specific date range, all reservations for a specific patron or organization (e.g., non-profits), all reservations for a specific staff member X X Facilities Reports Ability to choose which groups/accounts are included in report results. (E.g. Report that shows all rentals but allows to exclude reservations for some groups.)X X Facilities Reports Ability to report all financial activity for rentals by date range, site, type of facility (gym, field, picnic area, etc.), number of hours, etc.X X Facilities Reports Ability to preview reports on-screen X X Facilities Reports Ability to choose to print or email permits, facility rules and regulations, etc.X X Facilities Reports Ability to run a marketing report listing all patrons with reservations for a staff- defined search range (e.g., all patrons who reserved picnic areas for last month) and email/text/send notifications for upcoming events X X Facilities Reports Reservation report showing all reservations made by an individual patron or organization for a specific date range X X Facilities Reports Ability to create reports by facility and date, showing any reservation special requests and set-up requirements with option to include set-up chart X X Facilities Reports Ability to print rules and regulations letter and set-up chart at the time rental permit is issued. Include option to email the permit with these attachments.X X Facilities Reports Allow facility schedule inquiries by date range X X Facilities Reports Ability to view schedules for multiple facilities at one time X X Facilities Reports View reservation information by patron/organization name or by permit number X XFinance System must allow for: (a)Full payment (b) Partial payment (c)Payment from patron credit (d) Payment reversals (e)Payment cancellations and backdating (f) Payment plans with automated tracking (g)Credit balance refunds (h)Rental deposit refunds X XFinanceAllow split payments among multiple payment methods (cash, check, credit, gift certificate, etc.).X XFinance System must provide complete end-of-day reports (summary and detail options), to include as a minimum: (a)End of shift cash out process/report (b)Receipt transaction listing with receipt number, time of transaction and amount of transaction, and patron name, if checks, include check numbers (c)Daily GL account distribution (d)System must have the ability to balance (cash out) by staff member, location, for any date range, any time range, by function, by general ledger account number, by payment method, or for the entire system. X XFinance System must have the ability to cancel any transaction(s) with the following options: (a)Apply credit to household balance (b)Apply surcharge fees (c)Apply split refund payment types (i.e., ability to process a refund with portions applied to multiple refund payment methods) (d)Refund later from system (e) Backdate a payment cancellation X XFinanceRefund to payment type used at time of purchase (cash or check by check, credit card to credit card)X X Finance Ability to apply account credit to any transaction in any module in person or online.X XFinancePayment processor - either vendor hosts or a Third party X ůŝĞŶƚŚĂƐĞůĞĐƚĞĚƚŽƵƐĞůĂǀŽŶĂƐƚŚĞŝƌƚŚŝƌĚͲƉĂƌƚLJƉĂLJŵĞŶƚƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŽƌ. XFinance If a third party payment processor is used, there must be some identifier that helps identify which transaction in recreation system ties to which payment in third party payment system. X X Finance Option for auto bill pay (recurring credit card charge)X XFinanceAllow multiple, user-defined payment methods to be used online, including Financial Assistance.X XFinanceRequire payment reference information to be entered during transaction processing (e.g., when processing a check, check number is required for tracking purposes)X XFinance As revenue is tracked (i.e., transactions are processed), the revenue generated may be linked to unique general ledger codes. Example: If an Arts program is offered, a class fee and a registration fee are required. The system must have the ability to separate the class fee and the registration fee into two unique GL accounts and/or sub-accounts, automatically. Revenue from any part of the system (module) may be associated with any GL code in the system X XFinanceSystem must provide for linking revenue to chart of account codes (general ledger accounts).X XFinanceAbility to track revenue generated from activities that have not started yet (i.e., deferred revenue)X XFinanceAllow multiple, administrator-defined payment methods to be established (e.g., coupons, gift certificates, fee waivers, etc.)X XFinanceSystem must allow for tax rate option to be set up.X X Financial Assistance Patron's account should show Financial Assistance eligibility. For example, when registering an eligible patron in person, the system should show staff that the person has Financial Assistance available. X X Financial Assistance Automatically remove Financial Assistance status from patron accounts on system administrator-defined expiration date. Unused funds should go back to the main Financial Assistance account. X DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 29 Packet Page 387 of 792 X Financial Assistance Ability to offer & track Financial Assistance that is restricted to system administrator- defined activities X X Financial Assistance Financial Assistance redeemable online for approved activities X X Financial Assistance Generate form letter to notify or remind recipient of Financial Assistance status (available funds & expiration date). Options to email or print letter.X X GIS Integrate with the City's GIS system (Esri ArcGIS) for residency information X The City may opt to have CivicRec integrate with its Esri ArcGIS system for purposes of local resident determination, service fees apply. X Implementation Detail project timeline with carefully spelled out phases of installation, training, testing, etc.X X Implementation Ability to interface with City’s future financial software d ƵĞƚŽĂŵďŝŐƵŝƚLJ͕ŝǀŝĐWůƵƐĐĂŶŶŽƚĂŐƌĞĞǁŝƚŚŽƵƚŬŶŽǁŝŶŐŵŽƌĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶŝŶŐƚŚĞĨƵƚƵƌĞĨŝŶĂŶĐŝĂůƐŽĨƚǁĂƌĞĂŶĚǁŚĂƚƐLJƐƚĞŵƚŚĞĐůŝĞŶƚŝƐƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐŽŶƵƐŝŶŐ͘dŽďĞĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƐĐŽƉĞĚĂŶĚĚŝƐĐƵƐƐĞĚ͘tĞ ĚŽŽĨĨĞƌĨŝŶĂŶĐŝĂůĞdžƚƌĂĐƚƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ͕ĂŶĚǁĞĐĂŶŝŶƚĞŐƌĂƚĞǁŝƚŚ the City's selected payment gateway (for credit card processing). Additionally, we can also produce a GL extract compatible with the City's financial system. We have interfaced with a number of different systems and are confident that we can produce a file compatible with yours. Service fees apply.ůƚŚŽƵŐŚ͕ƚŚĞƐĞŵĂLJďĞĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶƐ͕ŶĞĞĚƚŽĚŝƐĐƵƐƐĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƚŽƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚ͘ X Implementation Extensive capability testing on a test/trainer database prior to going live X X Implementation Extensive on-site training X Training and travel fees apply. X Implementation Detailed training on how to customize reports X X Implementation Web-based training for staff and instructors X X Implementation Extensive training for staff, administrators, and any others where appropriate X X Implementation If data migration is possible, ability to transfer any monies on patron accounts to new system, including rental deposits, credit on account, amount owed X X Implementation Ability to roll over patron and facility details and history from existing CLASS system X Please see proposal for additional details concerning data imports. X Implementation Dedicated vendor project manager X X Leagues Provides for the scheduling of any number of leagues with normal regular season, round robin, and single/double elimination, including playoffs.X X Leagues System automatically reserves facilities during the schedule generation process X X Leagues Ability to design full leagues (schedules, standings, and rosters)X X Leagues Automatically calculates team record and winning percentage X X Leagues Ability to cancel games and reschedule X X Leagues Ability to import our own schedule (in place of system-generated schedule).X X Leagues Allows manual adjustment to a league schedule to meet any special requirements X X Leagues Allows for any adjustments to any game in the schedule X X Leagues Allows for creation of tournament brackets at the end of the regular season based on league standings X ŽŵŵĞŶƚĨŽƌďŽƚŚ͗tŚŝůĞŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐŶŽƚLJĞƚƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŚĞĂďŝůŝƚLJĨŽƌƐƚĂĨĨƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞƚŽƵƌŶĂŵĞŶƚďƌĂĐŬĞƚƐĂƚƚŚĞĞŶĚŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐƵůĂƌƐĞĂƐŽŶďĂƐĞĚŽŶůĞĂŐƵĞƐƚĂŶĚŝŶŐƐ͕ǁĞĂƌĞĂŶƚŝĐŝƉĂƚŝŶŐƚŚĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĂďŝůŝƚLJƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞͬƉƌŽĚƵĐĞ^ŝŶŐůĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚŝŽŶƚŽƵƌŶĂŵĞŶƚďƌĂĐŬĞƚƐŝŶϮϬϭϵǁŝƚŚĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůŽƉƚŝŽŶƐƉůĂŶŶĞĚĨŽƌĨƵƚƵƌĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞŝŶϮϬϮϬ͘X Leagues Effective method for managing “round-robin” and tournaments X X Leagues Ability to create league and coach/division specific email lists X X Leagues Produce and print individual league team rosters.X X Leagues Ability to email or text schedules, standings, and rosters and post online X X Leagues Count forfeits as a loss and a half in standings.X X Leagues Ability for staff to take a class list and assign youth to specific teams at will. Team rosters would include contact info, special needs, etc.X X Leagues League Coaches Portal: allow coaches to look up rosters, communicate with team members (via system & not personal account), etc. (similar to Team Snap)X X Memberships Batch renewal billing: roll over members into new cycle and automatically generate invoice (to manually mail or email).X X Memberships Ability to create a variety of membership pass types and time periods (annual, quarterly, punch pass)X X Memberships Option to print membership cards which can be used to pull up an account or check- in to a class. Includes ability to report on check-ins to track usage. Cards could be mag-strip, barcode, HID, etc. X X Memberships Ability to check-in via smartphone (via an email barcode or app; doesn't matter how) X This is currently supported via e-tickets with barcode scanning. X Memberships Option to limit class registration to those with a valid membership (membership validation by age, program/class, etc.)X X Memberships Ability to track and report on visit history X X Online Website should meet is the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/) ^ĞĞdžŚŝďŝƚ͗^ŽĨƚǁĂƌĞŽŵƉŽŶĞŶƚƐ X Online Ability to offer an online store that ties into point of sale (aware of inventory). Items would be for pickup only.X X Online E-mail address is login credential X X Online Ability for patron to select their own password X X Online Option for patron to login using other credentials such as Google, Facebook, etc.X X Online Alert patron of scheduling conflicts between class they are adding and existing classes on account X This is currently specific to active registrations in same class their attempting to enroll into. X Online Alert patron if signing up for a class they do not meet the requirements for (prerequisites, age limit, etc.). System should give reason for error, rather than simply preventing registration. X X Online Patron start page suggests classes family members might like X X Online Ability for patrons to attach/Insert scanned forms (e.g. medical waiver, field trip authorization, etc.) to patron's account X tŚŝůĞŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐŶŽƚLJĞƚƐƵƉƉŽƌƚĂƚƚĂĐŚŝŶŐĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐĂƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚǁĞǁŝůůďĞƐƚĂƌƚŝŶŐƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŶĞĞĚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚŝƐůĂƚĞƌƚŚŝƐLJĞĂƌĂŶĚǁŝůůĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞǁŽƌŬŝŶŐŽŶĐŽŵƉůĞƚŝŶŐƚŚŝƐŝŶϮϬϮϬ͘KŶĐĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚƚŚĞŝƚLJǁŝůůŚĂǀĞĂĐĐĞƐƐƚŽƵƐĞĂƐŶĞĞĚĞĚXOnline Allow cart to expire after certain period of time if patron does not check out X X Online System displays liability waivers with “I Agree and “I Disagree” options for patron input. If patron selects “I Disagree” option, the transaction cannot be completed. Allow patron to print or email liability waiver to themselves. X hƐŝŶŐWƌŽŵƉƚƐƚŚĞĐůŝĞŶƚĐĂŶĐŽŶĨŝŐƵƌĞĂĐƵƐƚŽŵƉƌŽŵƉƚĨŽƌΗ/ŝƐĂŐƌĞĞΗ͕ďƵƚŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐŶŽƚLJĞƚƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŚĞĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶĂůŝƚLJŝĨƚŚĞLJƐĞůĞĐƚΗ/ŝƐĂŐƌĞĞΗƚŚĞƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶĐĂŶŶŽƚďĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ͘/ŶŽƌĚĞƌƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚŝƐ͕ƚŚĞŝƚLJǁŽƵůĚŶĞĞĚƚŽƵƐĞŝǀŝĐZĞĐΖƐǁĂŝǀĞƌĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚŵĂŬĞƚŚĞŵƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽďĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚŝŶŽƌĚĞƌƚŽĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞŝŶƚŚĞƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ͘^ŚŽƵůĚƚŚĞƵƐĞƌĞůĞĐƚŶŽƚƚŽĂŐƌĞĞƚŽƚŚĞǁĂŝǀĞƌͬĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƚŚĞLJǁŝůůŶŽƚďĞĂůůŽǁĞĚƚŽĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞŝŶƚŚĞĐŚĞĐŬŽƵƚͬƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽĐĞƐƐƚŽŚĞůƉƚŚĞŝƚLJĂĐĐŽŵƉůŝƐŚƚŚĞŝƌŐŽĂů͘ X Online Offer electronic signature for liability waiver X X Online Ability for patron to add family or individual class schedule into personal electronic calendar (e.g. Outlook Calendar, iCal, Google Calendar, csv file, etc.)X X Online Patron-specific salutations when registering such as "happy birthday" or anniversary of being a patron X X Online Option for staff and instructors to record program attendance X X Online Ability for instructors to update patron skill or prerequisite record.X This is a permission based functionality assigned to users as the City deems fit. X Online Allow league coaches to look up rosters, communicate with team members (via system & not personal account), etc. (similar to Team Snap)X X Online Accurately, translate online pages into different languages X While CivicRec does not provide language support most groups meet this need through browser translation tools available. X Online Option to make donations and buy items in online store without having to create an account X For purposes of "guest-checkout" functionalities this is currently supported in- house. For all online transactions patrons are required to log into an active user account. X Online Option for administrators to include class details online. Details include: detailed class information, spaces available, comments, fees, dates, times, instructors, no class dates, and age/grade requirement online. Option for staff to include links to documents (e.g. class supply list, dress code, etc.) X X Online Present custom, activity-specific questions during the online registration process X X Online Ability to disallow online registration for certain classes X X Online Class and facility locations show addresses using online mapping (e.g. Bing Maps, Google Maps, Map Quest etc.)X X Online Responsive view - adjusts to smart phones/tablets and PC's X DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 30 Packet Page 388 of 792 X Online Ability for patron to create account and use it right away.X X Online System alerts patron of existing account when registering, etc. (to prevent duplicates) X X Online User-friendly option for patrons to reset a forgotten online password or retrieve a forgotten username.X X Online Ability for patron to update email, phone, etc. with the exception of physical address (due to non-resident fee) and birthdate. Only staff and administrators should be able to change physical address and birthdate. X X Online Robust search function, allowing patrons to quickly find program details and information based on program criteria (name, location, type, age, activity code)X X Online Ability to browse classes and availability online without requiring an account X X Online Suggest similar classes if a class is full X X Online Patrons may add themselves to a wait list X X Online Allow patrons to add special needs (physical, dietary, etc.) notes during online registration X X Online When registering, prompt patron to confirm emergency contact data is correct during checkout X X Online Periodically prompt patron to confirm phone, email address, contact, & other staff- defined data are correct. Intent is to make sure best method of contact is current.X X Online Patron may request refund online, with automatic staff notification. Refunds require staff processing.X While not currently available this is something CivicRec is addressing through product development and will be available to the City once completed at no additional expense. X Online Cancelled classes appear as "cancelled" online (they are not removed from listing)X The City can choose to manage this function as needed, both cancel and/or remove from online viewing. This feature can be set to manage automatically or manually. X Online Upselling recommendations like on Amazon (while browsing and during checkout). Upselling should make sure there is space in the class(es) before promoting.X X Online Add activities to cart and view cart before check out X X Online Show transaction timer for cart expiration. (e.g. Ticketmaster, but with more time.)X X Online If item is placed in patron cart, spot is not guaranteed until checkout is completed X X Online Allow patrons to view/print schedule of all household registrations. Ability to add/remove individual household members from calendar view.X You do have the ability to view/print schedule of all household registrations, and to view all household members from calendar view. Members are not removable from calendar view. X Online Allow patrons to view account information, current/history/future enrollments online X X Online Detailed class registration receipts must be provided on-screen with option to print. X X Online System must meet the PCI/CISP credit card industry Payment Applicator Best Practices specifications X CivicRec is certified as PCI SAQ-D compliant as a service provider. CP Pay is certified as PCI Level 1 compliant. X Online Online patrons must be notified in real-time if credit card is declined X Expired credit cards are typically indicated by a real- time return code from the merchant provider. Some merchant providers (e.g. OpenEdge) even have decline minimizing capabilities which will map the refund to the cardholders newly received card. X Online Credit card payments must be automatically deposited directly into City accounts at the end of each day X Additional dependency on the Merchant Services being used by the Department. X Online Ability for administrators to control online registrations by season, specific dates, and patron residency, etc.X X Online Ability for instructors to view and print class list online X X Online Ability for instructors to communicate with patrons via email or text (patron's preferred communication method). Allow instructors to add email addresses or texts that are not on class roster. If an instructor is going to cancel or change something about an individual class meeting, clerical should be notified. Communication should come from system and not from instructor's personal email address or cell phone number. X Permission based and available for use as needed. X Online Ability for instructors to change class size max/min. Instructor's supervisor should be notified of any changes.X Permission based and available for use as needed. X Online Ability to conduct online surveys based on staff-defined criteria within the system using email and social media.X These surveys utilize email and not social media. X Online Options for website design so it matches close to our city website X X Online Create and update webpages without having to edit html X X Online Ability for staff to post videos with class descriptions, facility descriptions, help information, landing/home pages, etc.X In order to maintain a judicious use of CivicRec we do not support the use of video. If needed the City may choose to embed video links for purposes of redirecting users for additional information. X Online If per-transaction fees or revenue percentages are charged, process donations without them (excludes credit card fee)X X Payment processing Third party (for PCI compliance). Interface will not capture or store any payment card information on or within the City of Palo Alto servers or network environment.X XPoint of SaleAbility to sell items in person at sites X XPoint of SaleAbility to customize receipt format (e.g. with different information per site, with City logo, etc.)X XPoint of SaleItemized receipts X X Point of Sale Flexibility in entering/changing amounts X X Point of Sale Option to attach patron information to transaction X X Point of Sale Ability to easily process refunds from point of sale X X Publishing Formatted Brochure export to Adobe InDesign, editable if format changes X X Publishing Formatted Brochure export to Adobe InDesign to multiple languages X This would be a requirement of the City staff to manage. CivicRec provides the tools to export information out of CivicRec in an InDesign format but does not manage multiple languages. X Registration Upon completion of any transaction, the roster, household history, cash journal, general ledger, billing information (if applicable) and activity financial status reports are all updated immediately. X X Registration Option for administrators to give staff ability to override requirements (e.g. age, grade, skill level, fees, etc.). Would be nice to have the option to make this override permanent.X X Registration Allow for age or grade-specific classes that a patron cannot sign up for if not the corresponding age or grade.X X Registration Display the number of registrants currently enrolled in a class X X Registration Automatically generate wait lists for classes reaching the maximum number of enrollees X X Registration Display the number of registrants currently on the wait list for a class X X Registration Allow staff to manually change wait list order. (E.g. Move someone up or down in priority.)X X Registration Automatically notify staff of wait list change when an opening becomes available. This will allow staff to notify the appropriate person on the wait list.X X Registration Option for staff to prorate class fees once a class has started X X Registration Staff must be notified immediately if a credit card is declined.X X Registration Registration refunds must not be applied to other transactions without manual intervention (linking)X DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 31 Packet Page 389 of 792 X Registration All email correspondence with patrons should be managed by system. Email from patrons should be routed to the staff working on a registration interaction (not general department email box). Staff responses should not come from her/his personal City email address. As a result, system should retain both sides of communication history with patron. X All incoming emails are managed through staff's department email. X Registration Digital signature pad at front counters (so they don't have to fill out a registration form) would need to be able to confirm registration is correct before signing.X While CivicRec does support e-signature options, CivicRec is not currently integrated with stand alone hardware tools for purposes of meeting this need. X Registration Automatic E-mail confirmations and reminders X X Registration Ability to easily email instructors their rosters with the specific information they want (names with emails or names with food allergies, birthdates, etc.). Should exclude sensitive information (e.g. address, etc.). X X Registration Prevent sensitive information from being emailed out by unaware staff.X X Registration Ability for staff to email patrons their individual or family class schedules X CivicRec's public dashboard tools prove especially useful in sharing this information with patrons. X Registration Ability to offer and track trial (free) classes. This should be reportable.X X Registration Each program can be linked to a staff-defined activity category (e.g., Youth Arts & Crafts, Youth Athletics)X X Registration Allows for activity to be associated with an activity sub-category and be searchable by the categories and sub-categories (e.g., Category: Youth Programs, Sub-Category: Dance)X X Registration Ability to offer pre-enrollment for the next session to current session participants with two options: 1.Pre-enroll in the exact same class (same day & time) in the next session (e.g. Mondays at 10 am). 2.Pre-enroll in any class in the next session (like a priority registration). All current patrons are notified of pre-enrollment opportunity by email with option to pay corresponding class fee online. Include option to also send notification by snail mail. This pre-enrollment option should only be available to patrons in the same category of class. For example, pre-enrollment in Gymnastics is only available to current Gymnastics patrons. Example of the two pre-enrollment options above 1.Currently registered in Gymnastics Level A on Mondays at 10 -> pre-enroll patron in Gymnastics Level A on Mondays at 10 in the next session 2. Currently Registered in Gymnastics Level A on Mondays at 10 -> allow patron to choose any Gymnastics class at any day & time (that they qualify for) X X Registration Private Lesson Management. Ability for patron to register online for single private lessons. Notification sent to instructor and staff when private lesson is scheduled.X X Registration Drop-In Class Management. Patrons can register for a class that is only for drop-ins. Ability to sell drop-in classes that traditionally have used punch cards (prefer different method than punch cards). Staff must have the ability to record when a drop-in class has been used. Drop-In Class package tied to family and not to specific participant. Usage tracked on both ends of online portal (staff and patron portal). Want patron to appear on a class list for the classes they attended. X X Registration Transactions Update patron history record, program roster, receipts, general ledger account distribution with a single transaction entry X x Registration Transactions Multiple window option for staff during registration (e.g., staff can do more than one thing at a time such as searching patron or activity info while processing a transaction.)X X Registration Transactions Staff is able to update and make changes to any part of a transaction at any point in the process X X Registration Transactions Allow staff to override requirements (age, gender, grade, prerequisite, etc.) with appropriate security clearance X X Registration Transactions Do not allow duplicate registrations (same person into same activity).X X Registration Transactions Automatically check if patron’s registration conflicts with other programs already registered in X CivicRec currently provides alerts for users if attempting to enroll in activities already enrolled in. CivicRec does not check against other existing registrations and would be the responsibility of the registrant to ensure availability until this can be addressed at a later time through development. X Registration Transactions Suggestions provided to staff if a class is full X X Registration Transactions Ability to register a patron for multiple activities/ programs without having to reselect that person for each program.X X Registration Transactions Ability to register multiple family members into multiple programs in one transaction without having to reselect the household, with all transactions printing on one receipt.X X Registration Transactions Warn staff if registration does not meet the specific requirements (age, gender, grade, prerequisite, etc.)X X Registration Transactions Ability to apply discounts to a transaction or account as needed X X Registration Transactions Ability to offer multi-child (sibling) discounts. Multi-child discount to apply to selected "grouped" activities.X X Registration Transactions Easy reference for staff to last transaction processed (receipt number, patron name, etc.) X X Registration Transactions Allow for automatic calculations of multiple child/ patron discounts based on enrollments into the same type of sessions or programs.X X Registration Transactions Allow for the cancellations of an individual or entire class in a single transaction, with the option to apply the funds to another program, keep the money on patron’s account, or process a refund. X X Registration Transactions Ability for staff to transfer a patron or whole class from one activity to another in one transaction (i.e., no need to withdraw from an activity in one transaction, and then enroll in another activity in a second transaction) X X Registration Transactions Ability to choose to print or email receipts for any type of transaction. Should follow patron's communication preference.X X Registration Transactions Additional comments added during activity set-up should print on receipt. Further comments can be added by staff before printing.X X Registration Transactions Customizable receipts (include City/Department logo)X X Registration Transactions Ability to produce receipts with program information, dates, times, locations, descriptive comments, payment information, date/time of transaction, staff and payment method, department information (donations, non-profit tax id, etc.) X X Registration Transactions Ability for staff to make entries to special notes section during registration and ability for it to print on activity roster if selected (e.g., allergies, medical, etc.)X X Registration Transactions Option for administrators to add prompt for specific staff to remind them to confirm phone, email address, & other staff-defined data with patron. Would be nice to be able to set this to turn on/off on a regular schedule (e.g. quarterly). X Current prompts are tied to registration/reservation processes. X Registration Transactions Ability for staff to process registrations with payment via tablets at offsite events (Summer child care and at special events-street fair booths) and email receipts X X Registration Transactions If per-transaction fees are charged, internal registrations are exempt from fees (i.e. free classes, donations)X For purposes of merchant processing CivicRec does not collect/charge fees for non-fee based registrations and would be restricted to Debit/CC transactions only. X Reports Real-time financials X DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 32 Packet Page 390 of 792 XReports Standard system reports which provide demographic and statistical information for program sessions, categories, types, ages, genders, etc., and ability export to Excel and produce graphs and charts X XReportsAbility to customize reports X XReportsAbility to sort reports by department, staff, instructor, class, site, GL account, payment type, etc.X XReportsAbility to print account statements based on user-defined criteria X XReportsAbility to view/print rosters and attendance sheets by user-defined fields (e.g., enrollment date, in alphabetical order, age, order of entry, etc.)X XReportsStandard report listing all activities patron is/has been currently enrolled in - ability to select by dates X XReportsReport showing activities not meeting minimum enrollment (sorted by supervisor, instructor, site, etc.)X XReportsReport showing activities reaching the maximum enrollment (sorted by supervisor, instructor, site, etc.)X XReportsAbility to view/print activity listings, in summary or detail, by selecting a range of activities with start date (e.g., print all classes beginning the week of April 1)X XReportsReport showing number registered in programs by category, sub-category, class, instructor, supervisor, site, etc.X XReportsAbility to create class roster that includes special notes (food allergy, prescription medication, etc.)X XReportsExtensive, ad-hoc (customizable) reporting options X X Reports Schedule-able reports delivered by email to staff-defined email address(es).X X Reports View real-time dashboards of financials, trends and histories WĂƌƚŝĂů tŚŝůĞŝǀŝĐZĞĐΖƐƌĞƉŽƌƚŝŶŐƚŽŽůƐĂƌĞŶŽƚĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůLJĐĂƉĂďůĞŽĨƉƌŽǀŝĚŝŶŐĐƵƐƚŽŵĚĂƐŚďŽĂƌĚƐĨŽƌǀŝĞǁŝŶŐŵƵůƚŝƉůĞƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂƚƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƚŝŵĞĂŶĚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚĞĂďŝůŝƚLJƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞƚƌĞŶĚƌĞƉŽƌƚŝŶŐ͕ŝǀŝĐZĞĐΖƐƌĞƉŽƌƚŝŶŐƚŽŽůƐĐĂŶďĞƵƐĞĚƚŽĂĐĐĞƐƐĂŶĚĞdžƉŽƌƚƚŚŝƐŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶĨŽƌƚŚĞĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƚŽƵƐĞŝŶƚĞƌŶĂůůLJĂƐŶĞĞĚĞĚ͘tĞĂƌĞĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝŶŐǁŽƌŬŶĞĞĚĞĚƚŽĞdžƉŽƐĞƚŚŝƐŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŝǀŝĐZĞĐΖƐW/ĂŶĚǁŝůůďĞŵĂĚĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞƚŽƚŚĞŝƚLJŽŶĐĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ͘ XReportsReports should be available in both summary and detail (where applicable) and by date range.X XReportsExportable to PDF, Excel, Word, XML, rich text, csv, etc.X CivicRec supports the ability to export via XML, CSV and PDF. XReportsRefund reports for specified date ranges, with ability to exclude payment type (e.g. credit cards, check, cash)X XReportsAbility to report sales tax revenue by staff-defined date range. Report should include both point of sale and online revenue.X XReportsTrack upcoming payment plan due dates X XReportsAging report X CivicRec has a very powerful reporting engine. There are 100+ standard/canned reports in CivicRec. However, staff can basically take any report and customize it to their liking. Filters can be added and/or removed. Fields can be added and/or removed. Reports can be sorted, saved, emailed, exported, or scheduled for regular delivery to any email address. CivicRec will gladly take any reasonable reporting request from the City and ensure that it is made available as requested. XReportsIf a third party payment processor is used, ability to generate and print financial reports from payment processor.X XReportsInstructor payment report based on percentage or flat rate. Removes registration fee and non-resident fee before calculation.X XReportsAbility to calculate instructor pay. Allows only certain program fees to be included in instructor pay processing calculation.X XReportsReport that splits percentage or flat rate payment between multiple instructors based on their individual payment share X X Reports View/print instructor contact information, certifications, pay rate for verification purposes X XReportsProduce comparison reports (e.g., mail-in & walk-in vs. online registration, resident vs. non-resident, etc.)X XReportsAbility to view/print revenue report by activity, preferably with option to create graphs and charts for easy analysis of revenues X XReportsProduce report showing enrollments for all programs within a given parameter (e.g., Spring 2015) or by dates, by activity category, etc.X XReportsAbility to create mailing labels (various sizes) directly from system based on staff- selected criteria X X Reports Audit trail to show which staff made each accounting transaction X XSecurityDifferent levels of authorization for multiple staff. Ability to limit staff access to only what they need to fulfill their role.X XSecurityOption to set staff permissions to only view facility bookings without ability to make changes or to take payment.X XSecuritySystem must meet the PCI/CISP credit card industry Payment Applicator Best Practices specifications.X X Security System must comply with new credit card chip technology requirements X CivicRec's ability to meet this requirement will depend on which merchant option the City chooses to work with. Please see proposal for additional information. Course/Setup Custom codes, use the same code year after year X XCourse/SetupActivity codes follow logical naming convention (either auto-generated or staff- generated)X XCourse/SetupAllows for unlimited length program descriptions. Descriptions will appear in brochure export, online registration site, on–screen in system searches.X XCourse/SetupAbility to roll over activity/program information from one season to another and automatically generate new class/program/activity codes X XCourse/SetupDesignate minimum and maximum number of participants X XCourse/SetupDesignate minimum and maximum school grade range. Date for grade verification should be adjustable by staff.X XCourse/SetupAbility to set separate registration start dates based on patron status (e.g. resident and non-resident), prior class enrollment, and memberships X XCourse/SetupAutomatically select and apply the appropriate patron fee type (resident, non- resident, senior, non-profit, etc.) based on information in a patron’s record X XCourse/SetupPrograms can be associated with multiple facilities/locations and the system automatically reserves those facilities X XCourse/SetupOption to change activity status to open/closed/cancelled X XCourse/SetupPrograms can be associated with off-site locations (e.g., Class takes place at a business such as an Ice Skating rink)X XCourse/SetupAllow for entry of dates class will not meet and the total number of class meetings adjusted accordingly. Must also print on receipt.X XCourse/SetupA unique comment/note can be associated with a program (e.g. bring a yoga mat). Appears on receipt and as part of program information.X XCourse/SetupOne min/max shared by multiple programs or activities (e.g. two programs in the same room at the same time with one maximum)X CivicRec currently tracks min/max to individual sessions. XCourse/SetupOption to allow for prerequisites to be linked to a program, so only registrants who have taken the prerequisites (e.g. class(es), skill level(s), etc.) can sign up X XCourse/SetupAllow multiple, separate fees to be linked to each program and for each separate fee to be linked to a different GL account number X X Course/Setup Ability to assign multiple instructors to one program X XCourse/SetupMultiple pay rates can be linked to each instructor (hourly, percentage, per participant, flat fee)X X Course/Setup Automatically calculate discount fees/coupons or incentives to programs X XCourse/SetupIncentive options (e.g., register/pay by certain date and receive a discounted fee, early bird registration)X DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 33 Packet Page 391 of 792 XCourse/Setup Allow for staff-defined enrollment prompts allowing for any data fields/questions to be set up and tracked for the program. Prompts will pop-up during registration process (e.g., What is your child’s t-shirt size? How did you hear about this program?) X XCourse/SetupSeparate registration dates for resident and non-resident, memberships, for online, mail- in and walk-in registrations (e.g. pre-registration)X X Course/Setup Option to send out email/text reminder to patrons before class/ program begins X XCourse/Setup Option to track make-up classes (or to tell if someone has used up all classes paid for). Administrators can limit number of allowed make-ups per patron. Allow make ups to be added up to the administrator-defined class maximum. X XCourse/Setup Enrollment History Management. E.g. ability to identify when last gymnastics class was taken and set restrictions on ability to re-enroll. For example, Student registered in 2012 for Level 2. Wants to re-register for Level 2 in 2015. System does not allow registration, notifies them that they have not participated in gymnastics for over 4 months and will need to begin at Level 1. X While CivicRec retains and tracks this information there is not currently a way to restrict users from re-enrolling in programs they've already participated in unless they're currently enrolled in which case CivicRec flags and notifies users of active enrollment status. X Support Live responsive technical support, available during normal business hours in the Pacific Time Zone.X X Support Tiered levels of user access to technical support (e.g., recreation staff, system administrator, IT, etc.). System administrators should be notified when anyone else (e.g. recreation staff, IT) contacts customer support directly. X You can restrict those that can request assistance. There is no additional charge for us to help any member of the City that requires assistance in the system. X Support Extensive online help for patrons X X Support Up to date system manuals/help for staff (printed or online)X X Support Timely notification of updates and enhancements (with full descriptions) and training on how to use enhancements X X Support Payment Processor - Third party host - customer service hours similar to City of Vacaville Community Services business hours X X Support Online interface to open/track support issues and availability of knowledge database. X X Support Provide fixes and patches for problems encountered between software releases.X XData SecurityProvide full back up and restore functions.X X Data Security Provide high availability on 24/7 schedule.X X Data Security Provide 99.9% uptime after exclusion of scheduled maintenance and hardware failure. X XData SecurityProvide full system recovery capabilities.X X Data Security System will not display or print passwords.X X Data Security Ability to purge select data based upon retention schedule.X X PCI Compliance Solution must meet PCI DSS / CISP credit card industry Payment Applicator Best Practices. X CivicRec is PCI SAQ-D compliant as a service provider. CP Pay is certified as PCI Level 1 compliant (please see proposal for additional information). X PCI Compliance Vendor will provide proof of PCI compliance annually - PCI DSS Certificate of Compliance. X CivicRec maintains PCI compliance through an Approved Scanning Vendor (ControlScan). We are scanned monthly and provided a quarterly certificate of compliance. Our customers are provided a copy of that certificate for use in their own PCI Compliance. X PCI Compliance Vulnerability scans to be performed by PCI Security Standards and it's results will be available for CSD on request.X CivicRec maintains PCI compliance through an Approved Scanning Vendor (ControlScan). We are scanned monthly and provided a quarterly certificate of compliance. Our customers are provided a copy of that certificate for use in their own PCI Compliance. X PCI Compliance Vendor will notify in writing and voice immediately if any data breach has been detected on any hosted system and will provide detailed assurance/information on what CSD information has been compromised during this breach. X X System Ability to access via tablet/Ipad/mobile device X XSystemPatron/organization data must be shared across all modules of the system (Registration, Facility Booking, Memberships, Online, Child Care, etc.).X XSystemStaff-facing programs should be compliant with accessibility standards (guidelines from Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973) ^ĞĞdžŚŝďŝƚ͗^ŽĨƚǁĂƌĞŽŵƉŽŶĞŶƚƐ XSystem More than one staff member may update the system at the same time, in the same program. System must prevent the loss of data when two or more people (staff, administrators, patrons) are updating the same record. X XSystemSystem automatically assigns a unique transaction number to each reservation and/or registration X XSystemSystem must allow the administrators to define how much history is retained and when it is archived X X System All transactions, reports, etc. in the system should be in real-time X XSystem Customizable “dashboard” display with current information without having to run a report. Examples include: reservation calendar, tracking registrations for specific programs, upcoming rentals, "still due" paperwork, etc. X CivicRec maintains both Public/Staff dashboards for users, though customization of these dashboards is not currently available we are continuing to address this through product development and the City will have this available once completed at no additional expense. X System Option to automatically email rosters to instructors at a specified time.X X System Ability to include custom text/logos on all receipts, rental permits, and reports X XSystemOn-going trainer/testing database (i.e., ability to test transactions offline, hidden from public website). Could be used to train new employees or to test out features.X X System Offer gift cards/ rewards X CivicRec supports both Gift Card and Coupon Code functions to meet this need. tŚŝůĞŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚĞĂďŝůŝƚLJƚŽĂĚĚůŽŐŽƐĂŶĚĐƵƐƚŽŵƚĞdžƚƚŽƚŚŝŶŐƐůŝŬĞƌĞĐĞŝƉƚƐĂŶĚƉĞƌŵŝƚƐƵƐŝŶŐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚƚĞŵƉůĂƚĞƐ͕ŝǀŝĐZĞĐĚŽĞƐŶŽƚƐƵƉƉŽƌƚĂĚĚŝŶŐĐƵƐƚŽŵƚĞdžƚͬůŽŐŽƐƚŽƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŝǀŝĐZĞĐΖƐƌĞƉŽƌƚŝŶŐƚŽŽůƐ DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 34 Packet Page 392 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 23 of 38 EXHIBIT B SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall provide ongoing Services to the CITY as described in Exhibit A, Scope of Services for the Recreation Management Software System within the term of the Agreement. Optional Schedule of Performance Provision for On-Call or Additional Services Agreements. (This provision only applies if checked and only applies to on-call agreements per Section 1 or agreements with Additional Services per Section 4.) The schedule of performance shall be as provided in the approved Task Order, as detailed in Section 1 (Scope of Services) in the case of on-call Services, or as detailed in Section 4 in the case of Additional Services, provided in all cases that the schedule of performance shall fall within the term as provided in Section 2 (Term) of this Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 35 Packet Page 393 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 24 of 38 EXHIBIT C COMPENSATION CITY agrees to compensate CONSULTANT for the Services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, including Services, any specified reimbursable expenses, and Additional Services (if any, per Section 4 of the Agreement), based on the rate schedule attached as Exhibit C-1. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all Services, any specified reimbursable expenses, and Additional Services (if any, per Section 4), shall not exceed the amount(s) stated in Section 4 of this Agreement. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Services, any specified reimbursable expenses, and Additional Services (if any, per Section 4), within this/these amount(s). Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth in this Agreement shall be at no cost to the CITY. REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES CONSULTANT’S ordinary business expenses, such as administrative, overhead, administrative support time/overtime, information systems, software and hardware, photocopying, telecommunications (telephone, internet), in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses, are included within the scope of payment for Services and are not reimbursable expenses hereunder. Reimbursable expenses, if any are specified as reimbursable under this section, will be reimbursed at actual cost. The expenses (by type, e.g. travel) for which CONSULTANT will be reimbursed are: NONE up to the not-to-exceed amount of: $0.00. All requests for reimbursement of expenses, if any are specified as reimbursable under this section, shall be accompanied by appropriate backup documentation and information. DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 36 Packet Page 394 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 25 of 38 EXHIBIT C-1 SCHEDULE OF RATES CONSULTANT’s schedule of rates is as follows: 1.Annual Services January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2028 Contract Term Annual Fee Jan 1, 2023 – June 30, 2023 $50,377.50 July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024 $105,792.75 July1, 2024 – June 30, 2025 $111,082.40 July 1, 2025 – June 30, 2026 $116,636.52 July 1, 2026 – June 30, 2027 $122,468.35 July 1, 2027 – June 30, 2028 $128,591.77 July 1, 2028 – December 31, 2028 $70,886.30 CONSULTANT reserves the right to reassess the historical data and transaction volume annually to ensure that the Annual Service Fees accurately reflects the transaction volume processed in the prior year. Should transaction volume no longer reflect the annual fees listed here, the parties shall meet and confer over any fee adjustments, which will be subject to mutual agreement and written amendment of this Agreement. 2.(Optional Additional Services) Enhanced implementation costs for automated exports fromActivenet to CONSULTANT which shall only be charged if requested by City in writing, persection 4, Additional Services may include, and shall be quoted upon request:11. Memberships export 12. User Credits export 13.Facilities export14.Activities export15.Custom financial extracts DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 37 Packet Page 395 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 26 of 38 EXHIBIT D INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONSULTANTS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS AS SPECIFIED HEREIN. REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONSULTANT, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONSULTANT AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONSULTANT’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. II. THE CONSULTANT MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE AT THE FOLLOWING URL: HTTPS://WWW.PLANETBIDS.COM/PORTAL/PORTAL.CFM?COMPANYID=25569 III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO ADDITIONAL INSUREDS: A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 38 Packet Page 396 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 27 of 38 B. CROSS LIABILITY THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. EVIDENCE OF INSURANCE AND OTHER RELATED NOTICES ARE REQUIRED TO BE FILED WITH THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AT THE FOLLOWING URL: HTTPS://WWW.PLANETBIDS.COM/PORTAL/PORTAL.CFM?COMPANYID=25569 OR HTTP://WWW.CITYOFPALOALTO.ORG/GOV/DEPTS/ASD/PLANET_BIDS_HOW_TO.ASP DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 39 Packet Page 397 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 28 of 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 40 Packet Page 398 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 29 of 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 41 Packet Page 399 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 30 of 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 42 Packet Page 400 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 31 of 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 43 Packet Page 401 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 32 of 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 44 Packet Page 402 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 33 of 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 45 Packet Page 403 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 34 of 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 46 Packet Page 404 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 35 of 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 47 Packet Page 405 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 36 of 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 48 Packet Page 406 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 37 of 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 49 Packet Page 407 of 792 Professional Services Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 38 of 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: 650D9CF1-FE8C-48CF-83D0-8F6B3BD1542A ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 50 Packet Page 408 of 792 Certificate Of Completion Envelope Id: 650D9CF1FE8C48CF83D08F6B3BD1542A Status: Completed Subject: Complete with DocuSign: C23186719 CivicRec - Renewal -Final R1.pdf Source Envelope: Document Pages: 46 Signatures: 2 Envelope Originator: Certificate Pages: 2 Initials: 0 Cecilia Magana AutoNav: Enabled EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled Time Zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto , CA 94301 cecilia.magana@cityofpaloalto.org IP Address: 199.33.32.254 Record Tracking Status: Original 1/10/2023 2:05:54 PM Holder: Cecilia Magana cecilia.magana@cityofpaloalto.org Location: DocuSign Security Appliance Status: Connected Pool: StateLocal Storage Appliance Status: Connected Pool: City of Palo Alto Location: DocuSign Signer Events Signature Timestamp Amy Vikander vikander@civicplus.com Senior Vice President of Customer Success CivicPlus Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style Using IP Address: 64.6.123.178 Sent: 1/10/2023 2:29:55 PM Resent: 1/11/2023 8:37:19 AM Viewed: 1/11/2023 9:04:14 AM Signed: 1/11/2023 10:31:22 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Cole Cheever cheever@civicplus.com Senior Vice President of Operations Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None)Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style Using IP Address: 87.54.40.213 Signed using mobile Sent: 1/11/2023 10:31:25 AM Viewed: 1/11/2023 10:57:51 AM Signed: 1/11/2023 11:07:56 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign In Person Signer Events Signature Timestamp Editor Delivery Events Status Timestamp Agent Delivery Events Status Timestamp Intermediary Delivery Events Status Timestamp Certified Delivery Events Status Timestamp Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp Cayla Koga Cayla.Koga@CityofPaloAlto.org Program Assistant I City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 1/11/2023 11:07:59 AM Viewed: 1/11/2023 11:23:12 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 51 Packet Page 409 of 792 Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp Nanette O'Brien Nanette.O'Brien@CityofPaloAlto.org City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 1/11/2023 11:08:01 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Witness Events Signature Timestamp Notary Events Signature Timestamp Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps Envelope Sent Hashed/Encrypted 1/10/2023 2:29:55 PM Envelope Updated Security Checked 1/10/2023 3:14:05 PM Certified Delivered Security Checked 1/11/2023 10:57:51 AM Signing Complete Security Checked 1/11/2023 11:07:56 AM Completed Security Checked 1/11/2023 11:08:01 AM Payment Events Status Timestamps ITEM 10 Attachment A - CivicPlus Contract C23186719 Item 10: Page 52 Packet Page 410 of 792 1 2 4 1 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Clerk Report Type: CONSENT REPORT Lead Department: City Clerk Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Adopt a Resolution Establishing the Council Annual Calendar of Meetings, Breaks and Council Events for Calendar Year 2023 RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution establishing the Annual Summer and Winter Breaks, Council Regular and alternate meeting dates and Council event schedule from January to December 2023. BACKGROUND Staff is requesting consideration of adopting an official Council schedule for 2023 to allow the Council to more efficiently conduct the City’s business and offer the community, the Council and staff the opportunity to better plan for those meetings. Under Municipal Code Section 2.04.010(b), each year, no later than the third meeting in February, the Council shall, by Resolution, schedule its vacation for that year. During the vacation period, the Code states that there shall be no regular meetings of the Council or its standing committees. Under the Code, the Mayor or a majority of the Council may call a special meeting during the scheduled vacation, if necessary. This process occurs annually. Additionally, Municipal Code Section 2.04.010(a) sets regular City Council meetings on the first three Mondays of each month. Recognizing that the Council has significant business to conduct, and at times there is a need for additional meetings to finish that business, as well as occasional meetings falling on a holiday or a day of cultural or religious significance, announcing in advance which meeting dates may be modified will maximize public participation in the public process and create operational efficiencies. ANALYSIS Attachment A outlines the proposed Council calendar for 2023. The attachment also includes a list of holidays and heritage and awareness months. As an iterative process, staff is aware that this list is not exhaustive and will continue to evolve over time. The goal with sharing these ITEM 11 Staff Report Item 11: Page 1 Packet Page 411 of 792 1 2 4 1 holidays and heritage and awareness months in Attachment A is to increase awareness as part of the City’s equity and inclusion efforts. The Attachment A calendar includes Council and Committee regular and alternate meeting dates, summer and winter vacation schedule and Council annual events for calendar year 2023. Modifications proposed to regular meeting dates were based on the following: 1. Federal or City negotiated Holidays which may fall on a date of what would be a regularly scheduled meeting. 2. Local election days which fall on the first Tuesday of the month in November in even number years (past practice has included the rescheduling of Committee meetings that fall on Palo Alto election night). 3. Shifting of a City Council meeting in order to respect a religious or cultural date of significance per Council and process recommended by the Human Relations Commission. 4. Establishment of alternate meeting dates, should they be necessary for conducting Council business. Dates of Significance During the March 7, 2022 City Council meeting the City Council addressed a colleagues memo recognizing key dates as part of continuing to prioritize diversity, equity, and inclusion, building upon the equity goals adopted in November 2020. Council took action to ”formally recognize and celebrate significant multicultural dates and months to promote equality, honor diversity and oppose racism.” The motion was as follows: MOTION: Council Member Burt moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kou to formally recognize and celebrate the following dates: A. Juneteenth, Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta Day, and add Indigenous People’s Day as dates of historic significance, and May as Asian American Pacific Islander Native Hawaiian Heritage Month; and B. Authorize Proclamations celebrating the above dates; C. Refer to the Human Relations Commission (HRC) recommendations on how to best recognize and celebrate these dates; and D. Ask the HRC to evaluate recognition of Holocaust Remembrance Day and Armenian Remembrance Day and evaluate if October 11th should be redesignated as Italian Heritage Day. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 The Human Relations Commission (HRC) agendized a discussion and developed a recommendation for criteria to categorize different events and holidays. This information was used as additional guidance in this calendar development discussion. The HRC will return to the ITEM 11 Staff Report Item 11: Page 2 Packet Page 412 of 792 1 2 4 1 Council at a future meeting to report on their proposed operational process for recognizing those dates of significance, or any other significant date identified going forward. Of note, in the 2023 calendar year, there are not many instances of the identified events of cultural or religious significance falling on a regularly scheduled meeting date. Attachment B is another format of the calendar as a multi-page month-by-month calendar. It mirrors the information in Attachment A but also includes some additional holidays for awareness. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT There are no fiscal impacts associated with this action. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Staff in the City Clerk’s Office, the City Manager’s Office, and Community Services worked on the draft of the calendar. The Human Relations Commission also held discussions to determine how to honor dates of cultural and religious significance in the City, per Council direction. As mentioned above, for the holidays and heritage and awareness months are a first attempt to expand awareness and will continue to evolve over time based on continued feedback. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This is not a project. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: 2023 Council Meeting, Break and Event Schedule Attachment B: 2023 City Calendar with Holidays (Alt Format) APPROVED BY: Lesley Milton, City Clerk Report #: 2212-0567 ITEM 11 Staff Report Item 11: Page 3 Packet Page 413 of 792 2023 City Council & Committee Calendar City Council Finance Policy & Services Rail Days of Significance (Not intended to be an exhaustive list) January 9, 2023 ** No Council Committee Meetings in January 1.2 New Year Holiday 1.16 MKL Jr. Holiday 1.22 Lunar New Year 1.27 Holocaust Remembrance Day January 23, 2023 January 30, 2023 February 6, 2023 February 7, 2023 February 14, 2023 February 22, 2023 2.20 President's Day February 13, 2023 February 21, 2023 February 27, 2023 March 6, 2023 March 7, 2023 March 14, 2023 March 22, 2023 3.31 Cesar Chavez & Dolores Huerta Day March 13, 2023 March 21, 2023 March 20, 2023 March 27, 2023 April 3, 2023 April 4, 2023 April 11, 2023 April 19, 2023 4.21-4.22 Eid al-Fitr 4.24 Armenian Remembrance Day April 10, 2023 April 18, 2023 April 17, 2023 May 1, 2023 May 2, 2023 May 9, 2023 May 17, 2023 5.29 Memorial Day May 8, 2023 May 16, 2023 May 15, 2023 TBD Budget Mtgs May 22, 2023 June 5, 2023 June 6, 2023 June 13, 2023 June 21, 2023 6.19 Juneteenth 6.22.22 – 8.6.22 Summer Break June 12, 2023 June 20, 2023 June 19, 2023 August 7, 2023 August 8, 2023 August 15, 2023 August 23, 2023 August 14, 2023 August 22, 2023 August 21, 2023 August 28, 2023 September 11, 2023 September 5, 2023 September 12, 2023 September 20, 2023 9.4 Labor Day 9.15-9.17 Rosh Hashanah 9.24-9.25 Yom Kippur September 18, 2023 September 19, 2023 October 2, 2023 October 3, 2023 October 10, 2023 October 18, 2023 10.9 Indigenous People's and Italian American Heritage Day October 16, 2023 October 17, 2023 October 23, 2023 October 30, 2023 November 6, 2023 November 7, 2023 November 14, 2023 11.11 Veterans Day 11.12 Diwali 11.20 -11.24 Thanksgiving Week November 13, 2023 November 28, 2023 November 27, 2023 December 4, 2023 December 5, 2023 December 12, 2023 December 20, 2023 12.7-12.15 Hanukkah 12.20.23 – 1.7.24 Winter Break December 11, 2023 December 19, 2023 December 18, 2023 ** ** Meetings in underlined italics are alternative meeting dates Adopted as of __________________ ITEM 11 Attachment A - 2023 City Council Calendar (1) Item 11: Page 4 Packet Page 414 of 792 Council Break Schedule 2023 Summer Break: Thursday June 22 – Sunday August 6, 2023 Winter Break: Wednesday December 20 – Sunday January 7, 2024 Council Events 2023 Monday, January 9, 2023 Council Reorganization Event Saturday, January 28, 2023 Annual Priority Setting Retreat Saturday, March 22, 2023 State of the City Friday, September 29, 2023 Board/Commission/Committee Recognition Event Heritage and Awareness Months by Month February Black History Month March National Women’s History Month Irish American Heritage Month April National Arab American Heritage Month May Asian American Pacific Islander Native Hawaiian Heritage Month Mental Health Awareness Month Affordable Housing Month Older Americans Month Jewish American Heritage Month Public Service Recognition Week June LGBTQ+ Pride Month Immigrant Heritage Month Caribbean American Heritage Month September Hispanic Heritage Month October National Italian American Heritage Month November National Native American Heritage Month (This is not intended to be an exhaustive list. As an iterative process, this list will continue to evolve over time as needed). ITEM 11 Attachment A - 2023 City Council Calendar (1) Item 11: Page 5 Packet Page 415 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D T HU FR I SA T 1 2 NEW YEAR'S DAY OBSERV. 3 4 5 6 7 8 END OF COUNCIL BREAK 9 COUNCIL REORG 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 MLK DAY 17 18 19 20 21 22 LUNAR NEW YEAR 23 COUNCIL MEETING 24 25 26 27 HOLOCAUST REMEMRANCE DAY 28 COUNCIL RETREAT 29 30 COUNCIL MEETING 312 0 2 3 . J a n u a r y ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 6 Packet Page 416 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D T HU FR I SA T 1 2 3 4 5 6 COUNCIL MEETING 7 FINANCE CMTE 8 9 10 11 12 13 COUNCIL MEETING 14 POLICY & SERVICES CMTE 15 16 17 18 19 20 PRESIDENTS' DAY 21 FINANCE CMTE 22 RAIL CMTE 23 24 25 26 27 COUNCIL MEETING 28 2 0 2 3 . F e b r u a r y Black History Month ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 7 Packet Page 417 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D T HU FR I SA T 1 2 3 4 5 6 COUNCIL MEETING 7 FINANCE CMTE 8 INT'L WOMEN'S DAY 9 10 11 TENTATIVE STATE OF THE CITY 12 13 COUNCIL MEETING 14 POLICY & SERVICES CMTE 15 16 17 ST. PATRICK'S DAY 18 19 20 COUNCIL MEETING 21 FINANCE CMTE 22 RAIL CMTE 23 24 25 26 27 COUNCIL MEETING (ALT) 28 29 30 31 CESAR CHAVEZ & DELORES HUERTA DAY 2 0 2 3 . M a r c h National Women's History Month; Irish American Heritage Month; Gender Equality Month ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 8 Packet Page 418 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D T HU FR I SA T 1 2 3 COUNCIL MEETING 4 FINANCE CMTE 5 PASSOVER BEGINS 6 7 8 9 EASTER 10 COUNCIL MEETING 11 POLICY & SERVICES CMTE 12 PASSOVER ENDS 13 14 15 16 17 COUNCIL MEETING 18 FINANCE CMTE 19 RAIL CMTE 20 21 EID AL-FITR (END OF RAMADAN) 22 EARTH DAY 23 24 PALO ALTO DAY; ARMENIAN REMEMBRANCE DAY 25 26 27 28 29 30 2 0 2 3 . a p r i l National Arab American Heritage Month; Autism Awareness Month ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 9 Packet Page 419 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D T HU FR I SA T PUBLIC SERVICE RECOGNITION WEEK 1 COUNCIL MEETING 2 FINANCE CMTE 3 4 5 CINCO DE MAYO 6 7 8 COUNCIL MEETING 9 POLICY & SERVICES CMTE 10 11 12 13 14 15 COUNCIL MEETING 16 FINANCE CMTE 17 RAIL CMTE 18 19 20 21 22 COUNCIL MEETING (ALT) 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 MEMORIAL DAY 30 31 2 0 2 3 . m a y Asian American Pacific Islander Native Hawaiian Heritage Month; Mental Health Awareness Month Affordable Housing Month; Older Americans Month; Jewish American Heritage Month *TBD Budget Hearing Dates for Finance Committee (dates to be added once available) ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 10 Packet Page 420 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D T HU FR I SA T 1 2 3 4 5 COUNCIL MEETING 6 FINANCE CMTE 7 8 9 10 11 12 COUNCIL MEETING 13 POLICY & SERVICES CMTE 14 15 16 17 18 19 COUNCIL MEETING JUNETEENTH 20 FINANCE CMTE 21 RAIL CMTE 22 COUNCIL BREAK BEGINS 23 24 25 26 27 28 EID AL-ADHA 29 30 2 0 2 3 . j u n e LGBTQ+ Pride Month; Immigrant Heritage Month; Caribbean American Heritage Month ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 11 Packet Page 421 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D T HU FR I SA T 1 2 3 4 INDEPENDENCE DAY 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 2 0 2 3 . j u l y ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 12 Packet Page 422 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D T HU FR I SA T 1 2 3 4 5 6 END OF COUNCIL BREAK 7 COUNCIL MEETING 8 FINANCE CMTE 9 10 11 12 13 14 COUNCIL MEETING 15 POLICY & SERVICES CMTE 16 17 18 19 20 21 COUNCIL MEETING 22 FINANCE CMTE 23 RAIL CMTE 24 25 26 27 28 COUNCIL MEETING (ALT) 29 30 31 2 0 2 3 . A u g u s t ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 13 Packet Page 423 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D T HU FR I SA T 1 2 3 4 LABOR DAY 5 FINANCE CMTE 6 7 8 9 10 11 COUNCIL MEETING PATRIOTS DAY 12 POLICY & SERVICES CMTE 13 14 15 ROSH HASHANAH (9.15-9.17) 16 17 18 COUNCIL MEETING 19 FINANCE CMTE 20 RAIL CMTE 21 22 23 24 YOM KIPPUR 25 YOM KIPPUR 26 27 28 29 BOARD / COMM RECOGNITION EVENT 30 2 0 2 3 . S e p t e m b e r Hispanic Heritage Month ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 14 Packet Page 424 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D T HU FR I SA T 1 2 COUNCIL MEETING 3 FINANCE CMTE 4 5 6 7 8 9 INDIGENOUS PEOPLE'S DAY & ITALIAN AMERICAN HERITAGE DAY 10 POLICY & SERVICES CMTE 11 12 13 14 15 16 COUNCIL MEETING 17 FINANCE CMTE 18 RAIL CMTE 19 20 21 22 23 COUNCIL MEETING 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 COUNCIL MEETING (ALT) 31 HALLOWEEN 2 0 2 3 . O c t o b e r National Italian American Heritage Month ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 15 Packet Page 425 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D T HU FR I SA T 1 DAY OF THE DEAD (11.1-11.2) 2 3 4 5 6 COUNCIL MEETING 7 FINANCE CMTE 8 9 10 11 VETERANS DAY 12 DIWALI 13 COUNCIL MEETING 14 POLICY & SERVICES CMTE 15 16 17 18 19 20 - 21 22 23 THANKSGIVING DAY 24 DAY AFTER THANKSGIVING 25 26 27 COUNCIL MEETING 28 FINANCE CMTE (ALT) 29 30 2 0 2 3 . N o v e m b e r National Native American Heritage Month ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 16 Packet Page 426 of 792 SU N MO N T UE W E D Q UI FR I SA T 1 2 3 4 COUNCIL MEETING 5 FINANCE CMTE 6 7 HANUKKAH (12.7-12.15) 8 9 10 11 COUNCIL MEETING 12 POLICY & SERVICES CMTE 13 14 15 16 LAS POSADAS (12.16-12.24) 17 18 COUNCIL MEETING 19 FINANCE CMTE 20 RAIL CMTE COUNCIL BREAK (12.20 - 1.7.24) 21 WINTER SOLSTICE 22 23 24 25 CHRISTMAS 26 KWANZAA (12.26-1.1) 27 28 29 30 312 0 2 3 . D e c e m b e r ITEM 11 Attachment B - 2023 Multi-page City Council Calendar with Holidays (alt format) Item 11: Page 17 Packet Page 427 of 792 1 5 1 8 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: CONSENT REPORT Lead Department: City Manager Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Approval of Recommendations on Process for 2023 Council Priority Setting Retreat RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council approve the recommended process for the Council 2023 Priority Setting retreat. BACKGROUND In October 2012, the City Council approved Priority Setting Guidelines (CMR #3156)1 and outlined the role of the Policy & Services Committee in this activity. Item 3, listed int he Process section of the Guidelines states: The Policy and Services Committee, each year at its December meeting, shall make recommendations about the process that will be used at the Annual Retreat paying particular attention to the number of priorities suggested by Council members. The recommended process is to be forwarded to Council for adoption in advance of the Council retreat. This report outlines the recommended process. ANALYSIS At its December 13, 2022 meeting, the Policy & Services (P&S) Committee reviewed the 2022 Priorities and proposed 2023 Priority Setting process for reviewing and selecting Council priorities. Staff presented a general outline of the process, including community engagement opportunities and program for the annual retreat. 1 City Council October 1, 2012; CMR #3156: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager- reports-cmrs/year-archive/2012/mini-packet-3156.pdf ITEM 12 Staff Report Item 12: Page 1 Packet Page 428 of 792 1 5 1 8 Through its discussion, P&S members expressed interest in discussing meeting efficiency as well as committee workplans as part of the retreat. Review of committee workplans has therefore been added to the recommended program below. Discussion of meeting efficiency is not explicitly identified, since subsequent to the P&S meeting the Council continued discussion of Council’s Procedures and Protocols Handbook. The Council will have the opportunity to discuss meeting efficiency as part of the Procedures and Protocols Handbook review planned for January 30th. Also discussed at the Policy & Services Committee, was the importance of reiterating and being mindful of the Council adopted values (CMR #14731)2 and value statement (CMR #14912)3 in advance of the Council retreat, the statement and core values state: The Palo Alto City Council has universally shared values that help guide our decisions and the work we do. These values include: 1. We will make decisions that balance revenues and expenses, now and in the future. 2. We will make decisions that are environmentally sustainable, now and in the future. 3. We will integrate equity into our decisions, considering how decisions affect people differently based on their identity or circumstances. 4. We will make decisions that create a healthy, safe and welcoming community for all. 5. We will safeguard public trust through transparent practices and open communication. 6. We embrace innovation. Recommended Annual Retreat Program: 1. Roll Call & Welcome from Mayor, Council Retreat Overview and Discussion 2 Policy & Services Committee September 13, 2022; CMR #14731: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/agendasminutes/policy-and-services-committee/2022/20220913/20220913ppsr.pdf ; Minutes: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/policy-andservices- committee/2022/20220913/20220913ampsr.pdf 3 City Council November 7, 2022; CMR 14912: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas- minutes/citycouncil-agendas-minutes/2022/20221107/20221107pccsm-amended-linked-q.a-2.pdf; Minutes: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/citycouncil-agendas- minutes/2022/20221107/20221107amccsm.pdf ITEM 12 Staff Report Item 12: Page 2 Packet Page 429 of 792 1 5 1 8 2. Overview of Community Survey Results 3. Staff presentation on the Status of 2022 Council Priorities 4. Public Comments 5. Reflections on 2023 City Council Priorities 6. 2023 Standing Committee Topics 7. Retreat Debrief, Take Away and Next Steps 8. Adjournment The City Council 2023 Priority Setting retreat is scheduled for Saturday, January 28, 2023 at the Mitchell Park Library El Palo Alto Room. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT The Council’s annual priority setting process is included within the City’s annual work program. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The Policy & Services Committee discussed the 2023 Council Priority Setting retreat process at its December 13, 2022 meeting, there was no public comment pertaining to the process. Further community engagement and feedback on Council Priorities will be summarized in the January 28, 2023 retreat report to Council. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Council action on this item is not a project as defined by CEQA because the process for the Council Priority Setting retreat is a continuing administrative or maintenance activity. CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(2). ATTACHMENTS None APPROVED BY: Ed Shikada, City Manager Report #: 2301-0771 ITEM 12 Staff Report Item 12: Page 3 Packet Page 430 of 792 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: ACTION Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 575 Los Trancos [21PLN-00196]: Major Site and Design Application for the Construction of a new 7,245 Square Foot Single-Family Residence With a new 895 Square Foot Accessory Dwelling Unit and Associated Site Improvements, Including a Swimming Pool, on a 5.38-Acre Site. Zoning District: Open Space (OS). Environmental Assessment: A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was Circulated for Public Comment on August 17, 2022 and Ended on September 16, 2022. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council: 1. Adopt the Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. (Attachments E and F) 2. Approve the Record of Land Use Action for the proposed Site and Design Review application for a Single-Family House and Accessory Dwelling Unit. (Attachment C) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The subject application is a request for Site and Design Review of a new, two-story, 7,245 square foot primary house (including a 734 square foot garage), and an 895 square foot accessory dwelling unit on a vacant, 5.38-acre lot in the Open Space zoning district. Site and Design Review1 is a discretionary land use planning application that is used for certain development located in environmentally or ecologically sensitive environments, such as the subject project location in the Foothills. These applications are reviewed by the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) who forward a recommendation on to Council. The PTC has reviewed the subject project to the Site and Design findings, conformance with local regulations and, with the incorporation of environmental mitigation measures and conditions of approval, recommends project approval. 1 More information about Site and Design reviews is available online from the City’s published zoning code regulations: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0-0-0-79449 ITEM 13 Staff Report Item 13: Page 1 Packet Page 431 of 792 Draft findings and conditions are attached to this report in Attachment C. Councilmembers are encouraged to review this document, called the record of land use action, as it serves to memorialize the Council’s decision. In particular, a project decision is based on required findings which are provided for in this document. All findings must be made in the affirmative to approve the project. Prior to making a decision on the project, the Council must consider the environmental analysis, which is provided in Attachment E and F, including special project-related conditions related to mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. Public comments on the Draft MND were heard by the Planning & Transportation Commission and a response to public comments has been included as Attachment G. Based on these comments, the project was modified to include shades to exterior lights and windows facing towards Los Trancos Creek. The public comments received did not change the conclusions of the MND. BACKGROUND This project was recommended for approval by the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) at their August 31, 2022, meeting. The PTC’S motions were as follows: •Recommendation of the Staff proposal for 575 Los Trancos with direction to Staff that the applicant submit their proposal for light mitigation to address PAMC Section 18.40.140(3)(G) and (4)(A). Motion passed 4-1-2. •Recommendation that Staff review potential amendments for interior and outdoor lighting in the OS Zone to ensure an appropriate level of lighting restrictions in this animal- intensive nature area. Motion passed 5-0-2. The staff report,2 minutes3, and video4 can be found online; see links provided in footnotes. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project consists of a new, two-story, 7,245 square foot main house (including a 734 square foot garage) and an 895 square foot Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). The project will create two net new housing units. A portion of the site is sloped and contains a creek; the site is an undeveloped 5.38-acre lot in the Open Space zoning district. The project also includes improving and extending the existing driveway and fire access road, creating a new swimming pool, and landscape improvements. A fence or wall(s) will enclose the ADU, pool area, and rear patio area. 2 Link to 8-31-22 staff report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/agendas-minutes/planning-and-transportation-commission/2022/ptc-08.31.2022-575-los-trancos.pdf 3 Link to 8-31-22 meeting summary minutes: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/agendas-minutes/planning-and-transportation-commission/2022/ptc-8.31.2022-summary_bc-bgh- edits.pdf 4 Link to 8-31-22 meeting video: https://midpenmedia.org/planning-transportation-commission-63-8312022/ ITEM 13 Staff Report Item 13: Page 2 Packet Page 432 of 792 Three covered garage spaces are provided, and the auto court provides additional space for tandem parking. Project Plans are located via Attachment D. The house is a contemporary style with most of the floor area on ground floor and a compact second-floor plan. Materials include both vertical and horizontal wood siding, plaster, and aluminum framed glass windows. The building height is 21 feet and 7 inches overall. The ADU utilizes the same materials and is about 11 feet tall. The topography of the project area is mostly flat; however, 80 cubic yards of grading is required for the foundation. The building site is low relative to the street with the finished floor of the house about nine feet below the street elevation. The rear of the property includes a creek, which has been discussed in the environmental review document, the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The code required building setback from a creek is 20 feet (PAMC 18.40.140). The building extends to this setback at two corners near the northwestern end of the house but is otherwise located beyond the protection area. However, the City’s Comprehensive Plan Policy N3.3 and program N3.3.1 seek a range of setbacks; where a 150-foot setback is cited as appropriate for new development west of Foothill Expressway, the program notes that single-family residential development can be exempt from this larger setback. The 5.38-acre site contains 82 trees, including 38 protected trees. One protected Coast Live Oak tree is being removed because it is dead. Four other non-protected trees are identified for removal because they are dead or significantly failing; one of the unprotected trees is impeding the planned location for the driveway and will be removed. All remaining trees will be protected. Tree protection fence locations are shown on plan set sheet A1.1. Some trees are located very far from the project area and will not require tree protection fencing during construction. DISCUSSION The project’s compliance with the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan were analyzed and discussed in the PTC report, and the PTC found the project to be consistent with those documents and the application findings, with additional information needed regarding lighting. Additional questions were also raised related to the overall proximity to the Los Trancos Creek, as it relates not only to lighting, but also to landscape preservation and fire risk. This report is focusing on those key remaining items. Proximity of Proposed Structures to Los Trancos Creek A significant portion of the PTC discussion was regarding Comprehensive Plan Policy N3.3 and program N3.3.1, which states that Stream Corridor Protection Ordinance should be updated to explore a 150 ft setback between a natural creek and a building, as well as conditions under which single family property may be exempt from such a setback. The current ordinance requires only a 20 foot setback, which this project complies with. The City has yet to codify Program N3.3.1, to require a larger setback, which would require a zoning code amendment with hearings before the PTC and Council could implement a new requirement. ITEM 13 Staff Report Item 13: Page 3 Packet Page 433 of 792 Zoning Code Section 18.40.140, Stream Corridor Protection, requires a 20-foot distance between the top of the creek bank and structures or a 2:1 setback from the toe of the bank, whichever is greater. Plan set sheet C-2.0 includes a diagram showing that the 20-foot setback is the greater of the two requirements. Preservation of riparian landscaping is also a priority. Mitigation Measure BIO-3 and the Conditions of Approval require fencing at the 20-foot creek setback, and no construction activity may occur in this zone. No removal of riparian landscaping is proposed or anticipated. Additionally, Sediment and erosion control measures (e.g., sand or gravel bags, hay bales, check dams) are required. The Public Works Engineering Department also requires a Grading Permit and a Grading and Drainage plan to be prepared and approved prior to starting construction. These documents will analyze in further detail any requirements related to erosion near the creek. Notably: •Any “land disturbing” activities during the wet season (October 1 through April 15) require special permission from the City Engineer, on the basis of forecasted weather. (PAMC 16.28.280) •Erosion control inspections are performed by the Watershed Preservation division regularly throughout construction. Lighting and Shading In response to the PTC comments, revisions have been made to the lighting conditions: •Automatic blackout shades will be installed on all upper-story windows facing the creek, to limit nighttime light intrusion on potential local wildlife. •Recessed lighting has been relocated further away from these windows and the rooms have vacancy sensors. •Exterior lighting will have motion sensors and be the minimum required by the Building Code. The Final IS/MND has been updated with an explanation of why the lighting associated with the proposed project does not pose a significant impact, as follows: Potential sources of glare from the proposed project would consist of windows, parked cars, and the pool. However, these glare sources are similar to those from nearby residences and would not constitute a substantial new source of glare. The proposed residence would also be screened by existing tree cover from the roadway and nearby residences. Compliance with PAMC Section 18.28.070(n) would reduce potential impacts from glare to the night sky and off-site. Therefore, the proposed project would not create a substantial source of glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views. Impacts related to glare would be less than significant. ITEM 13 Staff Report Item 13: Page 4 Packet Page 434 of 792 Fire Risk and Defensible Space This project is not located within a Fire Hazard Severity Area as defined by the State of California. However, PAMC 15.04.190 includes any property west of Interstate 280 as part of Palo Alto’s “Wildland-Urban Fire Interface Area”. Defensible Space is required by PAMC 15.04.200. This requires that no flammable vegetation be located within 30 ft of the structure. Vegetation that is green and healthy is not considered flammable, and therefore the riparian landscaping within 30 feet of the building footprint is expected to remain as-is with maintenance to remove any dead vegetation as needed. The goal of this project is to ensure the viability of the riparian landscaping throughout the construction and occupancy of the house while reducing fire risk. In general, healthy green landscaping is encouraged and protected, while dead and dry landscaping shall be cleared from the vicinity regularly. The following recommendations from the Fire Prevention staff are incorporated into the Conditions of Approval: •At the time of Building Permit application, the applicant shall prepare a Fire Protection Plan to the satisfaction of the Fire Code Official, and meeting the requirements of California Fire Code 4903.1-4903.4 (corresponds to PAMC 15.04.195). •Defensible space shall be maintained in compliance with California Fire Code 4907.1- 4907.2 (corresponds to PAMC 15.04.200). NEXT STEPS The Council’s decision is final. If the project is approved, the applicant will move forward in applying for building permits and any other applicable permits. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The City published the mitigated negative declaration for public comment, conducted public meetings and responded to project-related inquiries. Notice of a public hearing for this project was published in the Daily Post on January 13, 2023. Postcard mailing occurred on January 10, 2023. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 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. A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. In accordance with CEQA Guideline Section 15073, this document was available online for review during a minimum 30-day circulation period beginning August 17, 2022, and ending September 19, 2022. During the circulation period, two comment letters were received. The Response to Comments is available in Attachment D. ITEM 13 Staff Report Item 13: Page 5 Packet Page 435 of 792 Mitigations were required for Air Quality, Biology, Cultural Resources, and Geology. All mitigations are for the pre-construction or construction phases and will not require ongoing monitoring beyond the completion of the project. In response to the written comments received, as well as PTC feedback, the following changes were incorporated into the Final IS/MND: •Incorporating discussion of the lighting changes as previously described, with no changes to the determination or mitigation. •Minor grammar and word choice edits (ie, replacing the word ”project” with ”development area”) The Final IS/MND is included in this report as Attachment E. The MMRP is included as Attachment F, and the Response to Comments is Attachment G. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Location Map Attachment B: Zoning Comparison Table Attachment C: Draft Record of Land Use Action Attachment D: Project Plans and Environmental Review Attachment E: Final IS-MND Attachment F: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Attachment G: Response to Comments on the Draft IS-MND APPROVED BY: Jonathan Lait, Planning and Development Services Director Report #: 2212-0460 ITEM 13 Staff Report Item 13: Page 6 Packet Page 436 of 792 182-46-012 182-38-030 182-36-022 LOS TRANCOS ROAD TIERRA ARBOLES N C O S R O A D 601 601 575 575 622 610 805 805 This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Assessment Parcel Palo Alto Assessment Parcel Palo Alto Assessment Parcel Outside Palo Alto abc Road Centerline Small Text (TC) Curb Face (RF) Pavement Edge (RF) abc Address Label (AP) Current Features City Jurisdictional Limits (PL): Districts 0' 151' Attachment ALocation Map575 Los Trancos Road CITY O F PALO A L TO I NC OR PORATED C ALIFORN I A P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f APRIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2016 City of Palo Altoefoley2, 2022-08-23 14:25:39 (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Personal\Planning.mdb) ITEM 13 Attachment A Location Map Item 13: Page 7 Packet Page 437 of 792 1 7 6 ATTACHMENT B ZONING COMPARISON TABLE 575 Los Trancos Road 21PLN-00196 Table 1a: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.28 (OS DISTRICT) OS Residential Development Standards Regulation Required Existing Proposed Minimum Site Area, Width and Depth Area: 10 acres Width: No standard Depth: No standard Area: 5.38 acres Width: more than 1300 feet Depth: varies, 40-250 feet No change Front Yard 30 feet N/A 88 feet 8 inches minimum Street Side Yard 30 feet N/A N/A Rear Yard 30 feet, and 20 feet from creek top of bank N/A 38 feet from property line, 20 feet from top of bank, minimum Interior Side Yard 30 feet N/A Right: approx. 250 ft Left: approx. 154 ft Max. Building Height 25 feet N/A 21 feet 7 inches Maximum Impervious Coverage 4% (9,374 sf)N/A 8,140 sf, including ADU Max. Total Floor Area Ratio 4% (9,374 sf) N/A 9,192 sf (6,925 sf buildings, 2,267 hardscape) Table 1b: CONFORMANCE WITH CHAPTER 18.52 (Off-Street Parking and Loading) Single Family Residential Uses (Tandem Parking Allowed) Type Required Existing Proposed Vehicle Parking 4 spaces, of which one must be covered N/A 3 covered spaces, 1 uncovered space ITEM 13 Attachment B Zoning Comparison Table Item 13: Page 8 Packet Page 438 of 792 Page 1 1 7 7 Attachment C APPROVAL NO. XX-XXXX RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION FOR 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD: SITE & DESIGN [FILE NO. 21PLN-00196] On [DATE], the City Council approved certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Approval of the Site and Design to Allow a new 7,245 sf single-family residence with a new 734 sf Accessory Dwelling Unit and associated site improvements, including a swimming pool, on a 5.38-acre site located at 575 Los Trancos Road, making the following findings, determination and declarations: SECTION 1. BACKGROUND. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City Council”) finds, determines, and declares as follows: A. On July 13, 2021, Leonard Ng (LNAI Architecture) on behalf of Innovative Homes, LLC applied for a Site and Design application to allow a new 7,245 sf single-family residence with a new 895 sf Accessory Dwelling Unit and associated site improvements, including a swimming pool. B. Staff has determined that the proposed project is in compliance with the applicable OS development standards. C. The City prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND), see Section 2. Environmental Review D. Following staff review, the Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) reviewed the project design and the IS/MND on August 31, 2022, and recommended approval. F. On [DATE], the City Council reviewed the project design and the IS/MND. After hearing public testimony, the Council voted to approve the project subject to the conditions set forth in Section 4 of this Record of Land Use Action. SECTION 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. In conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was certified by the City Council on [date]. The document (State Clearinghouse No. XXX) concluded that the proposed project(s) would not have a significant effect on the environment with mitigation as proposed. The ISMND is available for review on the City’s website: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=2642&TargetID=319. All mitigation measures as stated in the approved Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. SECTION 3. SITE AND DESIGN OBJECTIVES. The design and architecture of the proposed improvements, as conditioned, complies with the Site and Design Objectives as required in Chapter 18.30.060(G) of the PAMC. ITEM 13 Attachment C Draft Record of Land Use Action Item 13: Page 9 Packet Page 439 of 792 Page 2 1 7 7 A. Objective (a): To ensure construction and operation of the use in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites. The proposed use is a single-family house and accessory dwelling unit (ADU) in the Open Space (OS) zoning district, on a property adjacent to other single-family uses. The proposed construction will meet all city requirements for noise, parking, etc. The proposed use is compatible with nearby existing uses. B. Objective (b): To ensure the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities, or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent areas. The proposed uses, a single family residence and ADU, are permitted uses in the OS zoning district, and will not affect the desirability of adjacent areas. C. Objective (c): To ensure that sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance shall be observed. The OS zoning district includes regulations to ensure that sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance shall be observed. The proposed design will meet these regulations including: •Landscaping. Maintaining existing vegetation and land formations to the maximum extent possible. The arborist report surveyed 82 trees in the project vicinity. 5 trees (including 1 protected Coast Live Oak) were identified as dead and will be removed. 10 replacement trees will be planted on site. All other trees in the project vicinity will have tree protection fencing during construction. •Building location. The proposed development is in a relatively flat area away from adjacent hills or slopes. The house is not expected to be visible from public roadways and is shielded by many mature trees. •Privacy. The proposed house and ADU will not have views to other residences which would create a privacy impact. •Architectural materials. Proposed materials fit in the natural landscape, through earth-toned colors and wood and plaster siding. D. Objective (d): To ensure that the use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. This property is located in the Streamside Open Space designation. The intention of this designation, in this location is to protect Los Trancos Creek. As stated in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, no direct impacts to the creek would occur as a result of this project. Indirect impacts including runoff and erosion will be addressed through mitigation measures (see Mitigation Measure BIO-3). While this designation does not explicitly allow housing, single-family houses and accessory dwelling units have regularly been built there. SECTION 4. Open Space Review Criteria. The following criteria shall be considered in the Site and Design review of all development of land ITEM 13 Attachment C Draft Record of Land Use Action Item 13: Page 10 Packet Page 440 of 792 Page 3 1 7 7 in the OS district, as outlined in the Conservation Element of the Comprehensive Plan: 1. The development should not be visually intrusive from public roadways and public parklands. As much as possible, development should be sited so it is hidden from view. The proposed structures are located in a naturally low, flat portion of the property. The development will be hidden from view of the street by both elevation and mature trees. 2. Development should be located away from hilltops and designed to not extend above the nearest ridgeline. The new home and Accessory Dwelling Unit are not located near a hilltop and will not extend above the nearest ridgeline. 3. Site and structure design should take into consideration impacts on privacy and views of neighboring properties. The proposed structure will not impact privacy, as it is located as a lower elevation than neighboring properties. Any potential views from the second story are also shielded by the existing trees, and the large distances customary to the Open Space district. 4. Development should be clustered, or closely grouped, in relation to the area surrounding it to make it less conspicuous, minimize access roads, and reduce fragmentation of natural habitats. The proposed development is proposed for a small section of the overall 5.38 acre site. One driveway/access road will provide access to the two dwelling units. 5. Built forms and landscape forms should mimic the natural topography. Building lines should follow the lines of the terrain, and trees and bushes should appear natural from a distance. The building and related patios and landscaping are isolated to the flat portion of the site. The project proposes to maintain all of the existing protected trees, preserving the natural appearance of the site. 6. Existing trees with a circumference of 37.5 inches, measured 4.5 feet above the ground level, should be preserved and integrated into the site design. Existing vegetation should be retained as much as possible. All existing trees are proposed to remain, three dead trees have already been removed for safety reasons. 7. Cut is encouraged when it is necessary for geotechnical stability and to enable the development to blend into the natural topography. Fill is generally discouraged and should never be distributed within the driplines of existing trees. Locate development to minimize the need for grading. This project has minimized grading, the majority of the grading is associated with installing a swimming pool. 8. To reduce the need for cut and fill and to reduce potential runoff, large, flat expanses of ITEM 13 Attachment C Draft Record of Land Use Action Item 13: Page 11 Packet Page 441 of 792 Page 4 1 7 7 impervious surfaces should be avoided. The design of the home and site landscaping have been designed to minimize the need for cut and fill. The entire driveway is designed to be DG and permeable, with impervious areas limited primarily to the building and patios off the building. 9. Buildings should use natural materials and earth tone or subdued colors. The proposed materials include: horizontal wood siding and slat screens with warm, earth-gray smooth-finished cement plaster, a solid dark gray flat roof, and dark wood toned windows and doors. 10. Landscaping should be native species that require little or no irrigation. Immediately adjacent to structures, fire retardant plants should be used as a fire prevention technique. The majority of the on site landscaping is existing. Additional planting in the patio areas will use plant materials will be selected for water conservation and low-maintenance characteristics and for fire-resistive properties where adjacent to the home. 11. Exterior lighting should be low-intensity and shielded from view so it is not directly visible from off-site. Exterior lighting shall be low-intensity and will be shielded from view as to not be directly visible from the street and surrounding properties. 12. Access roads should be of a rural rather than urban character. (Standard curb, gutter, and concrete sidewalk are usually inconsistent with the foothills environment). The proposed access road is in the existing location, which follows the natural topography, and the proposed decomposed granite material is consistent with a rural character. 13. For development in unincorporated areas, ground coverage should be in general conformance with Palo Alto's Open Space District regulations. N/A, the project is within Palo Alto city limits. SECTION 5. Conditions of Approval. PLANNING DIVISION 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS. Construction and development shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "575 Los Trancos Road, Palo Alto, California, 94304, Private Residence” uploaded to the Palo Alto Online Permitting Services Citizen Portal on November 14, 2022, as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. BUILDING PERMIT. Apply for a building permit and meet any and all conditions of the Planning, Fire, Public Works, and Building Departments. Project plans submitted for Building permits shall incorporate the following changes: a. Prior to issuance of any site preparation, grading or building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Services Director (Director), the means and methods to be used to ensure there is no encroachment, including excavation or grading in preparation for building foundations or site or building other work, into the required 20 foot creek setback. Minor adjustments to the proposed ITEM 13 Attachment C Draft Record of Land Use Action Item 13: Page 12 Packet Page 442 of 792 Page 5 1 7 7 building siting and foundation placement may be required by the Director to ensure compliance with this condition. b. The applicant shall provide sturdy, protective construction fencing, outside of the 20 foot creek setback to ensure no equipment storage, staging or preparation work occurs within the required creek setback. 3. BUILDING PERMIT PLAN SET. A copy of this cover letter and conditions of approval shall be printed on the second page of the plans submitted for building permit. 4. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) associated with the project and attached here as Exhibit A is incorporated by reference and all mitigation measures shall be implemented as described in said document. Prior to requesting issuance of any related demolition and/or construction permits, the applicant shall meet with the Project Planner to review and ensure compliance with the MMRP, subject to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Development Services. 5. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: All modifications to the approved project shall be submitted for review and approval prior to construction. If during the Building Permit review and construction phase, the project is modified by the applicant, it is the responsibility of the applicant to contact the Planning Division/project planner directly to obtain approval of the project modification. It is the applicant’s responsibility to highlight any proposed changes to the project and to bring it to the project planner’s attention. 6. UTILITY LOCATIONS: In no case shall utilities be placed in a location that requires equipment and/or bollards to encroach into a required parking space. In no case shall a pipeline be placed within 10 feet of a proposed tree and/or tree designated to remain. 7. NOISE PRODUCING EQUIPMENT: All noise producing equipment shall be located outside of required setbacks, except they may project 6 feet into the required street side setbacks. In accordance with Section 9.10.030, No person shall produce, suffer or allow to be produced by any machine, animal or device, or any combination of same, on residential property, a noise level more than six dB above the local ambient at any point outside of the property plane. 8. LIGHT AND GLARE. Exterior lighting shall be low-intensity and shielded from view so it is not directly visible from off-site. The light emitted from skylights shall be minimal during the night hours. Utilizing treatments such as translucent glass, shading systems, and interior light placement can reduce the night glare. Skylights shall not use white glass. 9. PROJECT ARBORIST. The property owner shall hire a certified arborist to ensure the project conforms to all Planning and Urban Forestry conditions related to landscaping/trees. 10. LANDSCAPE PLAN. Plantings shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan set and shall be permanently maintained and replaced as necessary. 11. ARBORIST FOLLOW UP. A follow-up arborist and/or landscape report shall be required five years after the final sign-off of the project completion. This report shall evaluate the health of trees and ITEM 13 Attachment C Draft Record of Land Use Action Item 13: Page 13 Packet Page 443 of 792 Page 6 1 7 7 significant landscape that were required for screen planting or and/or were designated as protected plantings on the approved plans for the project. Any subsequent owner(s) shall also be obligated to replace any trees that die with trees of the same size and species stated on the approved planning and building permit plans. 12. TREE PROTECTION FENCING. Tree protection fencing shall be required for all trees and shrubs proposed to be maintained as identified in the Arborist Report. 13. FENCES. Fences and walls shall comply with the applicable provisions of Chapter 16.24, Fences, of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC). Heights of all new and existing fencing must be shown on the Building Permit plans. a. Where the existing fence is located off the subject property and/or where the existing fence is failing, a new Code compliant fence shall be constructed. 14. ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE: Development Impact Fees, currently estimated in the amount of $81,826.00 plus the applicable public art fee, per PAMC 16.61.040, shall be paid prior to the issuance of the related building permit. 15. IMPACT FEE 90-DAY PROTEST PERIOD. California Government Code Section 66020 provides that a project applicant who desires to protest the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project must initiate the protest at the time the development project is approved or conditionally approved or within ninety (90) days after the date that fees, dedications, reservations or exactions are imposed on the Project. Additionally, procedural requirements for protesting these development fees, dedications, reservations and exactions are set forth in Government Code Section 66020. IF YOU FAIL TO INITIATE A PROTEST WITHIN THE 90-DAY PERIOD OR FOLLOW THE PROTEST PROCEDURES DESCRIBED IN GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66020, YOU WILL BE BARRED FROM CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OR REASONABLENESS OF THE FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, AND EXACTIONS. If these requirements constitute fees, taxes, assessments, dedications, reservations, or other exactions as specified in Government Code Sections 66020(a) or 66021, this is to provide notification that, as of the date of this notice, the 90- day period has begun in which you may protest these requirements. This matter is subject to the California Code of Civil Procedures (CCP) Section 1094.5; the time by which judicial review must be sought is governed by CCP Section 1094.6. 16. PLANNING FINAL INSPECTION. A Planning Division Final inspection will be required to determine substantial compliance with the approved plans prior to the scheduling of a Building Division final. Any revisions during the building process must be approved by Planning, including but not limited to; materials, fenestration and hard surface locations. Contact your Project Planner at the number below to schedule this inspection. 17. PERMIT EXPIRATION. The project approval shall be valid for a period of two years from the original date of approval. Application for a one year extension of this entitlement may be made prior to expiration, by emailing the Current Planning Support Staff (Alicia Spotwood - Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org). If a timely extension is not received, or the project has already received an extension and the applicant still wishes to pursue this project, they must first file for a new Planning application and pay the associated fees. This new application will be reviewed for conformance with the regulations in place at that time. ITEM 13 Attachment C Draft Record of Land Use Action Item 13: Page 14 Packet Page 444 of 792 Page 7 1 7 7 18. INDEMNITY: To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City for its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. BUILDING DIVISION 19. This project is located West of 280 and shall comply with Wildland Urban Interface requirements per 2019 CA Residential Code. 20. This project is subjected to all electrification per PAMC. 21. Please contact the Building Department for building permit submittal requirements. FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION 22. At the time of Building Permit application, the applicant shall prepare a Fire Protection Plan to the satisfaction of the Fire Code Official, meeting the requirements of California Fire Code 4903.1- 4903.4 (corresponds to PAMC 15.04.195). 23. Defensible space shall be maintained for the life of the project in compliance with California Fire Code 4907.1-4907.2 (corresponds to PAMC 15.04.200). PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DIVISION 24. GRADING PERMIT: Separate Excavation and Grading Permit will be required for grading activities on private property that fill, excavate, store or dispose of 100 cubic yards or more based on PAMC Section 16.28.060. Applicant shall prepare and submit an excavation and grading permit to Public Works separately from the building permit set. The permit application and instructions are available on our website: Application: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/public- works/engineering-services/webpages/forms-and-permits/grading-permit-application.pdf 25. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN: The plan set must include a grading & drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional See the Grading & Drainage Plan Guidelines for New Single Family Residences on the City’s website. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/public-works/engineering- services/webpages/forms-and-permits/grading-drainage-residential-guidelines.pdf 26. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA: The Impervious Area Worksheet for Land Developments form shall be completed and submitted with the building permit submittal. The worksheet and instructions are available on our website: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/public-works/engineering- services/webpages/forms-and-permits/impervious-area-worksheet-for-land-developments- 2021.pdf ITEM 13 Attachment C Draft Record of Land Use Action Item 13: Page 15 Packet Page 445 of 792 Page 8 1 7 7 27. PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS CONDITIONS: The City's full-sized "Standard Conditions" sheet must be included in the plan set. Copies are available from Public Works on our website: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/public-works/engineering- services/webpages/forms-and-permits/pw-conditions-sheet-alternative-update-8.7.18.pdf 28. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION: The City's full-sized "Pollution Prevention - It's Part of the Plan" sheet must be included in the plan set. Copies are available from Public Works on our website: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/public-works/engineering- services/webpages/forms-and-permits/rwq_stormwater_plansheet_final_bw.pdf This project triggers the California Regional Water Quality Control Board’s revised provision C.3 for storm water regulations (incorporated into the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Section 16.11) that apply to residential land development projects that create or replace between 2,500 and 10,000 square feet of impervious surface area. The applicant must implement one or more of the following site design measures on the grading and drainage plan: • Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse. • Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas. • Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. • Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas. • Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces. • Construct driveways, and/or uncovered parking lots with permeable surfaces 29. SIDEWALK, CURB & GUTTER: As part of this project, the applicant shall replace portions of the existing sidewalk, curbs, gutters or driveway approaches in the public right-of-way along the frontage(s) of the property as required. Contact the Public Works Inspector at 650-496-6929 to arrange a site visit so that the inspector can discuss the extent of replacement work in the public right-of-way. The site plan submitted with the building permit plan set must show the extent of the replacement work. Include a scan copy of the Site Inspection Directive obtained from the Public Works Inspector in the building plan set. WATERSHED PROTECTION DIVISION 30. Do not use chemicals fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides or commercial soil amendment. Use Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI) materials and compost. Refer to the Bay-Friendly Landscape Guidelines: http://www.stopwaste.org/resource/brochures/bay-friendly-landscape-guidelines- sustainable-practices-landscape-professional for guidance. Add this bullet as a note to the building plans. 31. Avoid compacting soil in areas that will be unpaved. Add this bullet as a note to the building plans. SECTION 6. Term of Approval. Site and Design Approval. The project approval shall be valid for a period of two years from the original date of approval. In the event a building permit(s), if applicable, is not secured for the project within the time limit specified above, the approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect. Application for extension of this entitlement may be made prior to the one year expiration. ITEM 13 Attachment C Draft Record of Land Use Action Item 13: Page 16 Packet Page 446 of 792 Page 9 1 7 7 PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________ ____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney Director of Planning and Development Services ITEM 13 Attachment C Draft Record of Land Use Action Item 13: Page 17 Packet Page 447 of 792 Page 10 1 7 7 Exhibit A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) ITEM 13 Attachment C Draft Record of Land Use Action Item 13: Page 18 Packet Page 448 of 792 1 7 8 Attachment D Project Plans In order to reduce paper consumption, a limited number of hard copy project plans are provided to Board members for their review. The same plans are available to the public, at all hours of the day, via the following online resources. Environmental Document An Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. In accordance with CEQA Guideline Section 15073, the draft document was available for a 30-day circulation period beginning August 17, 2022 and ending on September 16, 2022. The Final IS- MND and Response to Comments have been prepared and are also available use the link below. Directions to review Project plans and environmental documents online: 1. Go to: bit.ly/PApendingprojects 2. Scroll down to find “575 Los Trancos” and click the address link 3. On this project-specific webpage you will find a link to the project plans and other important information Direct Link to Project Webpage: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Events-Directory/Planning-and-Development-Services/575-Los- Trancos ITEM 13 Attachment D - Link to Project Plans Item 13: Page 19 Packet Page 449 of 792 FINAL INITIAL STUDY ♦ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project PREPARED BY City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 Contact: Emily Foley, AICP, Associate Planner PREPARED WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF Rincon Consultants, Inc. 449 15th Street, Suite 303 Oakland, California 94612 REPORT DATE January 2023 ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 20 Packet Page 450 of 792 TABLE OF CONTENTS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | i TABLE OF CONTENTS Initial Study .............................................................................................................................................1 Project Title ........................................................................................................................... 1 Lead Agency Name and Address .......................................................................................... 1 Contact Person and Phone Number ..................................................................................... 1 Project Sponsor’s Name and Address................................................................................... 1 Project Location .................................................................................................................... 1 General Plan Designation ..................................................................................................... 1 Zoning ................................................................................................................................... 4 Location and Existing Setting ................................................................................................ 4 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required ............................................................ 9 Have California Native American Tribes Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated with the Project Area Requested Consultation Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1? If so, is There a Plan for Consultation that Includes, for Example, the Determination of Significance of Impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources, Procedures Regarding Confidentiality, etc? ............................................................................................ 9 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ........................................................................................ 11 Determination ...................................................................................................................................... 11 Environmental Checklist ...................................................................................................................... 13 1 Aesthetics ........................................................................................................................... 13 2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................................................................... 17 3 Air Quality ........................................................................................................................... 19 4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................... 27 5 Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................. 39 6 Energy ................................................................................................................................. 43 7 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................ 45 8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................. 53 9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................................................... 55 10 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................. 59 11 Land Use and Planning........................................................................................................ 65 12 Mineral Resources .............................................................................................................. 67 13 Noise ................................................................................................................................... 69 14 Population and Housing ..................................................................................................... 77 15 Public Services .................................................................................................................... 79 16 Recreation ........................................................................................................................... 83 17 Transportation .................................................................................................................... 85 18 Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................................................... 87 19 Utilities and Service Systems .............................................................................................. 91 ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 21 Packet Page 451 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT ii | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration 20 Wildfire ............................................................................................................................... 95 21 Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................................... 99 References ......................................................................................................................................... 101 Bibliography .................................................................................................................................. 101 List of Preparers............................................................................................................................ 103 FIGURES Figure 1 Regional Location ................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2 Project Location .................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3 Project Site Photographs 1 and 2 ......................................................................................... 5 Figure 4 Project Site Photographs 3 and 4 ......................................................................................... 6 Figure 5 Proposed Site Plan ................................................................................................................ 7 Figure 6 Site Plan (Partial) in Relation to Creek and Property Lines................................................. 30 TABLES Table 1 Health Effects Associated with Non-Attainment Criteria Pollutants .................................. 20 Table 2 Palo Alto Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments ............................. 71 Table 3 Calculated Construction Noise Levels for Each Phase of Construction .............................. 73 Table 4 Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment at Noise-Sensitive Receptors ..................... 74 APPENDICES Appendix A Biological Resources Technical Report Appendix B Arborist Report Appendix C Geotechnical Engineering Study Appendix D Roadway Construction Noise Model and Vibration Noise Calculations Appendix E California Water Service and West Bay Sanitary District Will Serve Letter ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 22 Packet Page 452 of 792 INITIAL STUDY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 1 INITIAL STUDY PROJECT TITLE 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER Emily Foley, AICP, Associate Planner (650) 617-3125 PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS Innovative Homes LLC c/o John Suppes 412 Olive Avenue Palo Alto, California 94306 PROJECT LOCATION The project site is located at 575 Los Trancos Road in the City of Palo Alto and consists of a single 5.38-acre (234,352 square-foot) parcel. The assessor’s parcel number is 182-46- 012. The project site is located on the western side of Los Trancos Road approximately 0.8 miles south of its intersection with Alpine Road. Regional access to the site is available via Interstate 280 (I-280) and State Route (SR) 84. Figure 1 shows the site location in a regional context. Figure 2 shows the location of the site relative to the surrounding area. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION The site is designated as Open Space/Controlled Development. The City’s Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Community Design Element (2017) defines this category as “land having all the characteristics of open space but where some development may be allowed on private properties. Open space amenities must be retained in these areas. Residential densities range from 0.1 to 1 dwelling unit per acre but may rise to a maximum of 2 units per acre where second units are allowed, and population densities range from 1 to 4 persons per acre.” ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 23 Packet Page 453 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 2 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration Figure 1 Regional Location ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 24 Packet Page 454 of 792 INITIAL STUDY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 3 Figure 2 Project Location ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 25 Packet Page 455 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 4 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration ZONING The site is zoned Open Space (OS). Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.28.010(b) defines the OS district as “intended to protect the public health, safety and welfare, protect and preserve open space land as a limited and valuable resource, and to permit the reasonable use of open space land, while at the same time preserving and protecting its inherent open space characteristics to assure its continued availability for the following: as agricultural land, scenic land, recreation land, conservation or natural resource land; for the containment of urban sprawl and the structuring of urban development; and for the retention of land in its natural or near-natural state, and to protect life and property in the community from the hazards of fire, flood, and seismic activity; and coordinate with and carry out federal, state, regional, county, and city open space plans.” LOCATION AND EXISTING SETTING The project site is located in the southern extension of the City of Palo Alto where the predominant land use designations and land uses are Open Space/Controlled Development and Public Conservation Land. The site is surrounded by undeveloped areas and low-density residential. To the north of the site is a residence, Los Trancos Creek is located along the western boundary of the site, and undeveloped lands are located to the south and east of the site and further east beyond Los Trancos Road. Los Trancos Road abuts the project site to the east. The project site is an undeveloped and vacant lot, dominated by oak woodland, riparian woodland, and non-native grasses. Figure 3 and Figure 4 show photographs of the project site. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project would involve the construction of a 7,245 square-foot single- family residence and 734 square-foot attached garage, an 895 square-foot accessory dwelling unit (ADU), and associated amenities including a 4.5-foot-deep swimming pool in the flat, western portion of the site. The main residence would have a maximum height of 25 feet and would consist of two stories, a 6,030 square-foot first floor and 1,215 square foot second floor. The proposed lot coverage would be 9,374 square feet of the total lot area of 234,352 square feet (5.38 acres) which would result in a total lot coverage of four percent of the total site. The project would include 30-foot setbacks on the front, sides, and rear of the property. Design materials would include natural dark-stained vertical grain wood/wood-clad sliding and slats, smooth-finish cement plaster in an earth-tone gray color, a smooth dark painted finish along trim, and large windows. Exterior lighting would be limited by shielding on exterior safety lighting and shades on windows facing the creek. Figure 5 shows the proposed site plan. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 26 Packet Page 456 of 792 INITIAL STUDY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 5 Figure 3 Project Site Photographs 1 and 2 Photograph 1. View from near the center of the project site looking north Photograph 2. View from near the center of the project site looking south ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 27 Packet Page 457 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 6 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration Figure 4 Project Site Photographs 3 and 4 Photograph 3. View of the project site from southeast Los Trancos Road Photograph 4. View of the project site from eastern Los Trancos Road ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 28 Packet Page 458 of 792 INITIAL STUDY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 7 Figure 5 Proposed Site Plan ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 29 Packet Page 459 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 8 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration Access to the project site would be via a new curved driveway that would extend from Los Trancos Road toward the northern portion of the site and curve back toward the residence and attached three-car garage. The driveway would have a 14-foot width to accommodate fire trucks and at its termination at the residence would allow for fire truck turnaround. The project would include a 20 feet creek setback pursuant to Palo Alto’s Stream Corridor Ordinance (Section 18.40.140 of the PAMC). LANDSCAPING AND OPEN SPACE Landscaping on the project site would be limited to the immediate perimeter of the proposed development area. Along the perimeter of the residence, landscaping would consist of California native grasses and trees including but not limited to Bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), California bay (Umbellularia californica), Chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), Interior live oak(Quercus wislizeni), Blue elderberry (Sambucus Mexicana), Arroyo Willow (Salix lasiolepis), Concha California lilac (Ceanothus Concha), California Coffeeberry (Frangula californica), Toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), White pitcher sage (Lepechinia calycina), California honeysuckle (Lonicera hispidula), Pacific wax myrtle (Myrica californica), Golden currant (Ribes aureum vas. Gracillimum), California Wild Rose (Rosa Californica), Common Yarrow (Achillea millefolium), Mugwort (Artenusua dougliasiana), Crevice alumroot (Heuchera micrantha), Bee’s bliss purple sage (Salvia leucophylla ‘Bee’s Bliss’), Yerba Buena (Clinopodium douglassii), Woodland strawberry (Fragaria vesca). Landscaping would be used primarily for screening and creek side planting. CONSTRUCTION Construction of the project would include site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating phases. Construction would occur over an estimated 14 months. The project would require approximately 280 cubic yards of excavation (80 cubic yards for the house and 200 cubic yards for the pool), which would be dispersed evenly throughout the site and would not be exported. Construction activities would occur Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. and Saturday between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. PALO ALTO GREEN BUILDING CHECKLIST In addition to California Building Code (CBC) requirements, the City of Palo Alto has adopted more stringent green building regulations. The Palo Alto Green Building Ordinance (Ord. 5393, 2020) requires applicants to incorporate sustainable design, construction, and operational requirements into most single-family residential, multi- family residential, and non-residential projects. For residential development, the City has adopted California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) Tier 1 for additions and renovations over 1,000 square feet and CALGreen for Tier 2 for new construction pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 16.14. To achieve Tier 2 status, a project must comply with the requirements identified in CALGreen Appendix A4, Division A4.601.5 and be 10 percent more energy efficient than the base CALGreen code ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 30 Packet Page 460 of 792 INITIAL STUDY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 9 requirements. In accordance with the City’s Green Building Ordinance, the proposed project would satisfy requirements for CALGreen Tier 2. The project would be all electric and would utilize a 10-kilowatt renewable energy system. Additionally, heat pump technology would be used for water heating, including for the proposed pool, and space heating. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED The City of Palo Alto is the lead agency with jurisdiction over adoption of the proposed project and certification of the CEQA document. No other public agency’s discretionary approval is required. HAVE CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES TRADITIONALLY AND CULTURALLY AFFILIATED WITH THE PROJECT AREA REQUESTED CONSULTATION PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21080.3.1? IF SO, IS THERE A PLAN FOR CONSULTATION THAT INCLUDES, FOR EXAMPLE, THE DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS TO TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES, PROCEDURES REGARDING CONFIDENTIALITY, ETC? No California Native American Tribes have requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 31 Packet Page 461 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 10 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 32 Packet Page 462 of 792 Date Title CITY OF PALO AL TO Page I 11 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED This project would potentially affect the environmental factors checked below, involving at least one impact that is “Potentially Significant” or “Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. □Aesthetics ■ ■Cultural Resources □ Air Quality Energy □Agriculture and Forestry Resources □Greenhouse Gas Emissions □ ■Biological Resources ■Geology/Soils ■Hydrology/Water Quality □Land Use/Planning □ □Population/Housing □ Hazards & Hazardous Materials Mineral Resources Public Services □Tribal Cultural Resources □Noise □Recreation □Utilities/Service Systems □Transportation □Wildfire ■Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION Based on this initial evaluation: □I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and aNEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ■I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions to the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. □I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. □I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. □I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potential significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. 1/10/2023 ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 33 Packet Page 463 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 12 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page left intentionally blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 34 Packet Page 464 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AESTHETICS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 13 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 1 Aesthetics Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? □ □ ■ □ b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? □ □ □ ■ c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? □ □ ■ □ d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? □ □ ■ □ SETTING The project site is located within an area that consists primarily of open space, but limited development is allowed on private properties. North of the site is a single-family residence, to the west are single-family residences, to the east is open space, and to the northeast is a single-family residence. Residences are surrounded by dense tree cover and are set back from roadways. From the project site, there are views of nearby hillsides. Skyline Boulevard, identified in the City’s Comprehensive Plan as a scenic route, is located approximately 2.5 miles west of the project site. IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Views from and through the project site from public viewpoints such as the surrounding streets of Los Trancos Road and Valley Oak and from the Sweet Springs Trail are of trees, ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 35 Packet Page 465 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 14 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration open space, and glimpses of surrounding single-family development through vegetation. There are no vistas classified as significant or scenic in the vicinity of the project site (City of Palo Alto 2017a). Views from public viewpoints through the site would not substantially change, as trees and topography would generally screen the proposed buildings from view. The proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. This impact would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT b. Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? State Scenic Highways designated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) near the project site include State Route (SR) 35 to the west and SR 280 to the east (Caltrans 2019). The project site is not visible from either SR 35 or SR 280. The project site is not located near listed scenic routes in the City’s comprehensive plan including Sand Hill Road, University Avenue between Middlefield Road and San Francisquito Creek, Embarcadero Road, Page Mill Road, Oregon Expressway, Interstate 280, Arastradero Road (west of Foothill Expressway), Junipero Serra Boulevard/Foothill Expressway and Skyline Boulevard (City of Palo Alto 2017a). Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on scenic resources within a state scenic highway or within a scenic corridor identified in the comprehensive plan. NO IMPACT c. Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? Although the City of Palo Alto as a whole is an urbanized area, for the purposes of this analysis, the site is considered to be in a non-urbanized area due to its semi-rural character and open-space surroundings. Construction activities would temporarily alter the visual quality of the site. Construction of the project would require hauling of building materials and construction of below-grade foundations, the building itself, and landscaping. Construction activities would include the storage of equipment and materials onsite for several months. Due to the temporary nature of construction, these activities would not permanently degrade or modify the existing aesthetic image of the neighborhood, nor generate substantial long-term contrast with the visual character of the surrounding area. Therefore, visual quality impacts associated with construction would be less than significant. The project site is undeveloped, and the introduction of a single-family residence would change the visual character of the project site from existing conditions. However, the proposed project would introduce a structure that would be generally consistent with the height and massing of the other nearby single-family residences. Consistent with the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan controlled development designation, the project would result in one dwelling unit and an attached accessory dwelling unit. Proposed external materials for the new buildings would adequately reflect and be compatible with the natural ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 36 Packet Page 466 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AESTHETICS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 15 environment surrounding the project site. The project would also be required to comply with the single-family individual review guidelines for which a checklist is provided (City of Palo Alto 2005; 2022a). The purpose of the checklist is to ensure a project’s compliance with the City of Palo Alto’s Single-Family Individual Review Guidelines. Although grading would be required to prepare the site, the new development would generally be on the flatter portions of the site and no major grading or recontouring that would substantially alter the topography is proposed. The project would include the removal of five trees for which there would be three replacement trees introduced to the site, consistent with the City of Palo Alto’s Tree Technical Manual pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 8.10.30. The majority of trees on the project site would remain and would be required to be preserved pursuant to PAMC Chapter 8.10 which provides standards for removal, maintenance, and planting of trees to, ultimately, preserve trees on the site. Because the majority of existing trees would remain on the project site, the proposed residence would be screened from travelers on nearby roadways and views through the project site of the new residence would be brief. The proposed project would not significantly degrade the existing visual character of quality of the site and its surroundings. The proposed project’s height, massing, and design would be consistent with nearby single-family development. Therefore, impacts related to visual character and quality would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT d. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? Implementation of the proposed project would introduce new sources of light and glare to a site where there are currently no existing sources of light and glare. Potential new sources of lighting from the proposed project would include light visible through windows, car headlights, outdoor lighting, and exterior security lighting. The surrounding area consists of generally low levels of existing lighting. Primary sources of light adjacent to the project site are lighting associated with existing residences nearby. Lighting on the project site would be generally similar to existing lighting at residences nearby. Compliance with Single-Family individual Review Guidelines and PAMC Section 18.28.070(n) require that exterior lighting should be low-intensity and shielded from view and require utilization of treatments such as translucent glass, shading systems, and interior light placement. Adherence to these requirements would reduce night glare potential impacts from lighting. Impacts related to lighting would be less than significant. Potential sources of glare from the proposed project would consist of windows, parked cars, and the pool. However, these sources of glare would be similar to nearby residences and would not result in a substantial new source of glare. The proposed residence would also be screened from the roadway and nearby residences by existing tree cover. Compliance with PAMC Section 18.28.070(n) would reduce potential impacts from glare to the night sky and off-site. Therefore, the proposed project would not create a substantial source of glare that ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 37 Packet Page 467 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 16 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration would adversely affect day or nighttime views. Impacts related to glare would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 38 Packet Page 468 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 17 2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project have any of the following impacts: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? □ □ □ ■ b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? □ □ □ ■ c. Conflict with existing zoning for or cause rezoning of forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)); timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526); or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? □ □ □ ■ d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? □ □ □ ■ e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? □ □ □ ■ IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 39 Packet Page 469 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 18 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration c. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d. Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non- forest use? e. Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? The project is located on Other Land, pursuant to the Department of Conservation’s (DOC) Important Farmland Finder (DOC 2014). The project site is not identified as prime farmland, farmland of statewide importance, unique farmland, farmland of local importance, or grazing land. The project site is not enrolled in a Williamson Act contract, nor does it support forest land or resources; the site does not meet the definition of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production in Public Resources Code (PRC) 12220(g), 4526, and 51104(g). The project site is not located on or adjacent to agricultural land or forest land and the proposed project would not involve development that could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, the project would have no impact with respect to conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use; conflict with existing agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts; result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; or other conversion of farmland to non- agricultural use. NO IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 40 Packet Page 470 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AIR QUALITY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 19 3 Air Quality Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project have any of the following impacts: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? □ □ ■ □ b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? □ ■ □ □ c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? □ □ ■ □ d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? □ □ ■ □ AIR QUALITY STANDARDS AND ATTAINMENT The project site is located within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (the Basin), which is under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). As the local air quality management agency, the BAAQMD is required to monitor air pollutant levels to ensure that state and federal air quality standards are met and, if they are not met, to develop strategies to meet the standards. Depending on whether the standards are met or exceeded, the Basin is classified as being in “attainment” or “nonattainment.” Under state law, air districts are required to prepare a plan for air quality improvement for pollutants for which the district is in non-compliance. The BAAQMD is in non-attainment for the state and federal ozone standards, the state and federal PM2.5 (particulate matter up to 2.5 microns in size) standards and the state PM10 (particulate matter up to 10 microns in size) standards and is required to prepare a plan for improvement (BAAQMD2017a) The health effects associated with criteria pollutants for which the Basin is in non- attainment are described in Table 1. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 41 Packet Page 471 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 20 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration Table 1 Health Effects Associated with Non-Attainment Criteria Pollutants Pollutant Adverse Effects Ozone (1) Short-term exposures: (a) pulmonary function decrements and localized lung edema in humans and animals and (b) risk to public health implied by alterations in pulmonary morphology and host defense in animals; (2) long-term exposures: risk to public health implied by altered connective tissue metabolism and altered pulmonary morphology in animals after long-term exposures and pulmonary function decrements in chronically exposed humans; (3) vegetation damage; and (4) property damage. Suspended particulate matter (PM10) (1) Excess deaths from short-term and long-term exposures; (2) excess seasonal declines in pulmonary function, especially in children; (3) asthma exacerbation and possibly induction; (4) adverse birth outcomes including low birth weight; (5) increased infant mortality; (6) increased respiratory symptoms in children such as cough and bronchitis; and (7) increased hospitalization for both cardiovascular and respiratory disease (including asthma).a Suspended particulate matter (PM2.5) (1) Excess deaths from short- and long-term exposures; (2) excess seasonal declines in pulmonary function, especially in children; (3) asthma exacerbation and possibly induction; (4) adverse birth outcomes, including low birth weight; (5) increased infant mortality; (6) increased respiratory symptoms in children, such as cough and bronchitis; and (7) increased hospitalization for both cardiovascular and respiratory disease, including asthma.a a More detailed discussions on the health effects associated with exposure to suspended particulate matter can be found in the following documents: United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter, 2004. Source: USEPA 2018 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT The Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan provides a plan to improve Bay Area air quality and protect public health as well as the climate. The legal impetus for the Plan is to update the most recent ozone plan, the 2010 Clean Air Plan, to comply with state air quality planning requirements as codified in the California Health & Safety Code. Although steady progress has been made toward reducing ozone levels in the Bay Area, the region continues to be designated as non-attainment for both the one-hour and eight-hour state ozone standards as noted previously. In addition, emissions of ozone precursors in the Bay Area contribute to air quality problems in neighboring air basins. Under these circumstances, state law requires the Clean Air Plan to include all feasible measures to reduce emissions of ozone precursors and reduce transport of ozone precursors to neighboring air basins (BAAQMD 2017b). In 2006, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) tightened the national 24-hour PM2.5 standard regarding short-term exposure to fine particulate matter from 65 µg/m3 (micro-grams per cubic meter) to 35 µg/m3. Based on air quality monitoring data for years 2006-2008 showing that the region was slightly above the standard, the USEPA designated the Bay Area as non-attainment for the 24-hour national standard in December 2008. This triggered the requirement for the Bay Area to prepare a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal to demonstrate how the region would attain the standard. However, data for both the 2008-2010 and the 2009-2011 cycles showed that Bay Area PM2.5 levels currently meet the standard. On October 29, 2012, the USEPA issued a proposed rule to determine that the Bay Area has attained the 24-hour PM2.5 national standard. Based on this, the Bay Area is required to prepare an abbreviated SIP submittal that includes an emission inventory for primary (directly emitted) PM2.5, as well as precursor pollutants that ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 42 Packet Page 472 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AIR QUALITY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 21 contribute to formation of secondary PM in the atmosphere and amendments to the BAAQMD New Source Review to address PM2.5 (adopted December 2012).1 However, key SIP requirements to demonstrate how a region will achieve the standard (i.e., the requirement to develop a plan to attain the standard) will be suspended as long as monitoring data continues to show that the Bay Area attains the standard. In addition to preparing the “abbreviated” SIP submittal, the BAAQMD has prepared a report entitled Understanding Particulate Matter: Protecting Public Health in the San Francisco Bay Area (BAAQMD 2012). The report will help guide the BAAQMD’s ongoing efforts to analyze and reduce PM in the Bay Area to protect public health better. The Bay Area will continue to be designated as “non-attainment” for the national 24-hour PM2.5 standard until the district elects to submit a “redesignation request” and a “maintenance plan” to the USEPA, and the agency approves the proposed redesignation. AIR EMISSION THRESHOLDS This analysis uses the BAAQMD’s May 2017 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines to evaluate air quality. The May 2017 Guidelines include revisions made to the 2010 Guidelines, addressing the California Supreme Court’s 2015 opinion in the Cal. Bldg. Indus. Ass’n vs. Bay Area Air Quality Mgmt. Dist., 62 Cal. 4th 369 (BAAQMD 2017c). Therefore, the numeric thresholds in the May 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Thresholds were used for this analysis to determine whether the impacts of the project exceed the thresholds identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The BAAQMD has developed screening criteria to provide lead agencies and project applicants with a conservative indication of whether a project could result in potentially significant air quality impacts. If all the screening criteria are met by a project, the lead agency or applicant would not need to perform a detailed air quality assessment of their project’s air pollutant emissions and air quality impacts would be considered less than significant. These screening levels are generally representative of new development on greenfield sites without any form of mitigation measures taken into consideration. For infill projects, such as this one, emissions would be less than the greenfield-type project on which the screening criteria are based (BAAQMD 2017c). The BAAQMD’s screening level sizes for single-family land uses is 325 dwelling units for operational criteria pollutant emissions and 114 dwelling units for construction-related emissions (BAAQMD 2017c). For construction-related emissions to be considered less than significant, projects must meet the following criteria in addition to being below the applicable screening level: 1. All Basic Construction Mitigation Measures would be included in the project design and implemented during construction; and 1 PM is made up of particles emitted directly, such as soot and fugitive dust, as well as secondary particles formed in the atmosphere from chemical reactions involving precursor pollutants such as oxides of nitrogen (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), volatile organic compounds (VOC), and ammonia (NH3). ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 43 Packet Page 473 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 22 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration 2. Construction-related activities would not include any of the following: a. Demolition b. Simultaneous occurrence of more than two construction phases (e.g., paving and building construction would not occur simultaneously) c. Simultaneous construction of more than one land use type (e.g., project would develop residential and commercial uses on the same site) (not applicable to high density infill development) d. Extensive site preparation (i.e., greater than default assumptions used by the Urban Land Use Emissions Model [URBEMIS] for grading, cut/fill, or earth movement) e. Extensive material transport (e.g., greater than 10,000 cubic yards of soil import/export) requiring a considerable amount of haul truck activity IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The California Clean Air Act requires that air districts create a Clean Air Plan that describes how the jurisdiction will meet air quality standards. The most recently adopted air quality plan is the BAAQMD 2017 Plan. The 2017 Plan updates the most recent Bay Area plan, the 2010 Clean Air Plan, pursuant to air quality planning requirements defined in the California Health and Safety Code. To fulfill state ozone planning requirements, the 2017 control strategy includes all feasible measures to reduce emissions of ozone precursors—ROG and NOX—and reduce transport of ozone and its precursors to neighboring air basins. The CAP builds upon and enhances the BAAQMD’s efforts to reduce emissions of fine particulate matter and TACs. The 2017 Plan does not include control measures that apply directly to individual development projects. Instead, the control strategy includes control measures related to stationary sources, transportation, energy, buildings, agriculture, natural and working lands, waste management, water, and super-GHG pollutants. The 2017 CAP focuses on two paramount goals:  Protect air quality and health at the regional and local scale by attaining all national and state air quality standards and eliminating disparities among Bay Area communities in cancer health risk from TACs  Protect the climate by reducing Bay Area GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 Under BAAQMD’s methodology, a determination of consistency with the 2017 Plan should demonstrate that a project:  Supports the primary goals of the air quality plan  Includes applicable control measures from the air quality plan  Does not disrupt or hinder implementation of any air quality plan control measures A project that would not support the 2017 Plan’s goals would not be considered consistent with the 2017 Plan. On an individual project basis, consistency with BAAQMD quantitative ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 44 Packet Page 474 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AIR QUALITY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 23 thresholds is interpreted as demonstrating support for the clean air plan’s goals. As discussed under criterion (b) below, the project would not exceed BAAQMD significance thresholds related to air quality emissions), the project would not result in exceedances of BAAQMD thresholds for criteria air pollutants and thus would not conflict with the 2017 Plan’s goal to attain air quality standards. The 2017 Clean Air Plan includes goals and measures to increase the use of electric vehicles, promote the use of on-site renewable energy, and encourage energy efficiency. The project would include features that are consistent with these goals and measures, including meeting California Green Building Standards for residences and inclusion of efficient household fixtures, as well as being an all-electric development. Therefore, the project would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of an applicable air quality plan and the project would have a less than significant impact. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT b. Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? CONSTRUCTION The proposed project would involve construction of one single-family residence and an associated accessory structure. The proposed project would not involve simultaneous construction phases, simultaneous construction of more than one land use type, extensive site preparation, or extensive material transport. Therefore, the project would meet all of the screening criteria for construction emissions. FUGITIVE DUST Site preparation and grading may cause wind-blown dust that could contribute particulate matter into the local atmosphere. The BAAQMD has not established a quantitative threshold for fugitive dust emissions but rather states that projects that incorporate BMPs for fugitive dust control during construction, such as watering exposed surfaces and limiting vehicle speeds to 15 miles per hour, would have a less than significant impact related to fugitive dust emissions. The project does not expressly include implementation of these BMPs; therefore, construction-related fugitive dust emissions would be potentially significant and Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would be required. OPERATION For single-family residential uses such as the proposed project, BAAQMD’s operational screening size is 325 dwelling units. Therefore, the project would meet the screening criteria for operational emissions. Operational emissions impacts would be less than significant. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 45 Packet Page 475 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 24 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration MITIGATION MEASURE AQ-1 BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation. The property owner or their designee shall implement the following measures during project construction to reduce dust fall- out emissions:  All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, and graded areas) shall be watered two times per day.  All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered or maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard.  All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.  Enclose, cover, water daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.)  All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.  Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways.  Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure CCR Title 13, Section 2485). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.  All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator.  Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the City of Palo Alto or construction contractor regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The air district’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would ensure that the project comply with all BAAQMD basic mitigation, reducing construction emission impacts to a less than significant level. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 46 Packet Page 476 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AIR QUALITY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 25 c. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Sensitive receivers nearest to the project site include single-family residences to the west and the single-family residence to the north. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has identified diesel particulate matter (PM2.5) as the primary airborne carcinogen in the state (CARB 2021). In addition, Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC) comprise a defined set of air pollutants that may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. Common sources of TACs and PM2.5 include gasoline stations, dry cleaners, diesel backup generators, truck distribution centers, freeways, and other major roadways (BAAQMD 2017c). The proposed project does not include construction of new gas stations, dry cleaners, highways, roadways, or other sources that could be considered a new permitted or non-permitted source of TAC or PM2.5 in proximity to receivers. In addition, the proposed project would not introduce a stationary source of emissions, nor would it result in particulate matter emissions greater than the BAAQMD threshold. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT d. Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? Table 3-3 in the BAAQMD’s 2017 CEQA Guidelines provides odor screening distances for land uses that have the potential to generate substantial odor complaints. The odor- generating uses in the table include wastewater treatment plants, landfills or transfer stations, refineries, composting facilities, confined animal facilities, food manufacturing, smelting plants, and chemical plants (BAAQMD 2017c). The proposed project involves residential uses and does not include any of the uses identified by the BAAQMD as odor- generating uses. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. This impact would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 47 Packet Page 477 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 26 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page left intentionally blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 48 Packet Page 478 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 27 4 Biological Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project have any of the following impacts: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? □ ■ □ □ b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? □ ■ □ □ c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? □ ■ □ □ d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? □ ■ □ □ e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or as defined by the City of Palo Alto’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 8.10)? □ ■ □ □ f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? □ □ ■ □ ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 49 Packet Page 479 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 28 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration EXISTING SETTING Rincon Consultants prepared a Biological Resources Constraints Analysis (BRCA) in November 2021 (Rincon Consultants 2021; Appendix A). The analysis in this Initial Study is based on the 2021 BRCA. As part of the report, Rincon conducted a field reconnaissance survey on October 5, 2021. During that field survey, three terrestrial vegetation communities or other land cover types were observed within the project site: Coast live oak woodland, non-native annual grassland, and riparian. Coast live oak woodland (Quercus agrifolia Forest and Woodland Alliance) is typically found on canyon bottoms, slopes, and flats with deep sandy or loamy soils throughout the inner and outer Coast Ranges, Transverse Ranges, and southern coast, usually below 1,200 meters. Coast live oak woodlands are widely distributed throughout the state from northern Mendocino County to San Diego County. This community is dominated by coast live oak (Q. agrifolia), often including California bay (Umbellularia californica) and Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii). Stands vary from open or continuous to savanna-like. Dense conditions support sparse understory vegetation including California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), poison oak, and snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.), while more open stands have a grassy understory. Coast live oak woodland is found throughout the project site. Canopy cover is continuous to scattered, with a moderately dense understory of herbs and shrubs. Other observed tree species commonly associated with coast live oak woodland include California bay and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). The shrub layer of the coast live oak woodland is typically poorly developed and the herbaceous layer is mostly continuous with adjacent grasslands. Shrubs in the project site include poison oak, coyote brush, and California blackberry. On the project site, non-native annual grassland primarily occurs in the interior of the site and is surrounded by coast live oak woodland. The majority of the non-native annual grassland within the project site has been previously mowed. Characteristic non-native annual grasses observed include wild oat (Avena fatua), Italian rye (Festuca perennis), and foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum). Many ruderal herbs were also present, including plantain (Plantago spp.). Riparian habitat is found along Los Trancos Creek within the project site. This habitat type is similar to coast live oak woodland described above, with the distinction that it occurs along the banks of the creek and is considered riparian habitat. IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special status in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Based on a review of agency databases and literature review, as well as the results of the reconnaissance survey of the project site, Rincon evaluated 85 special-status species (40 special-status plant species and 45 special-status animal species) documented within the Mindego Hill, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle and the surrounding eight quadrangles (Woodside, Palo Alto, Mountain View, La Honda, Cupertino, Franklin Point, Big ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 50 Packet Page 480 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 29 Basin, and Castle Rock Ridge). Each of these 85 species was evaluated for its potential to occur at the project site. The majority of special-status species are not expected to occur based on the absence of suitable habitat and/or the project site being outside of the geographic range of the species. However, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would require implementation of a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) in order to aid workers in recognizing special-status species, which would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Of the 40 special-status plant species, one has a moderate potential to occur on the project site. Woodland woollythreads (Monolopia gracilens), CRPR 1B.2, can be found in a variety of habitat types, including some that occur on the project site, such as woodlands and grassy sites in openings. Blooming period for this species is March through July. Multiple occurrences of woodland woollythreads have been recorded within five miles of the project area, including the most recent occurrence from 2018 approximately one mile southwest of the project site. Therefore, the project has the potential to impact woodland woollythreads through removal of habitat and this impact is potentially significant. Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would be required to reduce impacts on woodland woollythreads and other special- status plant species to a less than significant level. Of the 45 special-status animal species, nine have moderate to high potential to occur in habitat on the site: steelhead - central California coast (CCC) distinct population segment (steelhead) (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus), Santa Cruz black salamander (Aneides niger), California giant salamander (Dicamptodon ensatus), California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), western pond turtle (Emys marmorata), San Francisco gartersnake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), and San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens). Additionally, there is suitable nesting habitat throughout the project site for nesting birds, which are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and CDFW Fish and Game Code. Mitigation measures BIO-3 through BIO-7 would be required to reduce impacts on the above-mentioned special-status animal species to a less than significant level. The project would include a 20-foot creek setback (see Figure 6) pursuant to Palo Alto’s Stream Corridor Ordinance (Section 18.40.140 of the PAMC) and no direct impacts to aquatic habitat would occur. However, construction of the project would result in removal of vegetation and loss of terrestrial habitat on limited portions of the site, and runoff and erosion from the project site could indirectly impact aquatic species habitat. Critical habitat for steelhead is present in Los Trancos Creek, both within and immediately adjacent to the project site. Designated critical habitat is also located in several of the rivers surrounding the project site within five miles for coho Salmon, though the project site does not overlap with these rivers and no drainages onsite are connected to the other rivers where critical habitat is designated. The project would include a 20-foot creek setback pursuant to Palo Alto’s Stream Corridor Ordinance and no direct impacts to steelhead critical habitat would occur. However, indirect impacts from runoff or erosion could impact water quality; therefore, the project has the potential to impact steelhead designated critical habitat and the impact is potentially significant. Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would be required to address potential erosion and provided BMPs for protection of steelhead and aquatic habitats. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 51 Packet Page 481 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 30 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration Figure 6 Site Plan (Partial) in Relation to Creek and Property Lines ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 52 Packet Page 482 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 31 New lighting introduced on the project site could have an adverse effect on animal species in the creek corridor if not properly limited and controlled. PAMC Section 18.40.140(B)(3) requires that “Nighttime lighting shall be directed away from the riparian corridor of a stream” and that “The distance between nighttime lighting and the riparian corridor of a stream should be maximized.” A lighting plan submitted by the applicant shows shielding on exterior safety lighting and shades to limit interior lighting spillover toward the creek. The City would require adherence to PAMC Section 18.40.140(B)(3) during final review of project lighting prior to issuance of building permits. Implementation of these requirements would limit light intrusion into the creek corridor and associated impacts would be avoided. Additionally, although designated critical habitat for California red-legged frog and Bay checkerspot butterfly is located within five miles of the project area, the project does not overlap with either of these designated critical habitats. MITIGATION MEASURES The following mitigation measures are required: BIO-1 Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP). Prior to initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization) all personnel associated with project construction shall attend a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training, conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in recognizing special-status resources that may occur in the construction area. The specifics of this program shall include identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area. A qualified biologist shall prepare a fact sheet conveying this information for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with construction. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer indicating they have attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to them. The forms from all trainings shall be available to the City upon request to document compliance. BIO-2 Special-Status Plant Species Botanical Surveys. A qualified biologist shall conduct a protocol level botanical survey, including a site visit during the blooming period of the target species in March through July. If the CRPR 1 rank plant is found, the plants shall be avoided by installing protective fencing and warning construction personnel of their presence through the WEAP training. If special-status plants species cannot be avoided, impacts shall be mitigated at a minimum ratio of 1:1 (number of acres or individuals restored to number of acres or individuals impacted). A restoration plan shall be prepared and submitted to the City for review and approval and to CDFW for review. The restoration plan shall include, at a minimum, the type and area of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; goals and objectives of the mitigation project; a monitoring plan including performance standards and success criteria; and maintenance activities to occur during ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 53 Packet Page 483 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 32 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration monitoring. The applicant shall implement the measures prior to commencement of ground disturbance, tree removal or construction. BIO-3 Best Management Practices for Protection of Steelhead and Aquatic Habitat. No vegetation removal, ground disturbance or construction shall occur within the creek or the 20-foot creek setback zone, which shall be demarcated with high visibility orange construction fencing to ensure avoidance of impacts to the aquatic habitat. Best management practices (BMPs) shall be developed and implemented during all grading and construction activities to prevent erosion and sedimentation into the creek and to prevent the spill of contaminants in or around the creek. The following BMPs shall be included and implemented on-site during construction to prevent any indirect impacts to aquatic habitat, as well as jurisdictional waters and wetlands:  Vehicles and equipment shall be checked at least daily for leaks and maintained in good working order. Spill kits shall be available on-site at all times and a spill response plan shall be developed and implemented.  Sediment and erosion control measures (e.g., sand or gravel bags, hay bales, check dams) shall be implemented and maintained throughout the project site to prevent the entry of sediment and/or pollutants into any waterways or jurisdictional areas. No monofilament plastic may be used for erosion control materials. BIO-4 Preconstruction Surveys for California Giant Salamander, Santa Cruz Black Salamander, Western Pond Turtle, California Red-Legged Frog, and San Francisco Garter Snake. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours of the initiation of project activities. If California Giant Salamander, Santa Cruz Black Salamander, and/or Western Pond Turtle are observed the animal shall be allowed to leave the site on its own. If California Red-Legged Frog, and/or San Francisco garter snake is found, USFWS shall be notified immediately to determine the correct course of action and the proposed project shall not begin until approved by USFWS. Prior to ground disturbance, a temporary wildlife exclusion barrier shall be installed along the limits of disturbance. A qualified biologist shall inspect the area prior to barrier installation. The barrier shall be designed to prevent the target species from entering the project area and will remain in place until all development activities have been completed. This barrier shall be inspected daily by a qualified biologist and maintained and repaired as necessary to ensure that it is functional and is not a hazard to the target species on the outer side of the barrier. A qualified biologist shall be present during all grading and initial ground disturbing activities. Vegetation disturbance shall be the minimum necessary to achieve the goals of the project. Immediately prior to initial ground disturbance and vegetation removal, a qualified biologist shall conduct a visual clearance survey. Vegetation shall be cut to 6 inches in height using hand tools (including string trimmers or chainsaw for brush). Once the ground is visible, a second visual survey for target species shall be conducted by the biologist prior to additional ground disturbance. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 54 Packet Page 484 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 33 Should California Giant Salamander, Santa Cruz Black Salamander, or Western Pond Turtle be observed within the project site, construction shall be halted in the vicinity until either the animal exits the site on its own or until a qualified biologist relocates the animal to suitable habitat in the immediate vicinity. Should California Red- Legged Frog, and/or San Francisco garter snake be observed within the project site, the USFWS shall be notified immediately and construction shall be halted until either the animal exits the site on its own or until a qualified biologist with the appropriate USFWS Recovery Permit relocates the animal. No work shall occur during a rain event over 0.25.” If a rain event occurs, a qualified biologist shall inspect the site again prior to resuming work. All holes and trenches shall be covered at the end of the day or ramped to avoid entrapment. BIO-5 Focused Surveys for Special-Status Bat Species and Roosting Bat Protection Plan. Prior to tree removal, a qualified biologist shall conduct a focused survey of all trees to be removed or impacted by construction activities to determine whether active roosts of special-status bats are present on site. If tree removal is planned for the fall, it is recommended the survey be conducted in September to ensure tree removal would have adequate time to occur during seasonal periods of bat activity, as described below. If tree removal is planned for the spring, it is recommended the survey be conducted during the earliest possible time in March, to allow for suitable conditions for both the detection of bats and subsequent tree removal. Trees containing suitable potential bat roost habitat features shall be clearly marked or identified. If day roosts are found to be potentially present, the biologist shall prepare a site- specific roosting bat protection plan to be implemented by the contractor following the City of Palo Alto’s approval. The plan shall incorporate the following guidance as appropriate:  To the extent possible, trees identified as suitable roosting habitat shall be removed during seasonal periods of bat activity, including the following, but not during maternity season: ▫ Between September 1 and about October 15, or before evening temperatures fall below 45 degrees Fahrenheit and/or more than 0.5 inch of rainfall within 24 hours occurs. ▫ Between March 1 and April 15, or after evening temperatures rise above 45 degrees Fahrenheit and/or no more than 0.5 inch of rainfall within 24 hours occurs.  If a tree must be removed during the maternity/breeding season and is identified as potentially containing a colonial maternity roost, then a qualified biologist shall conduct acoustic emergence surveys or implement other appropriate methods to further evaluate if the roost is an active maternity roost. Under the biologist’s guidance, the contractor shall implement measures similar to or better than the following: ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 55 Packet Page 485 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 34 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration ▫ If it is determined that the roost is not an active maternity roost, then the roost may be removed in accordance with the other requirements of this recommendation. ▫ If it is found that an active maternity roost of a colonial roosting species is present, the roost shall not be disturbed during the breeding season (April 15 to August 31).  Potential colonial hibernation roosts may only be removed during seasonal periods of bat activity. Potential non-colonial roosts that cannot be avoided shall be removed on warm days in late morning to afternoon when any bats present are likely to be warm and able to fly. Appropriate methods shall be used to minimize the potential harm to bats during tree removal. Such methods may include using a two-step tree removal process. This method is conducted over two consecutive days and works by creating noise and vibration by cutting non- habitat branches and limbs from habitat trees using chainsaws only (no excavators or other heavy machinery) on day one. The noise and vibration disturbance, together with the visible alteration of the tree, is very effective in causing bats that emerge nightly to feed to not return to the roost that night. The remainder of the tree is removed on day two. BIO-6 Preconstruction Surveys for San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey for woodrats no more than 14 days prior to construction. Nests within 50 feet of project activity that would not be directly impacted by project activity shall be demarcated with a 10-foot avoidance buffer and left intact. If a nest(s) that cannot be avoided are found during the pre- construction survey, an approved biologist shall dismantle the nest and relocate it to suitable habitat outside the work area no more than 50 feet away with the goal of ensuring the individuals are allowed to leave the work area(s) unharmed before on site activities begin. Nest relocation shall occur within 48 hours of construction activities to ensure that nests are not reestablished. BIO-7 Preconstruction Surveys for Nesting Birds. A general pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 14 days prior to the initiation of construction activities. If construction is stopped for more than 14 days during the nesting season, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted prior to the re-start of construction activities. Surveys shall include the disturbance area plus a 50-foot buffer for passerine species, and a 500-foot buffer for raptors. If active nests are located, an appropriate avoidance buffer shall be established within which no work activity would be allowed that would impact these nests. The avoidance buffer shall be established by the qualified biologist on a case-by-case basis based on the species and site conditions. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all construction personnel and equipment until juveniles have fledged and/or the nest is inactive. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is complete, and the nest is no longer active prior to removal of the buffer. If work within a buffer area cannot be ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 56 Packet Page 486 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 35 avoided, then a qualified biologist shall be present to monitor all project activities that occur within the buffer. The biological monitor shall evaluate the nesting avian species for signs of disturbance and shall have the ability to stop work. SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would require all personnel associated with project construction to attend a WEAP, which would aid them in recognizing special-status resources and reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Implementation of Mitigation BIO-2 would reduce impacts on special-status plant species to a less than significant level through conduction of botanical surveys and avoidance of CRPR 1 rank plant. Implementation of Mitigation BIO-3 would require implementation of BMPs for the protection of steelhead and aquatic habitats, as well as measures for sediment and erosion control which would reduce impacts on aquatic habitats and jurisdictional waters and wetlands to a less than significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-4 through BIO-7 would require surveys for and avoidance if possible for special-status animal species such as the California Giant Salamander, Santa Cruz Black Salamander, Western Pond Turtle, California Red-Legged Frog, San Francisco garter snake, special-status bat species, San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat, and nesting birds, which would reduce impacts on those species to a less than significant level. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED b. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Three sensitive natural communities (Northern Coastal Salt Marsh, Serpentine Bunch Grass, and Valley Oak Woodland) are known to occur within the nine-quadrangle search radius; however, none are present within the project site. Los Trancos Creek is an intermittent stream that crosses the western border of the site, as shown in Figure 2. It is a tributary to San Francisquito Creek, which flows into San Francisco Bay, a Traditional Navigable Water, and therefore is potentially under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), CDFW, and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The proposed project would not alter the course of this creek or other stream or river and would implement a 20 foot creek setback pursuant to Palo Alto’s Stream Corridor Ordinance as noted in Section 18.40.140 of the PAMC. Riparian habitat (coast live oak woodland) occurs adjacent to the creek. Coast live oak woodland is not a CDFW sensitive natural community, ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 57 Packet Page 487 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 36 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration but riparian habitat is considered to be jurisdictional by CDFW. Project plans avoid direct impacts to Los Trancos Creek by precluding work or disturbance within 20 feet of the top of bank; however, the proposed project may result in indirect impacts to the creek and riparian habitat from erosion or runoff from the project site. Mitigation Measure BIO-3 requires development of BMPs to protect water quality and aquatic habitat and would also serve to protect wetlands and waters of the U.S. and State. Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would be required to reduce potential water quality impacts to a less than significant level. Project activities within the dripline of the riparian canopy and removal of riparian canopy shall be avoided to the extent possible. Mitigation Measure BIO-3 requires high visibility orange construction fencing established for the creek setback zone. Where the riparian canopy extends beyond the 20-foot setback, the fencing must be extended to encompass the dripline of the riparian canopy. If project activities requiring pruning or soil disturbance, or that have the potential to impact soils within the dripline of the riparian canopy cannot be avoided, a CDFW Section 1600 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement is required. Mitigation at a minimum ratio of 1:1 shall be required. A compensatory mitigation plan for impacts to riparian habitat must be prepared and submitted to CDFW for approval. The mitigation plan must include, at a minimum, the type and area of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; goals and objectives of the mitigation project; a monitoring plan including performance standards and success criteria; and maintenance activities to occur during monitoring. The applicant must implement the measures prior to commencement of ground disturbance, tree removal or construction. The project site is mapped within CDFW’s California Essential Habitat Connectivity areas as somewhat permeable to wildlife passage. However, the project site is outside of mapped Landscape Blocks for the California Bay Area Linkage Network, indicating that it is not identified as highly permeable or high-quality habitat. Within the larger landscape, the project site is surrounded by highly permeable landscape providing terrestrial species more attractive alternatives for movement around the project site. Many large terrestrial wildlife species such as the candidate threatened mountain lion (Puma concolor) and most small species such as rodents and herpetofauna avoid openings and use the cover provided by the riparian corridor. The project is designed to avoid impacts to the riparian corridor, and Mitigation Measure BIO-3 requires fencing of the creek setback zone. The proposed placement of the structure is within an existing clearing on the property. The City would require adherence to PAMC Section 18.40.140(B)(3) requiring shielding of the creek from lighting. Implementation of these requirements would limit intrusion into the riparian corridor and impacts to the movement of both terrestrial and aquatic wildlife, established corridors, or nursery sites would be less than significant. MITIGATION MEASURE AND SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would require implementation of BMPs to reduce impacts on Los Trancos Creek and riparian habitat. With mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 58 Packet Page 488 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 37 e. Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or as defined by the City of Palo Alto’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 8.10)? The purpose of the City of Palo Alto Tree Preservation Ordinance is to promote the health, safety, welfare, and quality property within the city, and the establishment of standards for removal, maintenance, and planting of trees. In establishing these procedures and standards, it is the City's intent to encourage the preservation of trees. Chapter 8.10, Tree Preservation and Management Regulations, establishes regulations for the preservation of protected trees, defined as:  Coast live oak, 11.5 inches in diameter or greater when measured 4.5 ft above natural grade  Valley oak, 11.5 inches in diameter or greater when measured 4.5 ft above natural grade  Coast redwood, 18 inches in diameter or greater when measured 4.5 ft above natural grade  A heritage tree designated by the City Council Under the tree protection ordinance, discretionary development approvals for property containing protected trees will include appropriate conditions providing for the protection of such trees during construction and for maintenance of the trees thereafter. According to the arborist report prepared by Kielty Arborist Services on June 7, 2021 and revised on August 24, 2021 (Kielty Arborist Services 2021; Appendix B), there are currently 82 trees within or adjacent to the area of development. Four non-protected trees (one red willow tree, two olive trees, and one black walnut tree) would be removed as part of the project since they either pose a fire hazard or are located within the proposed driveway area. Coast live oak trees and valley oak trees with a diameter at breast height of greater than 11.5 inches occur within project site. Pursuant to PAMC Section 8.10, these on-site oak trees would qualify as protected trees. There are currently 55 protected trees on site. Except for one coast live oak tree, the rest of the protected trees are located away from the proposed work on site. However, Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would be required in order to reduce impacts on trees to be retained on site. The one Coast live oak tree that is located on the northwestern portion of the site and is dead would need to be removed. The City’s tree protection ordinance requires compliance with the Tree Technical Manual, which outlines the requirements for removal and replacement of protected trees consistent with the tree canopy requirements. A written Tree Removal Permit is required prior to removal of any street tree and would further ensure that the requirements of the Ordinance are met. The project would be required to comply with the tree ordinance and apply for the required permit as needed; therefore, there is no conflict with local policies or ordinances. MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-8 Protection of Retained Trees. The project applicant shall adhere to recommendations as described in the arborist report prepared by Kielty Arborist Services (Kielty Arborist Services 2021) regarding protection of retained trees. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 59 Packet Page 489 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 38 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration Recommendations include landscape buffers, tree pruning, root cutting, trenching and excavation, irrigation, grading, and inspections. SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would require protection measures for retained trees on site, which would reduce impacts to the trees to a less than significant level. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED f. Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The project site is not within an approved Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. No impact would occur. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 60 Packet Page 490 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST CULTURAL RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 39 5 Cultural Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project have any of the following impacts: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in§15064.5 or recognized by City Council resolution? □ □ □ ■ b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in §15064.5? □ ■ □ □ c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred out of formal cemeteries? □ □ ■ □ a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5 or recognized by City Council resolution? Rincon Consultants prepared a Cultural Resources Assessment Report for the project in February 2022 (Foster and Blind 2022). This assessment included a cultural resources records search of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search, historic-period aerial and topographic map review, a pedestrian survey of the project site on January 14, 2022. The CHRIS records search was conducted to identify previous cultural resources studies and previously recorded cultural resources within 0.5 mile of the project site. Rincon also reviewed the NRHP, the CRHR, the California Historical Landmarks list, and the Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD), as well as its predecessor the California State Historic Property Data (HPD) File. Additionally, Rincon reviewed the Archaeological Determination of Eligibility (ADOE) list. No structures or previously recorded historic structures were identified on the project site. The field survey and background research did not identify any built-environment historical resources on or adjacent to the project site. Therefore, no impacts would occur. NO IMPACT b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in §15064.5? Rincon identified two archaeological resources within the vicinity of the project site. Rincon evaluated one historical archaeological resource within the project site for listing in the CRHR and recommended it ineligible as its data potential was exhausted at initial recording. One Native American resource is located outside of the project site and will not be affected by project activities. This resource was not evaluated for listing in the CRHR. While the SLF results were negative, the project site still maintains moderate sensitivity to containing ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 61 Packet Page 491 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 40 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration historic-period or Native American archaeological resources due to the proximity of the project to previously recorded archaeological resources. Therefore, impacts are potentially significant. MITIGATION MEASURES CR-1 Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP). Prior to project ground disturbance, all construction personnel and contractors responsible for overseeing and operating ground-disturbing activities shall be required to receive cultural awareness and sensitivity training. The purpose of this training is to educate construction personnel regarding the legal obligations of the project, the types of archaeological deposits that may be encountered during construction, and the appropriate procedures required in the event of a discovery of archaeological resources, paleontological resources, or human remains. The WEAP shall also provide cultural sensitivity training to ensure respectful and appropriate behaviors in the vicinity of archaeological deposits and human remains. The WEAP shall be implemented by a qualified archaeologist that meets or exceeds the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in archaeology. CR-2 Archaeological and Native American Monitoring. A qualified archaeologist shall conduct archaeological monitoring for all project-related ground disturbing activities. Archaeological monitoring shall be performed under the direction of an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (National Park Service 1983). Locally affiliated Native American tribes shall be given the opportunity to conduct Native American monitoring. In the event that Native American monitoring occurs, a locally affiliated tribal member shall monitor all project-related ground disturbing activities. The monitor(s) will have the authority to halt and redirect work should any archaeological resources be identified during monitoring. If archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate area must halt and the find evaluated for listing in the CRHR. Archaeological monitoring may be reduced to spot-checking or eliminated at the discretion of the monitors, in consultation with the lead agency, as warranted by conditions such as encountering bedrock, sediments being excavated are fill, or negative findings during the first 60 percent of rough grading. If monitoring is reduced to spot-checking, spot-checking shall occur when ground-disturbance moves to a new location within the project area and when ground disturbance will extend to depths not previously reached (unless those depths are within bedrock). CR-3 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural or Tribal Cultural Resources. In the event that archaeological resources are unexpectedly encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate area shall be halted and an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archeology (National Park Service 1983) shall be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the find is Native American in origin, then a Native American representative shall also be contacted to participate in the evaluation of the find. The qualified archaeologist, and, if applicable, the Native American representative, shall examine ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 62 Packet Page 492 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST CULTURAL RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 41 the find and make appropriate recommendations regarding additional work necessary to evaluate the significance of the find and the appropriate treatment of the resource. All cultural resources identified shall be evaluated for CRHR eligibility and local listing. Additional work may be necessary to evaluate the resource for inclusion in the CRHR or local listing. Recommendations could include, but are not limited to, invasive or non-invasive testing, sampling, laboratory analysis, preservation in place, or data recovery. A report of findings documenting any data recovered during monitoring shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist and submitted to the Director of Planning. If the discovery is determined to be Native American in nature, the on-site Native American monitor, if applicable, shall be consulted to determine the appropriate treatment of the resource. In the event that no Native American monitor is contracted, locally affiliated Native American tribes shall be invited to consult regarding the appropriate treatment of any Native American resources identified during project construction. SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1, CR-2, and CR-3 would ensure that cultural resources are properly identified and preserved in the event they are uncovered during construction and would reduce impacts regarding disrupting intact archaeological resources to a less than significant level. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED c. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred out of formal cemeteries? No human remains are known to be present within the project site. However, the discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground disturbing activities. If human remains are found, the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the County Coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which will determine and notify the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). The MLD has 48 hours from being granted site access to make recommendations for the disposition of the remains. If the MLD does not make recommendations within 48 hours, the landowner shall reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from subsequent disturbance. With adherence to existing regulations, impacts to human remains would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 63 Packet Page 493 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 42 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 64 Packet Page 494 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ENERGY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 43 6 Energy Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? □ □ ■ □ b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? □ □ ■ □ a. Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b. Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? The proposed project would involve the use of energy during construction and operation. Energy use during the construction phase would be primarily in the form of fuel consumption. Long-term operation of the proposed project would require permanent grid connections for electricity to power internal and exterior building lighting and heating and cooling systems. In addition, the increase in vehicle trips associated with the project would increase fuel consumption within Palo Alto. However, the proposed project would be subject to the energy conservation requirements of the California Energy Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, Part 6) and the California Green Building Standards Code (24 CCR part 11) as well as the City’s green building ordinance (PAMC Section 16.14.). Additionally, the proposed project would be fully electric and would utilize renewable energy in the form of solar roof panels with a system of more than 10 kilowatts (kW). Heat pump technology would be used for water heating and space heating. The project would also utilize energy-efficient appliances and lighting, as well as water-efficient appliances and fixtures, which would be consistent with the following policies within the City of Palo Alto 2030 Comprehensive Plan:  Policy T-4.7 Require new residential development projects to implement best practices for street design, stormwater management and green infrastructure.  Policy N-7.4 Maximize the conservation and efficient use of energy in new and existing residences and other buildings in Palo Alto. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 65 Packet Page 495 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 44 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration  Policy N-7.5 Encourage energy efficient lighting that protects dark skies and promotes energy conservation by minimizing light and glare from development while ensuring public health and safety. Moreover, since the proposed project would involve the construction of one single-family residence and associated accessory structure, the increase in vehicle trips would be minimal and would not substantially increase fuel consumption within the City. Therefore, impacts related to the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 66 Packet Page 496 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST GEOLOGY AND SOILS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 45 7 Geology and Soils Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project have any of the following impacts: a. Directly or indirectly cause potential Expose substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. □ □ □ ■ 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? □ ■ □ □ 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? □ ■ □ □ 4. Landslides? □ □ □ ■ b. Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil? □ ■ □ □ c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? □ ■ □ □ d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? □ □ □ ■ f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? □ ■ □ □ ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 67 Packet Page 497 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 46 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration SETTING FAULT ZONES Similar to much of California, Palo Alto is located in a seismically active region. The USGS defines Holocene-active faults as those that are likely to have moved one or more times (surface displacement) in the last 10,000 years (USGS, n.d.), while inactive faults have not had surface displacement within that period. The major fault zones located near Palo Alto include the San Andreas Fault (5.5 miles southwest from the City), the Hayward Fault (13 miles northeast from the City), and the Calaveras Fault (23 miles northeast from the City). In addition to primary hazards like surface fault ruptures, earthquakes also result in secondary hazards and impacts such as ground shaking, landslides, and liquefaction, which could cause widespread damage. The project site is not located within an identified earthquake fault zone as delineated on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map (DOC 2021a). GROUND SHAKING Seismically induced ground shaking covers a wide area and is greatly influenced by the distance of the site to the seismic source, soil conditions, and depth to groundwater. The most intense ground-shaking scenario mapped by the USGS and Associated Bay Area Governments (ABAG) in the vicinity assumes a 7.0 magnitude earthquake on the Hayward Fault system (northern and southern segments). The predicted ground-shaking level from such an earthquake would be “strong shaking” to “very strong shaking” throughout the City (ABAG 2019). LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMICALLY INDUCED SETTLEMENT Liquefaction is defined as the sudden loss of soil strength due to a rapid increase in soil pore water pressure resulting from seismic ground shaking. Liquefaction potential is dependent on such factors as soil type, depth to ground water, degree of seismic shaking, and the relative density of the soil. When liquefaction of the soil occurs, buildings and other objects on the ground surface may tilt or sink, and lightweight buried structures (such as pipelines) may float toward the ground surface. Liquefied soil may be unable to support its own weight or that of structures, which could result in loss of foundation bearing or differential settlement. Liquefaction may also result in cracks in the ground surface followed by the emergence of a sand-water mixture. According to the DOC, the project site is located in a liquefaction zone (DOC 2021a). Seismically induced settlement occurs in loose to medium dense unconsolidated soil above groundwater. These soils compress (settle) when subject to seismic shaking. The settlement can be exacerbated by increased loading, such as from the construction of buildings. Settlement can also result solely from human activities including improperly placed artificial fill, and structures built on soils or bedrock materials with differential settlement rates. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 68 Packet Page 498 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST GEOLOGY AND SOILS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 47 LANDSLIDES Landslides result when the driving forces that act on a slope (i.e., the weight of the slope material, and the weight of objects placed on it) are greater than the slope’s natural resisting forces (i.e., the shear strength of the slope material). Slope instability may result from natural processes, such as the erosion of the toe of a slope by a stream, or by ground shaking caused by an earthquake. Slopes can also be modified artificially by grading, or by the addition of water or structures to a slope. Development that occurs on a slope can substantially increase the frequency and extent of potential slope stability hazards. The project site is not located in a landslide hazard zone or an earthquake fault zone (DOC 2021a). EXPANSIVE SOILS Expansive soils can change dramatically in volume depending on moisture content. When wet, these soils can expand; conversely, when dry, they can contract or shrink. Sources of moistures that can trigger this shrink-swell phenomenon include seasonal rainfall, landscape irrigation, utility leakage, and/or perched groundwater. Expansive soil can develop wide cracks in the dry season, and changes in soil volume have the potential to damage concrete slabs, foundations, and pavement. Special building/structure design or soil treatment are often needed in areas with expansive soils. Expansive soils are typically very fine-grained with a high to very high percentage of clay. The clay minerals present typically include montmorillonite, smectite, and/or bentonite. Linear extensibility is used to determine the shrink-swell potential of soils. The shrink-swell potential is low if the soil has a linear extensibility of less than 3 percent; moderate if 3 to 6 percent; high if 6 to 9 percent; and very high if more than 9 percent. EROSION Erosion is the wearing away of the soil mantle by running water, wind or geologic forces. Excessive erosion can contribute to landslides, siltation of streams, undermining of foundations, and ultimately the loss of structures. Removal of vegetation tends to heighten erosion hazards. The City enforces grading and erosion control ordinances to reduce these hazards and the 2030 Comprehensive Plan also contains policies to prevent erosion-related issues. PALEONTOLOGICAL SETTING Paleontological sensitivity refers to the potential for a geologic unit to produce scientifically significant fossils. Direct impacts to paleontological resources occur when earthwork activities, such as grading or trenching, cut into the geologic deposits within which fossils are buried and physically destroy the fossils. Since fossils are the remains of prehistoric animal and plant life, they are considered to be nonrenewable. Such impacts have the potential to be significant and, under the CEQA Guidelines, may require mitigation. Sensitivity is determined by rock type, past history of the geologic unit in producing significant fossils, and fossil localities recorded from that unit. Paleontological sensitivity is ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 69 Packet Page 499 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 48 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration derived from the known fossil data collected from the entire geologic unit, not just from a specific survey. The discovery of a vertebrate fossil locality is of greater significance than that of an invertebrate fossil locality, especially if it contains a microvertebrate assemblage. The recognition of new vertebrate fossil locations could provide important information on the geographical range of the taxa, their radiometric age, evolutionary characteristics, depositional environment, and other important scientific research questions. Vertebrate fossils are almost always significant because they occur more rarely than invertebrates or plants. Thus, geological units having the potential to contain vertebrate fossils are considered the most sensitive. IMPACT ANALYSIS a1. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? The project site is not located within an identified earthquake fault zone as delineated on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map (DOC 2021a). No known fault lines are located on the site. The closest active fault is the San Andreas Fault which is located approximately 0.4 miles southwest of the site. According to the Geotechnical Engineering Study completed by Earth Systems on April 9, 2021 (Earth Systems 2021; Appendix C), the danger from rupture of a known earthquake fault on the site is low. Therefore, no impact would occur. NO IMPACT a2. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? As with any site in the Bay Area region, the project site is susceptible to strong seismic ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake. Nearby faults include the San Andreas Fault, the Hayward Fault and the Calaveras Fault. These faults are capable of producing strong seismic ground shaking at the site. According to the project’s Geotechnical Engineering Study, strong shaking of the site is likely to occur, but the project would be feasible from a geotechnical standpoint if the recommendations in the report are implemented. This impact is potentially significant. MITIGATION MEASURE GEO-1 Geotechnical Design Considerations. The project plans submitted for building permit approval shall incorporate the design recommendations outlined in the Geotechnical Study prepared by Earth Systems on April 9, 2021, or any other design feature or measure shown to equivalently reduce impacts associated with geology and soils to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. These include recommendations under the categories of: ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 70 Packet Page 500 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST GEOLOGY AND SOILS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 49  General site preparation  Compaction  Fill  Mat slab foundations  Post-tensioned slab foundations  Interior slab-on-grade construction  Exterior flatwork  Swimming pool  Utility trench backfills  Management of site drainage and finish improvements  Geotechnical observation and testing Refer to the Geotechnical Study for full detail recommendations for each of the abovementioned categories. SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, the potentially significant impact associated with ground shaking would be reduced to a less than significant level. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED a3. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? c. Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? As mentioned above under Liquefaction, the project site is located in a liquefaction zone (DOC 2021a). The Geotechnical Engineering Study found that potentially liquefiable soils across the site are discontinuous, and therefore the potential for lateral displacement is considered low. However, there are concerns regarding loose soils in the upper 5 feet of the project site and the potential for settlement due to seismic shaking. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce impacts on liquefaction to a less than significant level. Additionally, with modern construction and required adherence to the geology and soil provisions of the CBC, which sets forth seismic design standards (Chapters 16, 18) and geohazard study requirements (Chapter 18), impacts would be less than significant. MITIGATION MEASURE AND SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, the potentially significant impact associated with liquefaction would be reduced to a less than significant level. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 71 Packet Page 501 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 50 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration a4. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides? Earthquakes can trigger landslides that may cause injuries and damage to people and structures. Landslides are typically hazards on or near slopes or hillside areas, rather than generally level areas like the project site and vicinity. According to the DOC, the project site is not located in a landslide zone, and therefore there would be no impact. NO IMPACT b. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Ground disturbing activities that would occur during the grading and excavation phase of construction would have the highest potential for erosion, and as a result temporary erosion could occur. However, the project would be required to comply with PAMC Chapters 16.28.070 and 16.28.120, which require measures to minimize surface runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. In addition, the project would be required to comply with erosion control standards administered by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFRWQCB) through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process, which requires implementation of nonpoint source control of stormwater runoff. Furthermore, as mentioned under Section 3, Air Quality, the project would be required to comply with BAAQMD best management practices (BMPs) in Section 8.1.2 of the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, which address the minimization or avoidance of erosion and loss of topsoil. Additional information related to the prevention of stormwater- induced erosion is provided in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality. Compliance with these requirements as well as implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 and Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would ensure that impacts of the proposed development associated with soil erosion and the loss of topsoil would be less than significant. MITIGATION MEASURE AND SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, which requires incorporation of design measures such as stabilization of surface soils while managing site drainage, and Mitigation Measure BIO-3, which requires implementation of sediment and erosion control measures (e.g., sand or gravel bags, hay bales, check dams) throughout the project site to prevent the entry of sediment and/or pollutants into any waterways or jurisdictional areas, the potentially significant impact associated with erosion or the loss of topsoil would be reduced to a less than significant level. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED d. Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property; Section 21.12.070 of the PAMC requires the preparation of a preliminary soil report in order to determine the presence of expansive soils and recommend corrective action to prevent structural damage. Building on unsuitable soils would have the potential to create future subsidence or collapse issues that could result in the settlement of infrastructure, and/or the disruption of utility lines and other services. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 72 Packet Page 502 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST GEOLOGY AND SOILS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 51 As analyzed in the Geotechnical Engineering Study, the near surface soils on the project site are sandy in nature and therefore are not expansive. Compliance with existing State and local laws and regulations would ensure that impacts associated with expansive soil are minimized by requiring the submittal and review of detailed soils and/or geologic reports prior to construction. Such evaluations must contain recommendations for ground preparation and earthwork specific to the site, which then become an integral part of the construction design. Palo Alto building codes and other City requirements would ensure that potential impacts are minimized or avoided. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, impacts associated with expansive soils would be less than significant. MITIGATION MEASURE AND SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, the potentially significant impact associated with expansive soils would be reduced to a less than significant level. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED e. Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? The proposed project would be connected to the local wastewater treatment system. Septic systems would not be used. There would be no impacts. NO IMPACT f. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? There are no unique geological features on the project site. Since the project would include a pool and spa area on the southern portion of the site, maximum depth of excavation could potentially reach no more than 8 feet on the southern portion of the site where the pool is proposed. The project has the potential to uncover unanticipated paleontological resources. This impact is potentially significant. MITIGATION MEASURES GEO-2 Discovery of Previously Unidentified Paleontological Resources. In the event a fossil is uncovered during Project construction, all work shall cease until a certified paleontologist can investigate the finds and make appropriate recommendations. Any artifacts uncovered shall be recorded and removed for storage at a location to be determined by the monitor. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 73 Packet Page 503 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 52 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Mitigation Measure GEO-2 would provide for the recovery, identification, and curation of previously unrecovered fossils, and Mitigation Measure CR-1 would require implementation of a WEAP prior to ground-breaking activities, which would ensure that potential impacts to paleontological resources be reduced to a less than significant level. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 74 Packet Page 504 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 53 8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project have any of the following impacts: a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? □ □ ■ □ b. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases? □ □ ■ □ CLIMATE CHANGE AND GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG) EMISSIONS Climate change is the observed increase in the average temperature of the earth’s atmosphere and oceans along with other substantial changes in climate (such as wind patterns, precipitation, and storms) over an extended period of time. Climate change is the result of numerous, cumulative sources of greenhouse gases (GHG), gases that trap heat in the atmosphere, analogous to the way in which a greenhouse retains heat. Common GHGs include water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxides (N2O), fluorinated gases, and ozone (O3). GHGs are emitted by both natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO2 and CH4 are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO2 are largely by-products of fossil fuel combustion, whereas CH4 results from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Man-made GHGs, many of which have greater heat-absorption potential than CO2, include fluorinated gases, such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) (California Environmental Protection Agency [Cal EPA] 2015). The accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the earth’s temperature. Without the natural heat trapping effect of GHGs, Earth’s surface would be about 34° C cooler (Cal EPA 2015). However, it is believed that emissions from human activities, particularly the consumption of fossil fuels for electricity production and transportation, have elevated the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere beyond the level of naturally occurring concentrations. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 75 Packet Page 505 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 54 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b. Would the project conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The project’s proposed construction activities, energy use, daily operational activities, and mobile sources (traffic) would generate GHG emissions. However, since the proposed project would involve construction of one single-family residence and an associated accessory structure, and would not involve demolition, simultaneous construction phases, simultaneous construction of more than one land use type, extensive site preparation, or extensive material transport, it would not generate substantial amounts of GHG emissions. For single-family residential uses such as the proposed project, BAAQMD’s operational GHG screening size is 56 dwelling units. Therefore, the project would meet the screening criteria for operational GHG emissions. The project would be consistent with the following goal policies within the 2030 Comprehensive Plan aimed at reducing greenhouse gases through the use of clean and efficient energy (City of Palo Alto 2017a):  Goal N-7 A clean, efficient energy supply that makes use of cost-effective renewable resources.  Policy N-7.4 Maximize the conservation and efficient use of energy in new and existing residences and other buildings in Palo Alto.  Policy N-7.6 Support the maximum economic use of solar electric (photovoltaic) and solar thermal energy, both as renewable supply resources for the Electric Utility Portfolio and as alternative forms of local power generation.  Policy N-7.7 Explore a variety of cost-effective ways to reduce natural gas usage in existing and new buildings in Palo Alto in order to reduce associated greenhouse gas emissions. The proposed project would be fully electric and would utilize energy-efficient appliances and lighting as well as water-efficient appliances and fixtures. The project would also include renewable energy in the form of solar roof panels as well as fully insulated slab construction foundation and exterior insulation on the roof. Therefore, the project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions and this impact would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 76 Packet Page 506 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 55 9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project have any of the following impacts: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? □ □ ■ □ b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? □ □ ■ □ c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? □ □ ■ □ d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? □ □ □ ■ e. For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? □ □ □ ■ f. Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? □ □ □ ■ g. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires? □ □ ■ □ ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 77 Packet Page 507 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 56 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? Residential uses, such as those proposed by the project, typically do not use or store large quantities of hazardous materials other than minor amounts needed for cleaning or landscaping maintenance. During grading and construction activities, limited quantities of miscellaneous hazardous substances, such as gasoline, diesel fuel, hydraulic fluid, solvents, oils, paints, may be transported to the site, used on site, and disposed over after use. However, the project would be required to comply with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations that address the handling, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous substances, including the Occupational Safety and Health Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act. This would eliminate potential significant hazards to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Construction contractors would be required to comply with applicable Federal and State environmental and workplace safety laws. The project site is not located within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school. Adherence to these regulatory requirements would ensure that impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT d. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment from existing hazardous materials contamination by exposing future occupants or users of the site or from location on listed hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5? A search of the following databases was conducted on April 27, 2022, for known hazardous materials contamination in the project area:  EnviroStor Database (Department of Toxic Substances Control [DTSC] 2022a)  Cortese list of Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (DTSC 2022b)  Geotracker search for leaking underground fuel tanks, Spills-Leaks-Investigations- Cleanups (SLIC) and Landfill sites (California State Water Resources Control Board 2022) According to EnviroStor and GeoTracker, there are no hazardous wastes or cleanup sites located on the project site or within 1,000 feet of the site. The nearest hazardous site to the project is located on Portola Road, approximately 0.6 miles northwest of the project site. Therefore, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or environment and no impact would occur. NO IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 78 Packet Page 508 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 57 e. For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? There are no private airstrips in the vicinity of the site. The Palo Alto Airport of Santa Clara County (PAO) is the closest airport to the project site and is located over 7 miles away. PAO is a 103-acre facility with a single runway, parallel taxiway, and a building area. The airport primarily serves small general aviation aircraft. The area is located entirely outside of the airport safety and traffic pattern zones (Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission 2016). Therefore, no impact would occur. NO IMPACT f. Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The project would involve construction of a single-family residence on a vacant site. The residence would not obstruct existing roadways or require the construction of new roadways or access points. The proposed buildings would not block emergency response or evacuation routes or interfere with adopted emergency response and emergency evacuation plans. No impact would occur. NO IMPACT g. Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? This impact is further discussed under Section 20, Wildfire. The project would not expose people lor structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildfires. Impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 79 Packet Page 509 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 58 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 80 Packet Page 510 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 59 10 Hydrology and Water Quality Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project have any of the following impacts: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise degrade surface or groundwater quality? □ ■ □ □ b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? □ □ ■ □ c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces in a manner which would: 1. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? 2. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site? 3. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff 4. Impede or redirect flows □ □ ■ □ d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? □ □ □ ■ e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? □ □ ■ □ ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 81 Packet Page 511 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 60 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise degrade surface or groundwater quality? Development of the proposed project would introduce heavy equipment during construction and increase traffic to and from the site during operation. This increase in heavy construction equipment and operational traffic could result in an increase in fuel, oil, and lubricants in the stormwater runoff due to leaks or accidental releases. Since the project would involve development of an individual detached single-family residence not part of a larger common plan of development, it would not constitute a development project under PAMC Section 16.11.020 and therefore would not be required to obtain a NPDES Construction General Permit or develop and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction activities. In terms of impacts related to operational activities, impervious surfaces can carry a variety of pollutants, including oil and grease, metals, and sediment and pesticide residues from roadways, parking lots, rooftops, and landscaped areas depositing them into adjacent waterways via the storm drain system. The project would be required to comply with the stormwater pollution prevention measures in PAMC Section 16.11.036 as well as the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program’s C.3 requirements. Under Section 16.11.036 of the PAMC and C.3, since the project would create 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surfaces, it would be required to implement one of six site design measures but not treatment or hydromodification control measures (County of Santa Clara 2016). The proposed project, in accordance with PAMC and C.3 requirements, would be designed to direct runoff from roofs and sidewalks into vegetated areas to treat surface runoff before entering the stormwater system, which would also ensure the protection of the Los Trancos Creek from harmful effluent. The project would also implement rainwater catchment systems as well as utilize recycled water for landscape irrigation. Compliance with the PAMC and C.3 requirements would not result in adverse effects on water quality or violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction or operation. Therefore, excessive stormwater runoff, substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site would not occur and the potential for the project to violate water quality standards and substantially degrade water quality would be reduced. As discussed in Section 7, Geology and Soils, the proposed project could involve excavation up to 8 feet for the pool and spa structure. According to the Geotechnical Study (Appendix C), groundwater was encountered at 17 to 18 feet below the site. Therefore, it is unlikely that groundwater would be encountered during excavation activities. However, if groundwater were to be encountered, the project would be required to comply with local regulations. According to the City’s Construction Dewatering System Policy and Plan Preparation Guidelines (City of Palo Alto 2020a), excavation activities that would require excavation within two feet of known groundwater are required to submit a Construction Dewatering Plan to the City’s Public Works Department. The Public Works Department would review and permit the dewatering plan prior to commencement of dewatering as part of the Grading and Excavation Permit process. The Construction Dewatering Plan must ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 82 Packet Page 512 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 61 comply with the City’s Guidelines, which require that water is tested for contaminants prior to initial discharge and at intervals during dewatering. In the dewatering plan, the applicant must include provisions for keeping sediment and contaminated groundwater out of the storm drain system. With adherence to the City’s policies regarding dewatering, contaminated groundwater would not enter the stormwater system. Although Los Trancos Creek is located within the western border of the site, the proposed project would implement a 20 feet creek setback pursuant to Palo Alto’s Stream Corridor Ordinance (PAMC Section 18.40.140), and implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would further minimize soil erosion and reduce potential runoff of pollutants into the creek. Overall, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on water quality with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3. MITIGATION MEASURE AND SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would require implementation of avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts on and pollutants entering Los Trancos Creek. With mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED b. Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? As discussed in Section 19, Utilities and Service Systems, the proposed project would receive its water from the California Water Service (Cal Water) Bear Gulch District. Cal Water uses a combination of local surface water and surface water purchased from the City and County of San Francisco (SFPUC). Local surface water, approximately 11 percent of Cal Water’s total supply, is derived from their 1,200-acre watershed in the Woodside hills, collected and treated at Cal Water’s reservoir and treatment plant in Atherton. The remaining 89 percent of Cal Water’s total supply is purchased from the SFPUC (Cal Water 2022). Therefore, water supply to the project site would not rely on groundwater supplies. Development under the proposed project would not include installation of new groundwater wells or use of groundwater from existing wells. Temporary dewatering during construction would not substantially affect groundwater levels, and because the maximum depth of excavation would not be near existing groundwater levels, the project would not result in a significant depletion of groundwater supply. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the groundwater table. Impacts related to groundwater would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 83 Packet Page 513 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 62 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration c1. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? c2. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? c3. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? c4. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces in a manner which would impede or redirect flows? Los Trancos Creek runs along the western border of the project site. The proposed project would not alter the course of this creek or other stream or river (no other surface water features are identified in the project site) and would implement a 20 feet creek setback pursuant to Palo Alto’s Stream Corridor Ordinance as noted in Section 18.40.140 of the PAMC. Although the proposed project would increase runoff on the site, it would be consistent with PAMC and C.3 stormwater treatment requirements and would include low sloping roofs with built-in perimeter gutters to direct runoff to vegetated areas, as well as pervious driveways throughout the site in order to reduce pollutants and runoff volume. Therefore, the project would not substantially increase runoff volumes, result in substantial erosion or siltation, result in flooding on- or off-site, or alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area. Impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? The project site is in Flood Zone X, which is defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as area of Minimal Flood Hazard/ 0.2 Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard (Flood Insurance Rate Map 06085C0180H). The site is not in a Special Flood Hazard Area. According to the State of California Tsunami Inundation Map (DOC 2021b), the site is not located within a tsunami inundation zone. According to the City of Palo Alto’s Natural Environment Element and Safety Element of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, mudflows and seiches are not identified as issues for the city. In addition, the nearest body of water that could experience a seiche event is the San Francisco Bay, and it is not anticipated that a seiche in the Bay would have potential to affect the project site. Therefore, the project site is located in a low hazard area for tsunami, seiche, and mudflow. No impact would occur. NO IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 84 Packet Page 514 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 63 e. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? As discussed under Impact (a) above, the project would not violate water quality standards or degrade water quality during construction or operation. The City of Palo Alto is under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The San Francisco Bay RWQCB provides permits for projects that may affect surface waters and groundwater locally and is responsible for preparing the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin (Basin Plan). The Basin Plan designates beneficial uses of water in the region and establishes narrative and numerical water quality objectives. The Basin Plan serves as the basis for the San Francisco Bay RWQCB’s regulatory programs and incorporates an implementation plan for achieving water quality objectives (California Water Board 2017). The proposed project would not interfere with the objectives and goals in the Basin Plan. This impact would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 85 Packet Page 515 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 64 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 86 Packet Page 516 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST LAND USE AND PLANNING CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 65 11 Land Use and Planning Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project have any of the following impacts: a. Physically divide an established community? □ □ ■ □ b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? □ □ ■ □ IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project physically divide an established community? The proposed project would involve construction of a single-family residence on a vacant parcel and would not cut off connected neighborhoods or land uses from each other. No new roads, linear infrastructure or other development features are proposed that would divide an established community or limit movement, travel or social interaction between established land uses. No impact would occur. NO IMPACT b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental The proposed project’s consistency with the City of Palo Alto 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance are discussed below. CITY OF PALO ALTO 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The project site has a Comprehensive Plan land use designation of Open Space/Controlled Development. The Comprehensive Plan defines this category as “Land having all the characteristics of open space but where some development may be allowed on private properties… Residential densities range from 0.1 to 1 dwelling unit per acre but may rise to a maximum of 2 units per acre where second units are allowed, and population densities range from 1 to 4 persons per acre” (City of Palo Alto 2017a). The proposed project involves single-family residential use consistent with the land use designation for this site. Additionally, the project would have a residential density of approximately 0.2 dwelling units per acre, which would be consistent with the allowed density range for the Open Space/Controlled Development land use designation. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 87 Packet Page 517 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 66 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration CITY OF PALO ALTO ZONING ORDINANCE The project site is zoned Open Space (OS). The PAMC Section 18.28.010(b) defines the OS district as “intended to protect the public health, safety and welfare, protect and preserve open space land as a limited and valuable resource, and to permit the reasonable use of open space land, while at the same time preserving and protecting its inherent open space characteristics to assure its continued availability for the following: as agricultural land, scenic land, recreation land, conservation or natural resource land; for the containment of urban sprawl and the structuring of urban development; and for the retention of land in its natural or near-natural state, and to protect life and property in the community from the hazards of fire, flood, and seismic activity; and coordinate with and carry out federal, state, regional, county, and city open space plans.” Pursuant to Section 18.28.040 of the PAMC, single-family dwelling units as well as accessory facilities and uses are permitted in the Open Space district. The project proposes a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 4 percent, consistent with PAMC requirements under Section 18.28.050(b)(1). Additionally, the proposed project would incorporate 30 feet setbacks in the front, sides, and rear, as well as a maximum height of 25 feet with a maximum number of two stories, consistent with PAMC Section 18.28.050(a). Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan or the City of Palo Alto Zoning Ordinance and impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 88 Packet Page 518 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST MINERAL RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 67 12 Mineral Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? □ □ □ ■ b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? □ □ □ ■ SETTING A small portion of Palo Alto is classified as Mineral Resource Zone-2 (MRZ-2), defined as “adequate information indicated that significant mineral deposits are present or a likelihood of their presence and development should be controlled”. The MRZ-2 is located in the southern portion of the city, adjacent to the San Mateo County/Santa Clara County border north of Foothills Park (0.5 mile east of the project site) (City of Palo Alto 2017b). Pursuant to USGS records, there are no known mineral resources or mines present on the project site and work area (USGS 2022). IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? The project site and work area are not located in an area with known mineral resources or a mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of a known mineral resource or mineral resource recovery site. No mineral resource activities would be altered or displaced by the proposed project. There would be no impact. NO IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 89 Packet Page 519 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 68 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 90 Packet Page 520 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST NOISE CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 69 13 Noise Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project result in: a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? □ □ ■ □ b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? □ □ ■ □ c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? □ □ ■ □ SETTING Noise is unwanted sound that disturbs human activity. Environmental noise levels typically fluctuate over time, and different types of noise descriptors are used to account for this variability. Noise level measurements include intensity, frequency, and duration, as well as time of occurrence. Noise level (or volume) is generally measured in decibels (dB) using the A-weighted sound pressure level (dBA). The A-weighting scale is an adjustment to the actual sound power levels to be consistent with that of human hearing response, which is most sensitive to frequencies around 4,000 Hertz (about the highest note on a piano) and less sensitive to low frequencies (below 100 Hertz). Because of the logarithmic scale of the decibel unit, sound levels cannot be added or subtracted arithmetically. If the physical intensity of a sound is doubled, the sound level increases by 3 dBA, regardless of the initial sound level. For example, 60 dBA plus 60 dBA equals 63 dBA. Where ambient noise levels are high in comparison to a new noise source, the change in noise level would be less than 3 dBA. For example, when 70 dBA ambient noise levels are combined with a 60 dBA noise source the resulting noise level equals 70.4 dBA. Noise that is experienced at any receptor can be attenuated by distance or the presence of noise barriers or intervening terrain. Sound from a single source (i.e., a point source) ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 91 Packet Page 521 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 70 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration radiates uniformly outward as it travels away from the source in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates (or drops off) at a rate of 6 dBA for each doubling of distance. For acoustically absorptive, or soft, sites (i.e., sites with an absorptive ground surface, such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees), ground attenuation of about 1.5 dBA per doubling of distance normally occurs. A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receiver can substantially attenuate noise levels at the receiver. The amount of attenuation provided by this shielding depends on the size of the object, proximity to the noise source and receiver, surface weight, solidity, and the frequency content of the noise source. Natural terrain features (such as hills and dense woods) and human-made features (such as buildings and walls) can substantially reduce noise levels. Walls are often constructed between a source and a receiver specifically to reduce noise. A barrier that breaks the line of sight between a source and a receiver will typically result in at least 5 dBA of noise reduction. Vibration is a unique form of noise because its energy is carried through buildings, structures, and the ground, whereas noise is simply carried through the air. Thus, vibration is generally felt rather than heard. Some vibration effects can be caused by noise; e.g., the rattling of windows from passing trucks. This phenomenon is caused by the coupling of the acoustic energy at frequencies that are close to the resonant frequency of the material being vibrated. Typically, groundborne vibration generated by manmade activities attenuates rapidly as distance from the source of the vibration increases. The ground motion caused by vibration is measured as particle velocity in inches per second and is referenced as vibration decibels (VdB) in the U.S. The vibration velocity level threshold of perception for humans is approximately 65 VdB. A vibration velocity of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels for many people. Most perceptible indoor vibration is caused by sources within buildings such as operation of mechanical equipment, movement of people, or the slamming of doors. Typical outdoor sources of perceptible groundborne vibration are construction equipment, steel wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. CITY OF PALO ALTO NOISE STANDARDS The City’s Comprehensive Plan Natural Environment Element includes goals and policies related to noise. This element establishes land use compatibility categories for community noise exposure (see Table 2). For residential uses, noise levels up to 60 dBA Ldn are identified as normally acceptable and noise levels between 60 and 75 dBA Ldn are identified as conditionally acceptable. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 92 Packet Page 522 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST NOISE CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 71 Table 2 Palo Alto Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Exterior Noise Exposure Ldn or CNEL or dB Land Use Category Normally Acceptable Conditionally Acceptable Unacceptable Residential, Hotel and Motels 50-60 60-75 75+ Outdoor Sports and Recreation, Neighborhood Parks and Playgrounds 50-65 65-80 80+ Schools, Libraries, Museums, Hospitals, Personal Care, Meeting Halls, Churches 50-60 60-75 75+ Office Buildings, Business Commercial, and Professional 50-70 70-80 80+ Auditoriums, Concert Halls, and Amphitheaters N/A 50-75 75+ Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, and Agriculture 50-70 75+ N/A Source: City of Palo Alto 2017a The PAMC regulates noise primarily through the Noise Ordinance, which comprises Chapter 9.10 of the Code, under Title 9, Public Peace, Morals and Safety. The Municipal Code contains additional specific and general provisions relating to noise. The Noise Ordinance also regulates noise associated with construction activities. Section 9.10.060 of the PAMC restricts construction activities to the hours of 8 AM to 6 PM Monday through Friday and 9 AM to 6 PM on Saturday. Construction is prohibited on Sundays and holidays. Construction, demolition or repair activities during construction hours must meet the following standards:  No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding 110 dBA at a distance of 25 feet. If the device is housed within a structure on the property, the measurement shall be made out-side the structure at a distance as close to 25 feet from the equipment as possible.  The noise level at any point outside of the property plane of the project shall not exceed 110 dBA.  The holder of a valid construction permit for a construction project in a non-residential zone shall post a sign at all entrances to the construction site upon commencement of construction, for the purpose of informing all contractors and subcontractors, their employees, agents, materialmen and all other persons at the construction site, of the basic requirements of this chapter. PROJECT SITE NOISE ENVIRONMENT Palo Alto’s noise environment is dominated by transportation-related noise, including car and truck traffic and trains. The project site is located in a non-urbanized area and away from noise generating sources such as highways and major roadways. The closest highway to the site is Interstate 280 (I-280), approximately 2.3 miles northeast of the project site. Residential, educational, and medical uses are more sensitive to noise than are commercial and industrial activities. Noise sensitive uses (“sensitive receptors”) are defined as those ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 93 Packet Page 523 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 72 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration facilities including, but not limited to, areas containing residences, schools, hospitals, rest homes, long-term medical or mental care facilities, or any other land use areas deemed noise sensitive by the local jurisdiction. The nearest sensitive receptors to the geometrical center of the proposed structure are a single-family residence located immediately adjacent to the north (approximately 230 feet), as well as a single-family residence approximately 250 feet west of the site. IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? CONSTRUCTION NOISE As discussed above, PAMC Section 9.10.060 regulates temporary construction noise. Construction of the project would generate temporary noise that would be audible at the single-family residence adjacent to the north of project site. Noise associated with construction is a function of the type of construction equipment, the location and sensitivity of nearby land uses, and the timing and duration of the construction activities. Based on construction details provided by the applicant, it is estimated that the construction period would involve approximately 30 days for site preparation, 30 days for grading, 270 days for building construction, 30 days for paving, and 30 days for architectural coating. While all phases of construction would generate noise, the building construction phase would represent the longest period of noise-generating activity. According to applicant provided information, pile drivers would not be used in building construction. Construction noise was estimated using the Federal Highway Administration’s Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) (Appendix D). Noise was modeled based on the list of anticipated equipment list for each phase of construction and the distances to nearby receptors. For a conservative approach, it was assumed that all construction equipment per phase would be operating simultaneously and would combine as a collective noise source. Table 3 shows the results of construction noise modeling from the center of activities for the project at distances of 230 feet and 250 feet from the closest property lines at the single-family residences north and west of the site. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 94 Packet Page 524 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST NOISE CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 73 Table 3 Calculated Construction Noise Levels for Each Phase of Construction Construction Phase Equipment Estimated Noise at 230 feet (dBA Leq/dBA Lmax) Estimated Noise at 250 feet (dBA Leq/dBA Lmax) Site preparation Backhoe, compactor, crawler tractor, dozer, dumper/tender, excavator, grader, front-end loader, skid steer loader, sweeper/scrubber 74.6/71.7 73.8/71.0 Grading Backhoe, compactor, dozer, excavator, grader, front-end loader, skid steer loader, sweeper/scrubber 73.6/71.7 72.9/71.0 Building construction Aerial lift, cement and mortar mixer, concrete/industrial saw, compactor, compressor, crane, dumper/tender, forklift, generator, pressure washer, pump, rough terrain forklift, skid steer loader, sweeper/scrubber, welder 74.5/76.3 73.8/75.6 Paving Backhoe, concrete/industrial saw, compactor, crawler tractor, grader, front-end loader, paver, paving equipment, roller, sweeper/scrubber 75.6/76.3 74.5/75.6 Architectural coating Air compressor 60.4/64.4 59.7/63.7 See Appendix D for calculations. As shown in Table 3, at the center of the project buildings nearest the property line of the single-family residence north of the site, maximum noise levels generated by project construction equipment are calculated to range from 64.4 to 76.3 dBA Lmax and 60.4 to 75.6 dBA Leq, while the maximum noise levels from the center of project buildings nearest the property line of the single-family residence west of the site are calculated to range from 63.7 to 75.6 dBA Lmax and 59.7 to 74.5 dBA Leq. Construction noise levels would therefore be below the City’s adopted standard of 110 dBA at any point outside the property line during allowable construction hours (PAMC Section 9.10.060). Impacts related to construction noise would be less than significant. OPERATIONAL NOISE Operation of the proposed residence would not substantially increase existing ambient noise levels. The primary sources of noise that would be associated with the project are vehicle trips to and from the residence, stationary noise sources, periodic landscaping (e.g., lawn mower), talking and music. Development of the proposed project would increase the number of vehicle trips to and from the site, which would incrementally increase traffic noise on area roadways. However, the proposed project would be a single-family residence and would not generate substantial trips. In addition, other operational noise sources such as ground level HVAC equipment, landscaping equipment, talking, and music would be comparable to noise from surrounding residences and consistent with existing ambient noise levels. The proposed project would include a vehicle turnaround area in between the ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 95 Packet Page 525 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 74 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration project site and the adjacent single-family residence north of the site. This would place vehicles adjacent to the existing residence. However, noise from vehicles using the turnaround area would be intermittent and would be anticipated to be below 60 dBA. Therefore, the project would not substantially increase ambient noise levels and noise generated during operation would be comparable to nearby single-family residential uses. Impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT b. Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Construction of the project over an anticipated 14-month period would intermittently generate vibration on and adjacent to the project site. Vibration-generating equipment would include excavators, front-end loaders, and dozers for site preparation and grading, and vibratory rollers for paving. It is assumed that pile drivers, which generate strong groundborne vibration, would not be used during construction. The closest noise sensitive receptors from property line to property line are a single-family residence adjacent to the north (35 feet) and single-family residence approximately 50 feet to the west. Table 4 identifies vibration velocity levels at distances of 35 and 50 feet from the source. Table 4 Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment at Noise-Sensitive Receptors Equipment Estimated VdB at Nearest Sensitive Receptors 35 feet 50 feet Vibratory roller 94 87 Large bulldozer 84 80 Loaded trucks 80 76 Small bulldozer 55 51 Source: Caltrans 2013; See calculations in Appendix D Based on Table 4, noise-sensitive receptors would experience the strongest vibration of up to 94 VdB during paving with vibratory rollers and up to 84 VdB during the use of large bulldozers during site preparation and grading. Compliance with Section 9.10.060 of the PAMC would restrict vibration-generating construction activity to daytime hours that are outside of normal sleeping hours, i.e., 8 AM to 6 PM Monday through Friday and 9 AM to 6 PM on Saturday. While vibration from construction activity could be perceptible at adjacent residences during daytime hours, this timing restriction would ensure that vibration does not exceed the FTA’s criterion of 72 VdB during normal sleeping hours at residential uses. Vibration levels also would not exceed 95 VdB at any fragile historic buildings and therefore would not damage such buildings. The project would have a less than significant impact from groundborne vibration. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 96 Packet Page 526 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST NOISE CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 75 c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The Palo Alto Airport (PAO)’s land use plan does not include the project site and is located over 7 miles away. Furthermore, there is no private airstrip in the vicinity of the project site. Thus, future residents would not be exposed to excessive noise levels associated with air traffic. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 97 Packet Page 527 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 76 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 98 Packet Page 528 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST POPULATION AND HOUSING CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 77 14 Population and Housing Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? □ □ ■ □ b. Displace substantial amounts of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? □ □ □ ■ IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? The current population of Palo Alto is estimated at 67,657 with a per-person household rate of 2.45 (Department of Finance [DOF] 2021). ABAG estimates that the population will increase to 86,510 by 2040 while the per-person household rate will increase to 2.48 (ABAG 2017). The City also currently has 29,406 housing units (DOF 2021). ABAG projections estimate that the number of housing units will increase to 32,940 by 2040. The project would include development of one single-family residence and an associated accessory structure and would therefore directly generate population growth. The estimated average persons per household in Palo Alto is 2.45 (DOF 2021). Based on that rate, assuming an estimated 2 to 3 people in the main residence and 1 to 2 people in the ADU, the proposed project would add an estimated 3 to 5 new residents. This incremental increase would be within the population forecast for the City. The proposed project would therefore not substantially induce population growth through the provision of new housing units and would result in less than significant impacts. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT b. Would the project displace substantial amounts of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? There are no existing housing units at the project site or people residing on the project site in a form of temporary housing. Therefore, the project would not displace existing housing units or people. No impacts would occur. NO IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 99 Packet Page 529 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 78 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 100 Packet Page 530 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PUBLIC SERVICES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 79 15 Public Services Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project result in any of the following impacts: a. Result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional school facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards? □ □ ■ □ b. Result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional fire protection facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards? □ □ ■ □ c. Result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional police protection facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards? □ □ ■ □ d. Result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional parks and recreation facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards? □ □ ■ □ e. Result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional library facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards? □ □ ■ □ IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional school facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards? Historically, the demand for school facilities has increased nearly proportionally to the amount of new housing that is built in the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) service area (City of Palo Alto 2017d). The proposed project would involve the construction one single family residence. Assuming the proposed residence would involve 1 or 2 school-aged children, this would not substantially increase enrollment at area schools. In addition, consistent with state law (Section 65995(h) of the California Government Code, Senate Bill 50, chaptered August 27, 1998), new development would be required to pay school impact fees. Payment of developer impact fees pursuant to state law would ensure that adequate school facilities are provided to accommodate future growth. Impacts would be less than significant. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 101 Packet Page 531 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 80 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT b. Would the project result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional fire protection facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards? The City of Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) provides fire protection, fire suppression, paramedic ambulance service, search and rescue, fire prevention inspections/permits, public fire education programs, emergency preparedness planning, and other services based on community needs. The closest fire department is Station 2 (Mayfield) at 2675 Hanover Street, located approximately 4.5 miles northeast of the project site. The site is within the existing service area of the PAFD and on-site construction would be required to comply with applicable Fire Code requirements. The project involves one single-family residence and would not create excessive demand for emergency services or introduce development to areas outside of normal service range that would necessitate new fire protection facilities. With the continued implementation of existing practices of the City, including compliance with the California Fire Code, the proposed project would not significantly affect community fire protection services and would not result in the need for construction of fire protection facilities. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT c. Would the project result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional police protection facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards? The Palo Alto Police Department (PAPD) provides police protection for the project vicinity. The closest police station is located at 275 Forest Avenue, approximately 5.8 miles northeast of the project site. The project site is within the PAPD’s service area and is currently serviced by the PAPD. The project involves one single-family residence which would not create excessive demand for police services or introduce development to areas outside of normal service range that would necessitate new police protection facilities. The proposed project would not create the need for new or expanded police protection facilities and impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT d. Would the project result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional parks and recreation facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards? Refer to Section 15, Recreation. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT e. Would the project result in an adverse physical impact from the construction of additional library facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards? The Palo Alto City Library (PACL) provides library services. The proposed project involves one single-family residence which would incrementally increase population growth in the ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 102 Packet Page 532 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PUBLIC SERVICES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 81 City. Overall, the project would not substantially impact the capacity of existing library facilities such that the construction of new facilities would be required. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 103 Packet Page 533 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 82 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 104 Packet Page 534 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST RECREATION CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 83 16 Recreation Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? □ □ □ ■ b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? □ □ □ ■ IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The City of Palo Alto maintains 174 acres of urban parks distributed throughout the City as well as 43.2 miles of trail and over 4,000 acres in natural open space preserves. The four natural open space preserves are: Baylands Nature Preserve (which includes Byxbee Park), Esther Clark Preserve, Foothills Park, and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve (City of Palo Alto 2017c). The project site is within a mile radius of the Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, and approximately 1.6 miles west of Foothills Park. The proposed project would not involve the construction or expansion of recreational or park facilities. Further, the proposed single- family residence would not generate substantial population growth such that the construction of new park or recreational facilities would be required. No impact would occur. NO IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 105 Packet Page 535 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 106 Packet Page 536 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST TRANSPORTATION CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 85 17 Transportation Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? □ □ □ ■ b. Conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? □ □ ■ □ c. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? □ □ ■ □ d. Result in inadequate emergency access? □ □ ■ □ IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? The project involves construction of a single-family residence served by an existing road. The proposed project would not affect adopted policies, plans and programs in support of alternative transportation. The project would have no impact on adopted policies, plans, and ordinances addressing the circulation system. NO IMPACT b. Conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Pursuant to the Office of Planning and Research’s (OPR) vehicles miles traveled (VMT) Technical Advisory document, small projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day or residential projects of 20 units or less would be presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT (City of Palo Alto 2020b). Since the proposed project would involve construction of one single-family residence with an associated accessory structure, the project would not significantly increase VMT. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 107 Packet Page 537 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 86 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration c. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Construction of the proposed project would occur in a low-density area in Palo Alto where it would take access via an appropriately-sized driveway from an existing road, and would not include hazardous design features or incompatible uses. The proposed project would not require temporary lane detours or closures that would affect traffic patterns or capacity. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT d. Result in inadequate emergency access? As discussed in Section 9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the proposed project would not involve the development of structures that could potentially impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No streets would be closed, rerouted or substantially altered. The project would involve the construction of new entryways to the project site, which would be required to be reviewed and approved by the Palo Alto Fire Department to ensure safety emergency access is provided. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 108 Packet Page 538 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 87 18 Tribal Cultural Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in a Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or □ ■ □ □ b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 2024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. □ ■ □ □ SETTING As of July 1, 2015, California Assembly Bill 52 of 2014 (AB 52) was enacted and expands CEQA by defining a new resource category, “tribal cultural resources.” AB 52 establishes that “A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment” (PRC Section 21084.2). It further states that the lead agency shall establish measures to avoid impacts that would alter the significant characteristics of a tribal cultural resource, when feasible (PRC Section 21084.3). PRC Section 21074 (a)(1)(A) and (B) defines tribal cultural resources as “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe” and is: 1. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or 2. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 109 Packet Page 539 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 88 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration Code Section 5024.1. In applying these criteria, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. AB 52 also establishes a formal consultation process for California tribes regarding those resources. The consultation process must be completed before a CEQA document can be certified. Under AB 52, lead agencies are required to “begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project.” Native American tribes to be included in the process are those that have requested notice of projects proposed within the jurisdiction of the lead agency. In May 2016, the City of Palo received a single request from a tribe to be contacted in accordance AB 52. However, through subsequent correspondence with the tribe, it was concluded that the tribe had contacted the City of Palo Alto in error and did not wish to be contacted regarding future projects within the City’s jurisdiction. The tribe, the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, is not traditionally or culturally affiliated with the geographic area within the City of Palo Alto. Because no other tribes have requested to be contacted, no notices in accordance with AB 52 were sent and no further action is required. As discussed in the Cultural Resources Section, a SLF search of the project area was also negative. IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code 21074 that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code 21074 that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 2024.1? Although no tribal cultural resources are expected to be present within the project site, there is the possibility of encountering undisturbed subsurface tribal cultural resources during construction activities which could potentially result in significant impacts on unanticipated tribal cultural resources. Therefore, Mitigation Measures CR-1 throughCR-3 would be required to reduce impacts on unidentified tribal cultural resources to a less than significant level. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 110 Packet Page 540 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 89 MITIGATION MEASURES AND SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1 would require a WEAP for all construction personnel to inform them of the appropriate procedures required in the event of a discovery. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-2 would ensure that locally affiliated Native American tribes be given the opportunity to conduct Native American Monitoring. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-3 would require that tribal cultural resources are identified properly and appropriately treated in the unanticipated event they are uncovered during construction. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce impacts related to disruption of tribal cultural resources to a less than significant level. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 111 Packet Page 541 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 90 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 112 Packet Page 542 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 91 19 Utilities and Service Systems Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electrical power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? □ □ ■ □ b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? □ □ ■ □ c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? □ □ ■ □ d. Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? □ □ ■ □ e. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? □ □ ■ □ IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electrical power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 113 Packet Page 543 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 92 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration WATER Water to the project site would be supplied by Cal Water’s Bear Gulch District pursuant to Cal Water’s will serve letter dated August 19, 2021 (Appendix E). This is discussed in further detail under Impact (b) below. WASTEWATER Wastewater services would be provided by the West Bay Sanitary District pursuant to the District’s will serve letter dated August 17, 2021 (Appendix E). The West Bay Sanitary District conveys wastewater via the Menlo Park Pump Station and force main, to Silicon Valley Clean Water (SVCW) for treatment and eventually discharge to the San Francisco Bay (West Bay Sanitary District 2022). The SVCW regional wastewater treatment plant has an average dry weather flow permitted capacity of 29 million gallons per day (SVCW 2020). Assuming the proposed project would generate approximately 280 gallons of wastewater per day (City of Los Angeles 2006), the proposed project would generate an estimated 280 gallons of wastewater per day. The increase in wastewater generation associated with the project would be less than 0.0000012 percent of the permitted capacity of the SVCW regional wastewater treatment plant. Therefore, there would be sufficient wastewater capacity to serve the project site. The proposed project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements or require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. The proposed project would not result in a substantial physical deterioration of public wastewater facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. STORMWATER As discussed under Impact (a) in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, pursuant to and in accordance with PAMC and C.3 requirements, the proposed project would be designed to direct runoff from roofs into vegetated areas to treat surface runoff before entering the stormwater system. In addition, the project would also implement rainwater catchment systems as well as utilize recycled water for landscape irrigation. The project would not require or result in the construction of new stormwater facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. ELECTRICITY The City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) receives electricity at a single connection point with Pacific Gas and Electric’s (PG&E’s) transmission system. From there the electricity is delivered to customers through nearly 470 miles of distribution lines, of which 223 miles (48 percent) are overhead lines and 245 miles (52 percent) are underground. The City also maintains six substations, roughly 2,000 overhead line transformers, 1,075 underground and substation transformers, and the associated electric services (which connect the distribution lines to the customers’ homes and businesses) (City of Palo Alto 2017a). The proposed project would continue to be served by CPAU and would not require or result in 2 280 gallons per day divided by 29 million gallons per day (permitted capacity) = less than 0.000001 percent ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 114 Packet Page 544 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 93 the construction of new utilities or the expansion of existing facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? Development of the residential project would increase demand for potable water. Assuming that water use is approximately 120 percent of wastewater generation (280 gallons per day), the proposed project would demand approximately 336 gallons of water per day, or 0.001 acre-feet per day. According to the Cal Water Bear Gulch District 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), sufficient water supplies would be available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources. No new or expanded entitlements would be needed to serve the proposed project. The project would not result in a substantial physical deterioration of public water facilities or result in adverse physical impacts from new or expanded utility facilities due to increased use as a result of the project. Impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT d. Would the project generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? The City is currently contracted with GreenWaste of Palo Alto for collection of garbage, recycling and composting services and 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 is also contracted with Waste Management Inc. to use the Kirby Canyon Landfill for waste disposal (City of Palo Alto 2018). The Kirby Canyon Landfill has a remaining capacity of 16,191,600 tons (CalRecycle 2019) and the daily permitted capacity is 2,600 tons per day (Waste Management 2022). Using the CalRecycle waste generation rate of 12.23 per pound per household per day (CalRecycle 2018), the project would generate approximately 12.23 pounds, or 0.006 tons, of solid waste per day. The incremental increase in solid waste associated with the project would be within the permitted capacities of Kirby Canyon Landfill. Therefore, the project would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs. The proposed project would not result in a substantial physical deterioration of public solid waste facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 115 Packet Page 545 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 94 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 116 Packet Page 546 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WILDFIRE CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 95 20 Wildfire Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact If located in or near a state responsibility area or land classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project result in any of the following impacts: a. Substantially impact an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? □ □ ■ □ b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? □ □ ■ □ c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? □ □ ■ □ d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result or runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? □ □ ■ □ IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project substantially impact an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? According to the Cal Fire Hazard Severity Zone map (Cal Fire 2022), the project site is not located in a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) or State Responsibility Area (SRA) Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ). The project would not obstruct existing roadways or require the construction of new roadways or access points, and project plans include a detailed fire truck turning exhibit showing fire truck access to and within the site and reflecting radius requirements from the PAFD. Therefore, the proposed building would not block emergency response or evacuation routes or interfere with adopted emergency response and emergency evacuation plans. Impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 117 Packet Page 547 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 96 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, would the project exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? As mentioned in Impact (a) above, the project site is not located in a LRA or SRA VHFHSZ. The nearest Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) is located approximately 1 mile northwest of the project site near Portola Valley (Cal Fire 2022). The project would be required to comply with the following 2030 Comprehensive Plan policy listed below which would require fire protection design in new development and ensure adequate emergency access for the PAFD (City of Palo Alto 2017a).  Policy S-2.14 Require that the planning and design of development in areas exposed to wildland fire hazards minimize the risks of wildfire and include adequate provisions for vegetation management, emergency access and firefighting. The project would comply with Policy S-2.14 by requiring fire sprinkler protection in all structures and installing a National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 13-D fire sprinkler system3 throughout the house, including closets and bathrooms. The project would also comply with wildland urban interface (WUI) requirements pursuant to the 2019 California Residential Code and Chapter 15 of the PAMC which include requirements for vegetation management; roofing; vents; exterior walls; eaves; exterior porch ceilings, floor projections, underfloor protection, underside of appendages; windows, skylights and doors; garages; decking; and accessory structures (City of Palo Alto 2019). The project site is also in proximity to three fire hydrants, one approximately 750 feet north of the proposed driveway, one approximately 420 feet east of the driveway, and one approximately 990 feet south of the driveway. Therefore, the project would not exacerbate wildfire risks and expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire. Impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT c. Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? The project site is not located in a LRA or SRA VHFHSZ. Although the project would involve the construction of a driveway that would extend from Los Trancos Road (entry) to the proposed single-family residence, the driveway would provide emergency access in the case of a fire, and would not exacerbate wildfire risk. Additionally, the project would not involve the construction of new utility infrastructure or power lines that would worsen wildfire risk. Roads, maintained landscaping, and fire-resistant building materials would help prevent the spread of uncontrolled wildfire. Therefore, wildfire impacts from associated project infrastructure would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 3 The NFPA 13-D sprinkler system is a residential sprinkler design standard focused on low-rise residential occupancies to ensure life safety and property protection (NFPA 2022). ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 118 Packet Page 548 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WILDFIRE CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 97 d. Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result or runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? The project site is not located in a landslide hazard zone. Therefore, the project would not substantially expose people or structures to flooding or landslides as a result of runoff, post- fire slope instability, or drainage changes, and would not exacerbate existing hazards. Furthermore, as mentioned in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the project would include low sloping roofs with built-in perimeter gutters to direct runoff to vegetated areas, as well as pervious driveways throughout the site which would ensure that runoff does not exceed the existing capacity of stormwater drainage systems which would reduce the potential of flooding. Impacts would be less than significant. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 119 Packet Page 549 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 98 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 120 Packet Page 550 of 792 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 99 21 Mandatory Findings of Significance Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Have the potential to substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? □ ■ □ □ b. Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? □ □ ■ □ c. Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? □ ■ □ □ IMPACT ANALYSIS a. Would the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? As noted under Section 4, Biological Resources, implementation of the proposed project may have potentially significant impacts on biological resources since special-status species have the potential to be present on the project site. Mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-7 would reduce impacts to special-status plant and animal species and riparian habitats to a less than significant level. Protected trees under PAMC Chapter 8.10 were also surveyed on or adjacent to the project site. However, only one dead coastal live oak tree would be removed as part of the project. Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would still be required ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 121 Packet Page 551 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 100 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration to reduce impacts on retained trees to a less than significant level. As discussed under Section 5, Cultural Resources, and Section 18, Tribal Cultural Resources, the project would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory with adherence to Mitigation measures CR-1, CR-2, and CR-3, which would reduce potential impact to unknown resources to less than significant. Overall, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED b. Would the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? There are currently no pending and approved developmental projects in the immediate vicinity of the project that would contribute to the cumulative impact setting (City of Palo Alto 2022b). Cumulative impacts are addressed in the individual topical sections above: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Transportation, and Utilities and Service Systems (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3). Some of the other resource areas were determined to have no impact in comparison to existing conditions and therefore would not contribute to cumulative impacts, such as those related to mineral resources and agricultural resources. As such, cumulative impacts in these issue areas would also be less than significant (not cumulatively considerable). With mitigation, the proposed project would not result in a significant cumulative impact with respect to Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Therefore, overall cumulative impacts would be less than significant with required mitigation. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT c. Would the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? In general, impacts to human beings are associated with air quality, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and wildfire impacts. As detailed in the preceding responses, the project would not result, either directly or indirectly, in substantial adverse impacts related to these issue areas. The project’s effects on air quality would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1; and the project’s effects on geology and soils would be less than significant with Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 122 Packet Page 552 of 792 REFERENCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 101 REFERENCES BIBLIOGRAPHY Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). 2019. MTC/ABAG Hazard Viewer Map. https://mtc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=4a6f3f1259df42eab29b35 dfcd086fc8 California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2002. California Geomorphic Provinces. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/CGS-Notes/CGS-Note- 36.pdf ______. 2021a. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation Map. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/ ______. 2021b. Santa Clara County Tsunami Hazard Areas. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/santa-clara California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2022. Fire Hazard Severity Zone viewer. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ (accessed April 2022) CalRecycle. 2018. Waste Generation Rates. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates ______. 2019. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Kirby Canyon Recycling & Disposal Facility. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1370?siteID=3393 California State Water Resources Control Board. 2022. GeoTracker. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/ Caltrans. 2019. California State Scenic Highway System Map. https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e 8057116f1aacaa California Water Boards San Francisco Bay. 2017. Chapter 3: Water Quality Objectives. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/water_issues/programs/planningtmdls/b asinplan/web/bp_ch3.html California Water Service (Cal Water). 2022. Bear Gulch District Information. https://www.calwater.com/district-information/?dist=bg Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2022a. EnviroStor. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/ ______. 2022b. Cortese List. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search?cmd=search&reporttype=CORTESE&site _type=CSITES,FUDS&status=ACT,BKLG,COM&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS+WASTE+AND+SUBST ANCES+SITE+LIST+%28CORTESE%29 Foster, Elaine, and Heather Blind. 2022. 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Cultural Resources Assessment, Palo Alto, Santa Clara County, California. Rincon Consultants Project No. 21- 12195. Report on file at the Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, California Los Angeles, City of. City of Los Angeles CEQA Threshold Guidelines. https://planning.lacity.org/eir/CrossroadsHwd/deir/files/references/A07.pdf ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 123 Packet Page 553 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 102 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 2022. Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems in Low-Rise Residential Occupancies. https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes- and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=13R Office of Emergency Services. 2017. Santa Clara County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan. https://emergencymanagement.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb261/files/For%20Partners/Lo cal-Hazard-Mitigation-Plan-LHMP-Vol-1.pdf Palo Alto, City of. 2005. Palo Alto Single-Family Individual Review Guidelines. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development- services/file-migration/current-planning/forms-and-guidelines/individual-review- guidelines.pdf ______. 2017a. 2030 Comprehensive Plan. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development-services/3.- comprehensive-plan/comprehensive-plan/full-comp-plan-2030_with-june21- amendments.pdf ______. 2017b. Comprehensive Plan Update Supplement to the Draft EIR SCH #2014052101. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development-services/3.- comprehensive-plan/comprehensive-plan/paloalto_compplanupdate_suppeir_feb2017.pdf ______. 2017c. Parks, Trails, Natural Open Space and Recreation Master Plan. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/community-services/parks-and-open- space/palo-alto-parks-master-plan.pdf ______. 2019. Inspection Guidelines: Wildland Urban Interface. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/development-services/building- division/residential-guidelines/inspections/wildland-urban-interface_2019-01-09.pdf ______. 2020a. Regulations for Groundwater Dewatering during Construction of Below Ground Structures. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/public-works/engineering- services/webpages/forms-and-permits/regulations-for-groundwater-dewatering-during- construction-of-below-ground-structures-2021.pdf ______. 2020b. Update to the City's Transportation Analysis Methodology to Comply With Senate Bill 743, Including Use of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) for CEQA Review and Level of Service (LOS) Standard for Local Transportation Analysis. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city- manager-reports-cmrs/year-archive/2020/id-11333-senate-bill-743.pdf?t=52295.02 ______. 2022a. Single-Family Individual Review (IR) Guidelines’ Key Points Checklist. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/development-services/planning- review/1.-single-family-and-duplexes/ir-guideline-checklist-for-applicants.pdf ______. 2022b. Palo Alto Building Eye. https://paloalto.buildingeye.com/planning Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission. 2016. Palo Alto Airport. https://plandev.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb941/files/ALUC_PAO_CLUP.pdf Santa Clara, County of. 2016. Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program C.3 Stormwater Handbook. https://cleanwater.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb461/files/SCVURPPP_C.pdf Silicon Valley Clean Water (SVCW). 2020. 2020-21 Operating Budget. https://svcw.org/wp- content/uploads/2020/11/SVCW-FY2020-21-Budget-Adopted.pdf ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 124 Packet Page 554 of 792 REFERENCES CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | 103 United States Geological Survey. N.d. Earthquake Glossary. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/glossary/?term=active%20fault ______. 2022. Mineral Resources Online Spatial Data. https://mrdata.usgs.gov/general/map- us.html. Waste Management. 2022. Kirby Canyon Landfill. https://kirbycanyon.wm.com/about- us/index.jsp#:~:text=Capacity%3A,operation%20until%202059%20and%20beyond West Bay Sanitary District. 2022. West Bay Sanitary District. https://westbaysanitary.org/ LIST OF PREPARERS Rincon Consultants, Inc. prepared this IS-MND under contract to the City of Palo Alto. Persons involved in data gathering analysis, project management, and quality control include: RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. Abe Leider, AICP CEP, Principal Leslie Trejo, Project Manager Karly Kaufman, Senior Advisor Nichole Yee, Associate Planner Kristin Asmus, Biologist Elaine Foster, Archaeologist Debra Jane Seltzer, Publishing Specialist Alvin Flores, Publishing Specialist Allysen Valencia, GIS Analyst ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 125 Packet Page 555 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 104 | Page Initial Study ♦ Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 126 Packet Page 556 of 792 Appendix A Biological Resources Technical Report ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 127 Packet Page 557 of 792 Rincon Consultants, Inc. 449 15th Street, Suite 303 Oakland, California 94612 510 834 4455 OFFICE info@rinconconsultants.com www.rinconconsultants.com E n v i r o n m e n t a l S c i e n t i s t s P l a n n e r s E n g i n e e r s November 4, 2021 Project No: 21-11882 Emily Foley, AICP Associate Planner, Planning & Development Services City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Ave. 5th Floor Palo Alto, California 94301 Via email: Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org Subject: Biological Resources Constraints Analysis for the 575 Los Trancos Road Project, Palo Alto, California Dear Ms. Foley: Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) has prepared this Biological Resources Constraints Analysis (BRCA) for the City of Palo Alto (City) of potential biological resources constraints to development at the approximately 5-acre property located at 575 Los Trancos Road in Palo Alto. (APN 182-46-012; Figure 1; Attachment 1). This report documents the existing conditions of the proposed development area within this parcel (hereafter known as the “project site”) and identifies sensitive biological resources that do or could occur on the site. Based on the evaluation of sensitive biological resources, the report presents an assessment of the potential significant impacts to biological resources under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and identifies potential impacts that may require permitting under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) and/or federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) and/or the Clean Water Act (CWA) and state regulations regarding waters of the State. The report also provides recommendations to address any potential constraints associated with such resources. Project Location and Description The project site is an approximately five-acre property located at 575 Los Trancos Road in the City of Palo Alto, Santa Clara County, California. The site is approximately 2.5 miles southwest of U.S. Highway 280. The parcel lies within the Mindego Hill, California U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle and within the San Francisquito Creek Watershed (Hydrologic Unit Code Number 180500030404). Los Trancos Creek, classified as a riverine habitat, runs west to east along the western border of the project site. The proposed project would involve construction of a new 7,266 square foot (sf) single-family residence with a new 1,000 sf accessory dwelling unit and associated improvements including a swimming pool and landscaped trees and shrubs. The project site is within the Open Space zoning district. Land use surrounding the project site consists of low-density residential and undeveloped areas. The project site is bordered on the eastern side by Los Trancos Road. The project site consists of an undeveloped and vacant lot, dominated by oak woodland, riparian woodland, and non-native grasses (Figure 2; Attachment 1). The non-native annual grasses are regularly mowed. The project site is surrounded by a residence to the north, Los Trancos Creek to the west, and undeveloped lands to the south and east. See Attachment 2 for representative photographs of the project site. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 128 Packet Page 558 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 2 Methodology This BRCA includes a review of relevant literature followed by a reconnaissance-level field survey and aquatic resources delineation. The purpose of this BRCA is to document the biological conditions of the project site and to provide information on the potential constrains to development related to sensitive biological resources. Literature Review Information on biological resources was compiled from a variety of publicly available sources including: ▪ Aerial photographs of the project site and vicinity; ▪ California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB; CDFW 2021a); ▪ California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (CNPS 2021); ▪ CDFW Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS; CDFW 2021b); ▪ CDFW Special Animals List (CDFW 2021c); ▪ CDFW Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List (CDFW 2021d); ▪ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation System (IPaC; USFWS 2021a); ▪ USFWS Critical Habitat Portal (USFWS 2021b); ▪ USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI; USFWS 2021c); ▪ USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD; USGS 2021); ▪ NOAA Fisheries California Species Tool (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] 2021) ▪ Essential California Habitat Connectivity Project data (available as GIS layers in BIOS [CDFW 2021b]). In addition, the Technical Memorandum Biotic Study (2014) prepared by Wildlife Research Associates (WRA) for an adjacent site was reviewed. The sources outlined above provide general information and coarse-grained data on biological resources to support a preliminary desktop assessment of the biological conditions of the project site. This level of evaluation allows for an assessment of potential constraints to development from sensitive biological resources and is sufficient to support CEQA environmental review. The potential presence of special-status species is based on the literature review which is intended to assess general habitat suitability within the project site only. Field Reconnaissance Survey Rincon Biologist Christian Knowlton conducted a field reconnaissance survey on October 5, 2021. Mr. Knowlton surveyed the entire project site on foot and recorded all biological resources encountered on site. Weather conditions at the time of the survey were clear (0% cloud cover) with winds at approximately zero to three miles per hour (mph) and an air temperature of 61 degrees Fahrenheit (F). The survey was conducted to document the existing site conditions, map vegetation communities, and to evaluate the potential for presence of sensitive biological resources, including sensitive plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities, and habitat for nesting birds protected by federal and state laws. During the survey, an inventory of all plant and animal species observed was compiled. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 129 Packet Page 559 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 3 All plant species encountered were noted and identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible given the condition of the materials during the site visit. Plant species nomenclature and taxonomy followed Baldwin et al. (2012) as updated by The Jepson Online Interchange (University of California, Berkeley 2020). (Jepson Flora Project 2021). The vegetation classification system used for this analysis is based on A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition (MCV2; Sawyer et al. 2009), but has been modified as needed to accurately describe the existing habitats observed on site. Vegetation communities were mapped onto aerial imagery depicting the project site and then later digitized using ArcGIS® (ESRI 2021). Wildlife identification and nomenclature followed standard reference texts, including Sibley Birds West: Field Guide to Birds of Western North America (Sibley 2016). The habitat requirements for each regionally occurring special-status species were assessed and compared to the type and quality of the habitats observed within the project site during the field survey. Several sensitive species were eliminated from consideration as having potential to occur on site due to lack of suitable habitat, lack of suitable soils/substrate, and/or knowledge of regional distribution. Existing Conditions Topography and Soils Topography of the site is relatively flat, with elevation approximately 535 feet (163 meters) above mean sea level. A review of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service’s online Web Soil Survey (2019) revealed one soil type mapped within the site: Flaskan sandy clay loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes. The Flaskan series consists of very deep, well drained soils that formed in alluvium from mixed rock sources. (USDA 2021b) Vegetation Communities and General Land Cover Types Three terrestrial vegetation communities or other land cover types were observed within the project site. A map approximating the types and acreages of the various vegetation communities and land-cover types that occur within the study area is shown in Attachment 1 (Figure 2). Habitat characterizations were based on the classification systems presented in MCV2 (Sawyer et al. 2009); but have been modified slightly to reflect the existing site conditions most accurately. See Attachment 3 for a complete list of plant species observed within the project site. Coast Live Oak Woodland Coast live oak woodland (Quercus agrifolia Forest and Woodland Alliance) is typically found on canyon bottoms, slopes, and flats with deep sandy or loamy soils throughout the inner and outer Coast Ranges, Transverse Ranges, and southern coast, usually below 1,200 meters. Coast live oak woodlands are widely distributed throughout the state from northern Mendocino County to San Diego County. This community is dominated by coast live oak (Q. agrifolia), often including California bay (Umbellularia californica) and Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii). Stands vary from open or continuous to savanna- like. Dense conditions support sparse understory vegetation including California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), poison oak, and snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.), while more open stands have a grassy understory (Sawyer et al. 2009; Holland 1986). Coast live oak woodland is found throughout the project site. Canopy cover is continuous to scattered, with a moderately dense understory of herbs and shrubs. Other observed tree species commonly ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 130 Packet Page 560 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 4 associated with coast live oak woodland include California bay and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). The shrub layer of the coast live oak woodland is typically poorly developed and the herbaceous layer is mostly continuous with adjacent grasslands. Shrubs in the project site include poison oak, coyote brush, and California blackberry. Non-native annual grassland Non-native annual grassland is typically comprised of annual grasses and forbs introduced during and since the Spanish colonial period. This vegetation community most closely resembles the Avena spp. – Bromus spp. Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance described by Sawyer et al. (2009). Non-native annual grassland is generally found in open areas in valleys and foothills throughout coastal and interior California. It typically occurs on soils consisting of fine-textured loams or clays that are somewhat poorly drained. Non-native annual grasses and weedy annual and perennial forbs, primarily of Mediterranean origin, dominate this vegetation type, probably as a result of human disturbance. Scattered native grass and wildflower species, representing remnants of the original vegetation may also be common (Sawyer et al. 2009). On the project site, this vegetation community primarily occurs in the interior of the site and is surrounded by coast live oak woodland. The majority of the non-native annual grassland within the project site had been previously mowed. Characteristic non-native annual grasses observed include wild oat (Avena fatua), Italian rye (Festuca perennis), and foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum). Many ruderal herbs were also present, including plantain (Plantago spp.). Riparian Riparian habitat is found along Los Trancos Creek within the project site. This habitat type is similar to coast live oak woodland described above, with the distinction that it occurs along the banks of the creek and is thus riparian habitat. The MCV has moved similar riparian woodlands into the California sycamore – coast live oak riparian woodlands (Platanus racemosa – Quercus agrifolia Woodland) alliance, but this vegetation community does not include California sycamore, and the vegetation community present best corresponds to the Central Coast live oak riparian forest as described in Holland (1986). This plant community would be classified as upland where trees are rooted outside of the top of banks at the drainages and as palustrine forested wetland where trees are rooted along the drainage banks, following Cowardin et al. (1979). General Wildlife Wildlife activity was low during the reconnaissance survey. Eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), Nuttall’s woodpecker (Dryobates nuttallii), and Steller’s jay (Cyanocitta stelleri) were observed at the project site during the site survey. See Attachment 4 for a complete list of wildlife species observed within the project site. Biological Constraints Special-Status Species For the purpose of this report, special status species are defined as those plants and animals listed, proposed for listing, or candidates for listing as threatened or endangered by the USFWS or NMFS under ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 131 Packet Page 561 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 5 the FESA; those listed or candidates for listing as rare, threatened, or endangered by the CDFW under CESA; animals designated as “Species of Special Concern” (SSC) by the CDFW or “Fully Protected” under the CFGC; and plants with a California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) of 1B, 2, 3, or 4. The project site may contain suitable habitat for special-status species. Based on the agency databases and literature review, as well as the results of the reconnaissance survey of the project site, Rincon evaluated 85 special-status species (40 special-status plant species and 45 special-status animal species) documented within the Mindego Hill, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle and the surrounding eight quadrangles (Woodside, Palo Alto, Mountain View, La Honda, Cupertino, Franklin Point, Big Basin, and Castle Rock Ridge). Each of these 85 species was evaluated for its potential to occur in the project site (see Attachment 5). The majority of special-status species are not expected to occur based on the absence of suitable habitat and/or the project site being outside of the geographic range of the species. Special-Status Plants As noted above, based on the database and literature review of records, 40 special-status plant species are known to or have the potential to occur within the regional vicinity of the project site (Attachment 4). Potential to occur within the project site was based primarily on the presence of suitable habitat, determined during the site reconnaissance survey, and the proximity to CNDDB/CNPS documented occurrences. No special-status plant species were detected within the project site during the reconnaissance survey; however, this survey was conducted outside of the seasonal bloom period for many special-status plant species and the project site had been recently mowed. As such, it is possible that these special-status plant species occur at the project site but were simply undetected due to the timing of the reconnaissance survey and problematic vegetation conditions due to regular vegetation maintenance. Of the 40 special-status plant species, one has a moderate potential to occur on the project site. Woodland woollythreads (Monolopia gracilens), CRPR 1B.2, can be found in a variety of habitat types, including some that occur on the project site, such as woodlands and grassy sites in openings. Blooming period for this species is March through July. Multiple occurrences of woodland woollythreads have been recorded within five miles of the project area, including the most recent occurrence from 2018 approximately one mile southwest of the project site. Protections are afforded for this and other special-status plants through CEQA, regardless of their listing status under the FESA, CESA, or the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA). Special-Status Animals Forty-five special-status animal species were reported to occur within the regional vicinity, based on the database and literature review. Habitats within the project site have moderate to high potential to support nine special-status wildlife species: steelhead - central California coast (CCC) distinct population segment (steelhead) (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus), Santa Cruz black salamander (Aneides niger), California giant salamander (Dicamptodon ensatus), California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), western pond turtle (Emys marmorata), San Francisco gartersnake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), and San Francisco dusky- footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens). Each of these species is discussed in more detail below. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 132 Packet Page 562 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 6 Steelhead The project site is located within the known range of the federally listed as threatened steelhead. Steelhead that occur in this geographic area are considered part of the CCC DPS. This DPS was listed by NMFS in 2006 and includes steelhead populations in streams from the upper Russian River in Mendocino County to Aptos Creek in southern Santa Cruz County (NMFS 2016). Steelhead are capable of surviving in a wide range of temperature conditions within freshwater and estuarine environments but prefer temperatures less than 57 degrees Fahrenheit. Eggs tend to experience mortality at temperatures greater than 55 degrees Fahrenheit, and steelhead appear to have difficulty obtaining sufficient oxygen from water temperatures greater than 70 degrees Fahrenheit. Elevated summer water temperatures have been identified as a problem (CDFW 1996). Steelhead do best where dissolved oxygen concentrations are at least seven parts per million. In streams, deep low- velocity pools are important wintering habitats. Spawning habitat consists of gravel substrates that are free of excessive silt. Los Trancos Creek runs along the property boundary on the western side. It is immediately adjacent to the project site and is critical habitat for steelhead. A 20-foot creek setback is marked on the proposed project plan, indicating that the creek is outside the limits of disturbance. Implementation of the proposed project may result in direct or indirect impacts to steelhead at all life stages. The results and conclusions presented herein represent our best professional judgement but do not represent determinations of the NMFS and CDFW as these agencies have ultimate jurisdiction over the steelhead through administration and enforcement of the FESA and CESA, respectively. Santa Cruz black salamander Santa Cruz black salamander (Aneides flavipunctatus niger) is a state species of special concern. This species is typically found in mixed deciduous woodlands, coniferous forests, and coastal grasslands in Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, and San Mateo counties. They primarily reside in moist habitats with wet soils, rotten logs, and surface debris for cover adjacent to ravines and water courses below 3,500 feet in elevation (Zeiner 1990, CDFW 2021a, Nafis 2020). Los Trancos Creek and the riparian corridor within the project site provides suitable breeding and foraging habitat for Santa Cruz black salamander. The grassland and oak woodland within the project site may also be utilized by dispersing salamanders. Implementation of the proposed project may result in direct or indirect impacts to individuals within the project site. California giant salamander California giant salamander (Dicamptodon ensatus) is a state species of special concern that occurs in damp coastal forests and riparian woodland habitats up to 6,500 feet in elevation. Terrestrial adults are commonly found in damp litter, in burrows, or under fallen logs, and aquatic adults typically occur near cold, clear, permanent or semi-permanent water sources with rocky substrates. Breeding occurs from March to May and eggs are laid in slow moving waters and springs and under streambanks (Zeiner 1990, CDFW 2021a, Nafis 2020). Los Trancos Creek and the riparian corridor within the project site provides suitable breeding and foraging habitat for California giant salamander. The grassland and oak woodland within the project site may also provide habitat for burrowing animals which may provide refugia for California giant ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 133 Packet Page 563 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 7 salamander. Implementation of the proposed project may result in direct or indirect impacts to individuals within the project site. California red-legged frog The California red-legged frog is federally listed as threatened and a state species of special concern throughout its range. The historic range of California red-legged frog extended along the coast from the vicinity of Point Reyes National Seashore, Marin County, and inland from the vicinity of Redding, Shasta County, southward to northwestern Baja California, Mexico. California red-legged frog inhabits quiet pools of streams, marshes, and ponds. All life history stages are most likely to be encountered in and around breeding sites, which include coastal lagoons, marshes, springs, permanent and semi-permanent natural ponds, and ponded and backwater portions of streams, as well as artificial impoundments such as stock ponds, irrigation ponds, and siltation ponds. Eggs are typically deposited in permanent pools, attached to emergent vegetation (USFWS 2011). Los Trancos Creek and the riparian corridor within the project site may provide suitable breeding habitat, in slow moving pools, and foraging habitat for California red-legged frog. The closest documented breeding habitat is approximately 2.6 miles north of the project site within San Francisquito Creek. The grassland and oak woodland within the project site may also provide habitat for burrowing animals which may provide refugia for California red-legged frog. Implementation of the proposed project may result in direct or indirect impacts to individuals within the project site. Western pond turtle Western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata [=Emys marmorata]) is a state species of special concern. This species is a semi-aquatic turtle that occurs in ponds, marshes, rivers, streams and irrigation ditches that typically support aquatic vegetation. It requires downed logs, rocks, mats of vegetation, or exposed banks for basking. Western pond turtle lay their eggs in nests dug along the banks of streams or other uplands in sandy, friable soils. Western pond turtles, especially those that reside near creeks, are known to overwinter in upland habitats. Upland movements can be quite extensive, and individuals have been recorded nesting or overwintering hundreds of meters from aquatic habitats. The typical nesting season is usually from April through August; however, variation exists depending upon geographic location. Los Trancos creek may provide suitable foraging habitat for the western pond turtle. The oak woodland and annual grassland may also provide suitable breeding and foraging habitat. Western pond turtles have been documented approximately 2.9 miles north of the project site within San Francisquito Creek. Implementation of the proposed project may result in direct or indirect impacts to individuals within the project site. San Francisco garter snake San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) is federally and state listed as endangered. The historical distribution of the San Francisco garter snake included wetland areas on the San Francisco peninsula from the San Francisco County line south along the eastern and western foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains to at least Upper Crystal Springs Reservoir and Año Nuevo Point in San Mateo County, and Waddell Creek in Santa Cruz County. The San Francisco garter snake occurs in a number of aquatic and terrestrial habitats throughout their range. San Francisco garter snake has been documented within the San Francisquito Creek watershed, which Los Trancos Creek is a part of. Suitable aquatic and terrestrial habitats are found along Los Trancos ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 134 Packet Page 564 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 8 creek. Implementation of the proposed project may result in direct or indirect impacts to individuals within the project site. Special-Status Bat Species Pallid bat, and Townsend’s big-eared bat are CDFW SSC. Pallid bats are found in grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, and forests, and may roost in trees or buildings. Townsend’s big-eared bat are found in a wide variety of habitats and may roost in abandoned buildings or large trees. Bats prefer open areas or open areas under a tree canopy for foraging, and often roost near water. Several large and mature oak trees contain dense canopy cover within the project site may provide suitable roosting habitat for these special-status bat species. Implementation of the proposed project may result in direct or indirect effects to roosting special-status bat species, should they be present within the project site and/or immediate surrounding vicinity. San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat The San Francisco woodrat is one of eleven described subspecies of the dusky-footed woodrat (Hooper 1938) and is recognized by the CDFW as a species of special concern. Dusky-footed woodrats are well known for their large terrestrial stick houses/nests, some of which can last for twenty or more years (Linsdale and Tevis 1951). Middens/nests can be placed on the ground against or straddling a log or exposed roots of a standing tree and are often located in dense brush. Middens/nests are also placed in the crotches and cavities of trees and in hollow logs. Sometimes arboreal nests are constructed, this behavior seems to be more common in habitat with evergreen trees such as live oak. The body coloring is brown/grey with white/grey underside and white/dusky coloring on feet. The woodrats have a hairy brown tail, usually with a lighter underside, and large ears (Burt and Gossenheider 1980). The San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat can be found throughout the San Francisco Bay area in grasslands, scrub and wooded areas (Hall 1981). Several San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat nests were observed during the reconnaissance survey. The oak woodland provides suitable breeding and foraging habitat throughout the project site. Implementation of the proposed project may result in direct or indirect impacts to individuals within the project site. Nesting Birds The California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) Section 3503 and the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) protect native bird species and their nests. The blue oak woodland habitat within and adjacent to the project site provides suitable nesting habitat for a variety of bird species. No active or inactive bird nests were observed within the project site during the reconnaissance-level field surveys. However, species of birds that typically occur in the region, such as red-shoulder hawk (Buteo lineatus), Steller’s jay, and Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna), may nest in the project site or surrounding area. Implementation of the proposed project may result in direct or indirect effects to nesting bird species, should they be present within the project site and/or immediate surrounding vicinity. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 135 Packet Page 565 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 9 Special-Status Vegetation Communities and Critical Habitat Sensitive Natural Communities Plant communities are also considered sensitive biological resources if they have limited distributions, have high wildlife value, include sensitive species, or are particularly susceptible to disturbance. The CDFW ranks sensitive communities as “threatened” or “very threatened” and keeps records of their occurrences in CNDDB. CNDDB vegetation alliances are ranked 1 through 5 based on NatureServe’s (2010) methodology, with those alliances ranked globally (G) or statewide (S) as 1 through 3 considered sensitive. Some alliances with the rank of 4 and 5 have also been included in the 2020 sensitive natural communities list under CDFW’s revised ranking methodology (CDFW 2020). Three sensitive natural communities are known to occur within the nine-quadrangle search radius, none of which are present within the project site: ▪ Northern Coastal Salt Marsh ▪ Serpentine Bunch Grass ▪ Valley Oak Woodland Critical Habitat Critical habitat for steelhead is present in Los Trancos Creek, shown in Appendix A (Figure 2), both within and immediately adjacent to the project site. (NOAA 2021). Designated critical habitat is also located in several of the rivers surrounding the project site within five miles for coho Salmon (Central California Coast ESU; Oncorhynchus kisutch pop. 4). However, the project site does not overlap with these rivers and no drainages onsite are connected to the rivers where critical habitat is designated. Designated critical habitat for California red-legged frog and Bay checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis) is located within five miles of the project area (USFWS 2021b); however, the project does not overlap with either of these designated critical habitats. Oak Trees Coast live oak trees and valley oak trees with a diameter at breast height of greater than 11.5 inches occur within project site. Pursuant to Section 8.10, Tree Preservation and Management Regulations, of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, these on-site oak trees would qualify as protected trees. Under Section 8.10.020, all protected trees that are planned for removal must be approved by the director of planning and development services, on the basis of a tree report prepared by a certified arborist. The proposed project may result in trimming and or disturbance close in proximity to several of the trees and may include work within oak tree driplines. As such, implementation of the proposed project may result in direct or indirect impacts to protected oak trees within the project site. Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands Los Trancos Creek is an intermittent stream within and immediately adjacent to the project site and is potentially under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), CDFW, and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Riparian habitat (coast live oak woodland) occurs adjacent to the creek. Coast live oak woodland is not a CDFW sensitive natural community, but riparian habitat is considered to be a jurisdictional wetland by CDFW. Project plans appear to avoid impacts to Los Trancos ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 136 Packet Page 566 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 10 Creek, however the proposed project may result in indirect impacts to the creek and direct or indirect impacts to riparian habitat if project activities occur within the dripline of the riparian canopy. Discussion and Recommendations The project site contains: potentially suitable habitat for one special-status plant species, nine special- status wildlife species and nesting bird species; native oak trees; and potentially jurisdictional areas. If the project will be subject to environmental review under CEQA and there will be impacts to special- status species that are not listed as threatened or endangered under CESA and/or FESA, it may be considered significant and compensatory mitigation and/or specific avoidance and minimization measures may be required before and during construction of the project. Special-Status Plant Species The project site contains suitable habitat for one special-status plant species, as described above. It was not observed within the project site during the reconnaissance survey; however, the reconnaissance survey was conducted outside the bloom period for the species. Following are recommendations to address constraints due to the potential presence of special-status plants within the project site: ▪ A qualified biologist should conduct a protocol level botanical survey, including a site visit during the blooming period in March through July, and to ensure impacts to special-status plant species are avoided, minimized, and/or mitigated. ▪ If the CRPR 1 rank plant is found, a qualified biologist shall determine if the project will result in a significant impact and if so, prepare compensatory mitigation measures. Special-Status Wildlife Species The project site contains suitable habitat for nine special-status wildlife species. Los Trancos Creek is designated critical habitat for steelhead, and the non-native annual grassland in the woodland openings may provide suitable habitat for several other species. The large and mature oak trees on the project site provide potentially suitable habitat for nesting birds as well as special-status bat species. None of these species were observed onsite during the reconnaissance-level field surveys and no focused or protocol-level species surveys were conducted. Following are recommendations to address constraints due to the potential for occurrence of special-status wildlife and the presence of their habitats within the project site: Steelhead: Best management practices (BMPs) should be implemented during all construction activities that take place in or adjacent to Los Trancos Creek to prevent erosion and sedimentation into the creek and to prevent the spill of contaminants in or around the creek. Construction should occur between June and December, outside of steelhead migration season in the region. The following BMPs should be implemented on-site during construction to prevent any indirect impacts to waters and wetlands: ▪ Vehicles and equipment should be checked at least daily for leaks and maintained in good working order. Spill kits should be available on-site at all times and a spill response plan should be developed and implemented. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 137 Packet Page 567 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 11 ▪ Sediment and erosion control measures (e.g., sand or gravel bags, hay bales, check dams) should be implemented and maintained throughout the project site to prevent the entry of sediment and/or pollutants into any waterways or jurisdictional areas. No monofilament plastic will be used for erosion control. California Giant Salamander and Santa Cruz Black Salamander Immediately prior to initial ground disturbance and vegetation removal, a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction clearance survey of the site for special status amphibians. If California giant salamander and/or Santa Cruz black salamander are observed on site, they shall be relocated to suitable habitat in the immediate vicinity by the qualified biologist. The following additional measures shall be implemented to reduce potential impacts: ▪ Vegetation disturbance shall be the minimum necessary to achieve the goals of the project. ▪ All trash shall be removed from the site daily and disposed of properly to avoid attracting potential predators to the site. ▪ No pets shall be permitted on site during project activities. ▪ All vehicles shall be in good working condition and free of leaks. All leaks shall be contained and cleaned up immediately to reduce the potential of soil/vegetation contamination. ▪ All hole and trenches shall be covered at the end of the day or ramped to avoid entrapment. California red-legged frog: A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 14 days prior to initiation of construction activities. The USFWS will be notified should California red-legged frog be observed within the project site. The following avoidance and mitigation measures should be implemented to avoid impacts to California red-legged frog: ▪ Construction crew shall be taught during the WEAP training to check beneath the staging equipment each morning prior to commencement of daily construction activities. Should California red-legged frog occur within the staging areas, construction activities shall be halted until the California red- legged frog vacates the project site on its own or until a biologist with a USFWS Recovery Permit for California red-legged frog relocates the California red-legged frog. ▪ Prior to ground disturbance a temporary wildlife exclusion barrier shall be installed along the limits of disturbance. A qualified biologist will inspect the area prior to barrier installation. The barrier will be designed to prevent California red-legged frog from entering the project area, and will remain in place until all development activities have been completed. This barrier will be inspected daily by a qualified biologist and maintained and repaired as necessary to ensure that it is functional and is not a hazard to California red-legged frogs or San Francisco garter snakes on the outer side of the barrier. ▪ A qualified biologist shall be present during all grading and initial ground disturbing activities. Should California red-legged frog be observed within the project site, the USFWS shall be notified and construction shall be halted until either the California red-legged frog exits the site on its own or until a biologist with a USFWS Recovery Permit for California red-legged frog relocates the California red-legged frog. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 138 Packet Page 568 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 12 ▪ No work should occur during a rain event (over 0.25”). If a rain event occurs, a qualified biologist should inspect the site again prior to resuming work. Western pond turtle A qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction clearance surveys for western pond turtle within 48 hours prior to the start of construction (including staging and mobilization) in areas of suitable habitat. The biologist shall flag limits of disturbance for each construction phase. Areas of special biological concern within or adjacent to the limits of disturbance should have highly visible orange construction fencing installed by a contractor between said area and the limits of disturbance. If western pond turtles are observed they shall be allowed to leave the site on their own. San Francisco garter snake A qualified biologist shall conduct a focused pre-construction survey within 24 hours of the initiation of project activities. If San Francisco garter snake is found, the USFWS shall be notified immediately to determine the correct course of action and the proposed project shall not begin until approved by the USFWS. ▪ Construction personnel will participate in a worker environmental awareness program training. The training will cover the need to check beneath and around equipment each morning prior to commencement of daily construction activities. Should San Francisco garter snake occur within the project areas, construction activities shall be halted until the San Francisco garter snake vacates the project site on its own or until a biologist with a USFWS Recovery Permit for San Francisco garter snake relocates the snake. ▪ Vegetation will be cut to 6 inches in height or when the ground is visible, using hand tools (including string trimmers or chainsaw for brush). Once the ground is visible, a visual survey for San Francisco garter snake will be conducted by the biologist prior to additional ground disturbance. If San Francisco garter snake is found, USFWS will be notified immediate to determine the correct course of action. ▪ Prior to ground disturbance a temporary wildlife exclusion barrier shall be installed along the limits of disturbance. A qualified biologist will inspect the area prior to barrier installation. The barrier will be designed to prevent San Francisco garter snake from entering the project area and will remain in place until all development activities have been completed. This barrier will be inspected daily and maintained and repaired as necessary to ensure that it is functional and is not a hazard to California red-legged frogs or San Francisco garter snakes on the outer side of the barrier. ▪ Prior to conducting non-native plant removal or treatments (e.g., spraying with herbicide, cutting, pulling, digging out), the permittee shall make every reasonable attempt to ensure that SFGS are not hidden within the plant or residual plant matter to be treated. Special-Status Bat Species: There is suitable roosting habitat for special-status bats present in the large oak trees throughout the project site. Disturbance of maternity roosts from construction activities, resulting in roost destruction or abandonment, would be a potentially significant impact to special-status bat species and would be violations of CFGC. The following are recommendations and possible constraints due to special-status bat species within the project site: ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 139 Packet Page 569 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 13 ▪ Prior to tree removal, a qualified biologist should conduct a focused survey of all trees to be removed or impacted by construction activities to determine whether active roosts of special-status bats are present on site. If tree removal is planned for the fall, the survey should be conducted in September to ensure tree removal would have adequate time to occur during seasonal periods of bat activity, as described below. If tree removal is planned for the spring, then the survey should be conducted during the earliest possible time in March, to allow for suitable conditions for both the detection of bats and subsequent tree removal. Trees containing suitable potential bat roost habitat features should be clearly marked or identified. ▪ If day roosts are found to be potentially present, the biologist should prepare a site-specific roosting bat protection plan to be implemented by the contractor following the City of Palo Alto’s approval. The plan should incorporate the following guidance as appropriate:  When possible, removal of trees identified as suitable roosting habitat should be conducted during seasonal periods of bat activity, including the following: 1. Between September 1 and about October 15, or before evening temperatures fall below 45 degrees Fahrenheit and/or more than 0.5 inch of rainfall within 24 hours occurs. 2. Between March 1 and April 15, or after evening temperatures rise above 45 degrees Fahrenheit and/or no more than 0.5 inch of rainfall within 24 hours occurs.  If a tree must be removed during the breeding season and is identified as potentially containing a colonial maternity roost, then a qualified biologist should conduct acoustic emergence surveys or implement other appropriate methods to further evaluate if the roost is an active maternity roost. Under the biologist’s guidance, the contractor should implement measures similar to or better than the following: 1. If it is determined that the roost is not an active maternity roost, then the roost may be removed in accordance with the other requirements of this recommendation. 2. If it is found that an active maternity roost of a colonial roosting species is present, the roost should not be disturbed during the breeding season (April 15 to August 31).  Potential colonial hibernation roosts should only be removed during seasonal periods of bat activity. Potential non-colonial roosts that cannot be avoided should be removed on warm days in late morning to afternoon when any bats present are likely to be warm and able to fly. Appropriate methods should be used to minimize the potential harm to bats during tree removal. Such methods may include using a two-step tree removal process. This method is conducted over two consecutive days and works by creating noise and vibration by cutting non- habitat branches and limbs from habitat trees using chainsaws only (no excavators or other heavy machinery) on day one. The noise and vibration disturbance, together with the visible alteration of the tree, is very effective in causing bats that emerge nightly to feed to not return to the roost that night. The remainder of the tree is removed on day two. San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat A qualified biologist should conduct a pre-construction survey for woodrats no more than 14 days prior to construction. Nests within 50 feet of project activity that would not be directly impacted by project activity should be demarcated with a 10-foot avoidance buffer and left intact. If a nest(s) that cannot be avoided are found during the pre-construction survey, an approved biologist should dismantle the nest and relocate it to suitable habitat outside the work area no more than 50 feet away with the goal of ensuring the individuals are allowed to leave the work area(s) unharmed before on site activities begin. Nest relocation should occur within 48 hours of construction activities to ensure that nests are not ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 140 Packet Page 570 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 14 reestablished. With the implementation of mitigation (worker training program and relocation of active nests), impacts to San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat would be reduced to less than significant. Nesting Birds: There is suitable nesting habitat for nesting birds throughout the project site. If construction activities are scheduled to occur during the avian nesting season (typically February 1 to September 15), then typical avoidance and minimization measures to prevent take of bird nests, eggs or nestlings under CFGC and the MBTA could pose constraints on the project. The following are recommendations and possible constraints due to special-status birds and nesting birds within the project site: ▪ A general pre-construction nesting bird survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist, within 14 days prior to the initiation of construction activities. If construction is stopped for more than 14 days during the nesting season, a pre-construction survey should be conducted prior to the re-start of construction activities. Surveys should include the disturbance area plus a 200-foot buffer for passerine species, and a 500-foot buffer for raptors. ▪ If active nests are located, an appropriate avoidance buffer should be established within which no work activity would be allowed which would impact these nests. The avoidance buffer would be established by the qualified biologist on a case-by-case basis based on the species and site conditions. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) should be closed to all construction personnel and equipment until juveniles have fledged and/or the nest is inactive. A qualified biologist should confirm that breeding/nesting is complete, and the nest is no longer active prior to removal of the buffer. If work within a buffer area cannot be avoided, then a qualified biologist should be present to monitor all project activities that occur within the buffer. The biological monitor should evaluate the nesting avian species for signs of disturbance and should have the ability to stop work. Protected Trees Pursuant to Chapter 8.10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code the on-site coast live oak and valley oak trees would qualify as protected trees. Depending on the extent of disturbance, the proposed project may result in trimming and or disturbance close in proximity to several of the trees within the project site. Therefore, Section 8.10.050, Tree Preservation and Management Regulations would require an arborist report, conducted by a qualified arborist, tree mitigation may be required in accordance with the City of Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual. Additionally, should one or more protected trees be planned for removal, a tree protection and replacement plan may be required. This plan would include but is not limited to the following protective measures for trees: ▪ Prior to initiating any construction activity on a construction project, including demolition or grading, temporary protective fencing should be installed at each site tree. 1. Fencing should be located at the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) illustrated on the Improvement Plans. 2. Fencing should serve as a barrier to prevent encroachment of any type by construction activities, equipment, materials storage, or personnel. ▪ The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) is illustrated on the Improvement Plans and represents the area around each tree, or group of trees, which must be protected at all times with tree protection fencing. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 141 Packet Page 571 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 15 1. No encroachment into the TPZ is allowed at any time without approval from the project arborist. 2. Any unauthorized entry into the TPZ is a violation of the Tree Protection Ordinance and shall be subject to enforcement through civil, criminal or administrative remedies, including applicable penalties. ▪ Contractors and subcontractors should direct all equipment and personnel to remain outside the fenced area at all times until project is complete and should instruct personnel and sub-contractors as to the purpose and importance of fencing and preservation. ▪ No grade changes should be made within the protective barriers without prior approval by the Planning Director. ▪ No attachments or wires other than those of a protective or non-damaging nature should be attached to a protected tree. ▪ Excavation or landscape preparation within the protective barriers should be limited to the use of hand tools and small handheld power tools and should not be of a depth that could cause root damage. ▪ When the existing grade around a protected tree is to be raised the project and/or City arborist should provide written directions on which method(s) may be used to drain liquids away from the trunk. ▪ When the existing grade around a protected tree is to be lowered the project and/or City arborist should provide written directions on which method(s) may be used (terracing, retaining wall, etc.) to allow the dripline to be left at the original grade. ▪ No equipment, solvents, paint, asphalt, or debris of any kind should be placed, stored, or allowed within the protective barrier. Potentially Jurisdictional Areas Los Trancos Creek is within and adjacent to the project area. It is a tributary to San Francisquito Creek, which flows into San Francisco Bay, a Traditional Navigable Water, thus it is potentially under the jurisdiction of USACE, CDFW, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). In addition, riparian habitat on the project site would be considered jurisdictional by CDFW and RWQCB. Therefore, the following avoidance and minimization measures are recommended: ▪ If the project will avoid impacts to the riparian area (shown on Figure 2), we recommend installing high visibility orange construction fence between the jurisdictional areas and the construction activities, including a 20-foot buffer setback, to avoid all potential impacts to jurisdictional areas. ▪ If the project will impact the riparian areas, a formal delineation report and map should be prepared. If wetland areas cannot be avoided, regulatory permits from USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB would be required prior to construction. ▪ Vehicles and equipment should be checked at least daily for leaks and maintained in good working order. Spill kits should be available on-site at all times and a spill response plan should be developed and implemented. ▪ Sediment and erosion control measures (e.g., straw wattles, silt fence, check dams) should be implemented and maintained throughout the project site to prevent the entry of sediment and/or pollutants into any waterways or jurisdictional areas. No monofilament plastic will be used for erosion control. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 142 Packet Page 572 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 16 Conclusion As noted above, this report is intended to identify sensitive biological resources and potential occurrence of special-status species that represent potential constraints to development of the 575 Los Trancos Road project. This report provides analysis sufficient to support CEQA, though further analysis may be required for compliance with FESA, or CESA, and/or the CFGC. Thank you for the opportunity to support your environmental analysis needs for this important project. Please contact us if you have any questions. Sincerely, Rincon Consultants, Inc. Christian Knowlton Sherri Miller Biologist Principal Attachments Attachment 1 Figures Attachment 2 Representative Site Photographs Attachment 3 Plant Species List Observed Attachment 4 Wildlife Species List Observed Attachment 5 Special-Status Species Evaluation Tables ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 143 Packet Page 573 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 17 References Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, editors. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, second edition. University of California Press, Berkeley. Burt, W.H., and R.P. Grossenheider. 1980. A Field Guide to the Mammals of North America North of Mexico. The Peterson Field Guide Series. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2020. California Sensitive Natural Communities Arranged Alphabetically by Life Form (PDF). Available from https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities#sensitive%20natural %20communities (accessed October 2021). ____. 2021a. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), Rarefind 5 (online). Commercial Version. (accessed October 2021). ____. 2021b. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). http://bios.dfg.ca.gov (accessed October 2021). ____. 2021c. Special Animals List. July. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109406&inline (accessed October 2021). ____. 2021d. Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. July. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109383&inline (accessed October 2021). ____. 1996. Steelhead Restoration and Management Plan. Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California. February. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=3490&inline. California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2021. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v9-01 0.0). https://www.rareplants.cnps.org (accessed October 2021). Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/documents/classwet/index.html#contents (accessed October 2021). Hall, E. R. 1981. The Mammals of North America, Vol I, 2nd edition. John Wiley & Sons, New York. 690+92 pp. Holland, Robert F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Nongame Heritage Program. 156 pgs. Hooper, E. T. 1938. Geographical variation in woodrats of the species Neotoma fuscipes. University of California Publications in Zoology 42:213-245. Jepson Flora Project (eds.). 2021. Jepson eFlora, https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/ Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, B.N. Harvey (2005). "Historical distribution and current status of steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California." Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, California. Retrieved October 2021. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 144 Packet Page 574 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Page 18 Linsdale, J.M and L. P. Tevis. 1951. The Dusky-footed Wood Rat: A Record of Observations Made on the Hastings Natural History Reservation. University of California Press. Berkeley and Los Angeles. 664 pp. Nafis, G. 2000-2020 California Herps - A Guide to the Amphibians and Reptiles of California. Available at: http://www.californiaherps.com/ (accessed October 2021). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2021. California Species List Tools. https://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/maps_data/california_species_list_tools. html National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2016. Final Coastal Multispecies Recovery Plan for California Coastal Chinook Salmon, Northern California Steelhead and Central California Coast Steelhead. NMFS, Southwest Region, Santa Rosa, California. Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. 1300 pp. Sibley. 2016. Sibley Birds West: Field Guide to Birds of Western North America. Knopf; second edition. United States Department of Agricultural (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2019. Web Soil Survey. July 31, 2019. Available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/ (accessed October 2021). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021a. Information, Planning, and Conservation Online Tool [online]. http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ (accessed October 2021). ____. 2021b. Designated Critical Habitat Portal [online]. http://criticalhabitat.fws.gov/crithab/ (accessed October 2021). ____. 2021c. National Wetlands Inventory Online Application. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html (accessed October 2021). ____. 2011. California Red-legged Frog (Rana draytonii) species account. Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, California. https://www.fws.gov/arcata/es/amphibians/crlf/crlf.html (accessed October 2021). United States Geological Service (USGS). 2021. National Hydrography Dataset. https://nhd.usgs.gov/index.html (accessed October 2021). University of California, Berkeley. 2020. University and Jepson Herberia. https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/interchange/ [Accessed October 2021]. WRA (Wildlife Research Associates). 2014. Technical Memorandum Biotic Study: 805 Los Trancos Road, Palo Alto, California. May 27, 2008. Updated October 16, 2014. Zeiner, D., W.F. Laudenslayer, Jr., and K.E. Mayer. 1988-1990. California’s Wildlife. California Statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationship System, Volumes I, II, & III. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 145 Packet Page 575 of 792 Attachment 1 Figures ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 146 Packet Page 576 of 792 Page 1-1 Figure 1 Regional Location ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 147 Packet Page 577 of 792 Page 1-2 Figure 2 Land Cover Types ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 148 Packet Page 578 of 792 Attachment 2 Representative Site Photographs ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 149 Packet Page 579 of 792 Page 2-1 Photograph 1. Overview of the coast live oak woodland within the project site. Photograph taken from the northern end of the project site, facing south. Photograph 2. View of mowed non-native annual grassland surrounded by the oak woodland within the project area facing the northern boundary of the project area. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 150 Packet Page 580 of 792 Page 2-2 Photograph 3. Photograph of Los Trancos creek immediately adjacent to the west of the project area. Photograph 4. San Francisco dusky footed woodrat nest within the project area. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 151 Packet Page 581 of 792 Page 2-3 Photograph 5. View of the oak woodland at the southern extent of the project area. Photograph 6. View of the riparian woodland along the southern extent of the project area. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 152 Packet Page 582 of 792 Page 2-4 Photograph 7. Representative photo of the oak woodland within the project area. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 153 Packet Page 583 of 792 Attachment 3 Plant Species List Observed ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 154 Packet Page 584 of 792 Page 3-1 Scientific Name Common Name Origin & Cal-IPC Status1 Aesculus californica California buckeye Native Artemesia douglasiana mugwort Native Avena spp. wild oats Introduced; Cal-IPC Moderate Bromus diandrus ripgut grass Introduced; Cal-IPC Moderate Cynodon dactylon Bermuda grass Introduced; Cal-IPC Moderate Genista monspessulana French broom Introduced; Cal-IPC High Plantago lanceolata English plantain Introduced; Cal-IPC Limited Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak Native Quercus lobata valley oak Native Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry Introduced; Cal-IPC High Salix lasiolepis arroyo willow Native Toxicodendron diversilobum poison oak Native Umbellularia californica California bay Native 1 Cal-IPC: California Invasive Plant Council ratings ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 155 Packet Page 585 of 792 Attachment 4 Wildlife Species List Observed ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 156 Packet Page 586 of 792 Page 4-1 Scientific Name Common Name Neotoma fuscipes annectens San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat Dryobates nuttallii Nuttall’s woodpecker Melanerpes formicivorus Acorn woodpecker Sciurus niger Fox squirrel Cyanocitta stelleri Steller’s jay Certhia americana Brown creeper Sciurus carolinensis Eastern gray squirrel Melozone crissalis California towhee Junco hyemalis Dark eyed junco ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 157 Packet Page 587 of 792 Page 4-2 Attachment 5 Special-Status Species Evaluation Tables ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 158 Packet Page 588 of 792 Page 5-1 Special-Status Plant Species in the Regional Vicinity (Nine Quad) of the Project Site Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur Rationale Acanthomintha duttonii San Mateo thorn- mint FE/SE G1/S1 1B.1 Chaparral, Valley and foothill grassland. Uncommon serpentinite vertisol clays; in relatively open areas. 50- 300m. Blooms Apr-Jun. Not Expected Suitable serpentine soils not present. One historic occurrence from 1977 has been recorded within 5 miles, approximately 5 miles to the north of the site, and is considered extirpated (CDFW 2021a). Allium peninsulare var. franciscanum Franciscan onion None/None G5T2/S2 1B.2 Cismontane woodland, Valley and foothill grassland. Clay soils; often on serpentine; sometimes on volcanics. Dry hillsides. 52-305m. Blooms (Apr)May-Jun. Not Expected Suitable woodland habitat and grasslands are present. No native grassland communities are present within the site. Clay soils are present; however, no serpentine formations occur within the project site. One recent occurrence from 2013 is recorded within 5 miles of the project site, approximately 3.25 miles to the northeast (CDFW 2021a). Amsinckia lunaris bent-flowered fiddleneck None/None G3/S3 1B.2 Cismontane woodland, Coastal bluff scrub, Valley and foothill grassland. 3-500m. Blooms Mar-Jun. Not Expected Grasslands and coast live oak woodland are present. The non-native grasslands present are not a natural vegetation community and are frequently disturbed by mowing. No occurrences have been reported within 5 miles (CDFW 2021a). Arctostaphylos andersonii Anderson's manzanita None/None G2/S2 1B.2 Broadleafed upland forest, Chaparral, North Coast coniferous forest. Open sites, redwood forest. 60-760m. Blooms Nov-May. Not Expected Suitable vegetation communities absent. This species would have been observed if present. Arctostaphylos regismontana Kings Mountain manzanita None/None G2/S2 1B.2 Broadleafed upland forest, Chaparral, North Coast coniferous forest. Granitic or sandstone outcrops. 305- 730m. Blooms Dec-Apr. Not Expected Suitable vegetation communities, elevations, and rock outcrops absent. Would have been observed if present. Astragalus pycnostachyus var. pycnostachyus coastal marsh milk- vetch None/None G2T2/S2 1B.2 Coastal dunes, Coastal scrub, Marshes and swamps. Mesic sites in dunes or along streams or coastal salt marshes. 0-30m. Blooms (Apr)Jun-Oct. Not Expected No suitable habitat or elevations occurs in the project site. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 159 Packet Page 589 of 792 Page 5-2 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur Rationale Astragalus tener var. tener alkali milk-vetch None/None G2T1/S1 1B.2 Playas, Valley and foothill grassland, Vernal pools. Low ground, alkali flats, and flooded lands; in annual grassland or in playas or vernal pools. 1-60m. Blooms Mar-Jun. Not Expected No suitable habitat occurs in the project site. Outside of suitable elevation. Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii Congdon's tarplant None/None G3T1T2/S1S2 1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland. Alkaline soils, sometimes described as heavy white clay. 0-230m. Blooms May- Oct(Nov). Not Expected Suitable soils absent. Chloropyron maritimum ssp. palustre Point Reyes salty bird's-beak None/None G4?T2/S2 1B.2 Marshes and swamps. Usually in coastal salt marsh with Salicornia, Distichlis, Jaumea, Spartina, etc. 0-10m. Blooms Jun-Oct. Not Expected No suitable habitat occurs in the project site. Chorizanthe pungens var. hartwegiana Ben Lomond spineflower FE/None G2T1/S1 1B.1 Lower montane coniferous forest. Zayante coarse sands in maritime ponderosa pine sandhills. 90-610m. Blooms Apr-Jul. Not Expected No suitable habitat occurs in the project and it does not contain maritime ponderosa forests. Cirsium fontinale var. fontinale fountain thistle FE/SE G2T1/S1 1B.1 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Meadows and seeps, Valley and foothill grassland. Serpentine seeps and grassland. 45-175m. Blooms (Apr)May-Oct. Not Expected No suitable habitat occurs in the project site and serpentine soils are not present. Collinsia corymbosa round-headed Chinese-houses None/None G1/S1 1B.2 Coastal dunes. 0-20m. Blooms Apr-Jun. Not Expected No suitable habitat or elevations occur in the project site. Collinsia multicolor San Francisco collinsia None/None G2/S2 1B.2 Annual herb. Blooms March-May. Closed-cone coniferous forest, coastal scrub. On decomposed shale (mudstone) mixed with humus. 30-250m (100-820ft). Not Expected Closed cone coniferous forests and suitable soils are absent. Dirca occidentalis western leatherwood None/None G2/S2 1B.2 Broadleafed upland forest, Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Closed-cone coniferous forest, North Coast coniferous forest, Riparian forest, Riparian woodland. On brushy slopes, mesic sites; mostly in mixed evergreen & foothill woodland communities. 25-425m. Blooms Jan-Mar(Apr). Not Expected Suitable habitat, including riparian woodland is present on the project site; however, this species would have been observed if present. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 160 Packet Page 590 of 792 Page 5-3 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur Rationale Eriophyllum latilobum San Mateo woolly sunflower FE/SE G1/S1 1B.1 Cismontane woodland, Coastal scrub, Lower montane coniferous forest. Often on roadcuts; found on and off of serpentine. 45-330m. Blooms May-Jun. Low Potential Coast live oak woodland is present. One historic occurrence from 1962 is recorded within 5 miles of the project site, approximately 1.8 miles to the southwest (CDFW 2021a). Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri Hoover's button- celery None/None G5T1/S1 1B.1 Vernal pools. Alkaline depressions, vernal pools, roadside ditches and other wet places near the coast. 3-45m. Blooms (Jun)Jul(Aug). Not Expected No suitable habitat occurs in the project site, which outside of known elevation for this species. Eryngium jepsonii Jepson's coyote- thistle None/None G2/S2 1B.2 Valley and foothill grassland, Vernal pools. Clay. 3-300m. Blooms Apr-Aug. Not Expected No vernal pools within the project site. Suitable soils not present Fissidens pauperculus minute pocket moss None/None G3?/S2 1B.2 North Coast coniferous forest. Moss growing on damp soil along the coast. In dry streambeds and on stream banks. 10-1024m. Not Expected No suitable habitat occurs in the project site, and no occurrences have been recorded within 5 miles (CDFW 2021a). Fritillaria liliacea fragrant fritillary None/None G2/S2 1B.2 Cismontane woodland, Coastal prairie, Coastal scrub, Valley and foothill grassland. Often on serpentine; various soils reported though usually on clay, in grassland. 3-410m. Blooms Feb-Apr. Low Potential Suitable habitat present although no serpentine soils were observed on the project site. One historical occurrence from 1932 has been recorded within 5 miles of the project site, approximately 2.5 miles to the north (CDFW 2021a). Hesperocyparis abramsiana var. abramsiana Santa Cruz cypress FT/SE G1T1/S1 1B.2 Chaparral, Closed-cone coniferous forest, Lower montane coniferous forest. Restricted to the Santa Cruz Mountains, on sandstone & granitic-derived soils; often w/Pinus attenuata, redwoods. 280-800m. Blooms . Not Expected No suitable habitat or elevation occurs in the project site. Would have been observed if present. Hesperocyparis abramsiana var. butanoensis Butano Ridge cypress FT/SE G1T1/S1 1B.2 Chaparral, Closed-cone coniferous forest, Lower montane coniferous forest. Sandstone. 400-490m. Blooms Oct. Not Expected No suitable habitat or elevation occurs in the project site. Would have been observed if present. Hesperolinon congestum Marin western flax FT/ST G1/S1 1B.1 Chaparral, Valley and foothill grassland. In serpentine barrens and in serpentine grassland and chaparral. 5- 370m. Blooms Apr-Jul. Not Expected Suitable soils are absent. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 161 Packet Page 591 of 792 Page 5-4 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur Rationale Hoita strobilina Loma Prieta hoita None/None G2?/S2? 1B.1 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Riparian woodland. Serpentine; mesic sites. 30- 860m. Blooms May-Jul (Aug- Oct). Not Expected Although suitable woodlands, including riparian woodlands occur on the project site, suitable serpentine soils are absent and no occurrences have been recorded within 5 miles. Legenere limosa legenere None/None G2/S2 1B.1 Vernal pools. In beds of vernal pools. 1-880m. Blooms Apr- Jun. Not Expected No suitable vernal pool habitat occurs in the project site. Limnanthes douglasii ssp. sulphurea Point Reyes meadowfoam None/SE G4T1/S1 1B.2 Coastal prairie, Marshes and swamps, Meadows and seeps, Vernal pools. Vernally wet depressions in open rolling, coastal prairies and meadows; typically in dark clay soil. 0- 140m. Blooms Mar-May. Not Expected No suitable habitat occurs in the project site. Malacothamnus arcuatus arcuate bush- mallow None/None G2Q/S2 1B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland. Gravelly alluvium. 15-355m. Blooms Apr-Sep. Low Potential Suitable woodland habitat is present; however, regular vegetation maintenance decreases the likelihood of their occurrence. No individuals were observed during the site visit.Two recent occurrences (2013 and 2015) have been recorded within 5 miles of the project site (CDFW 2021a). Monolopia gracilens woodland woollythreads None/None G3/S3 1B.2 Broadleafed upland forest, Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, North Coast coniferous forest, Valley and foothill grassland. Grassy sites, in openings; sandy to rocky soils. Often seen on serpentine after burns, but may have only weak affinity to serpentine. 100-1200m. Blooms (Feb)Mar- Jul. Moderate Potential Suitable habitat is present within the project site and three recent occurrences (2015-2018) have been recorded within 5 miles of the project site (CDFW 2021a). Pedicularis dudleyi Dudley's lousewort None/SR G2/S2 1B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, North Coast coniferous forest, Valley and foothill grassland. Deep shady woods of older coast redwood forests; also in maritime chaparral. 60-900m. Blooms Apr-Jun. Low Potential Woodland habitat occurs on the project site however, deep shady forests and maritime chapparal are absent. No occurrences have been recorded within 5 miles (CDFW 2021a). ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 162 Packet Page 592 of 792 Page 5-5 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur Rationale Pentachaeta bellidiflora white-rayed pentachaeta FE/SE G1/S1 1B.1 Cismontane woodland, Valley and foothill grassland. Open dry rocky slopes and grassy areas, often on soils derived from serpentine bedrock. 35- 620m. Blooms Mar-May. Not Expected The annual grassland present on the project site is not a natural grassland community and is regularly maintained, thus would not provide suitable habitat. No occurrences have been recorded within 5 miles (CDFW 2021a). Piperia candida white-flowered rein orchid None/None G3/S3 1B.2 Broadleafed upland forest, Lower montane coniferous forest, North Coast coniferous forest. Sometimes on serpentine. Forest duff, mossy banks, rock outcrops, and muskeg. 30-1310m. Blooms (Mar)May-Sep. Not Expected No suitable habitat occurs in the project site. Only one occurrence from 1992 has been recorded within 5 miles of the project site (CDFW 2021a). Plagiobothrys chorisianus var. chorisianus Choris' popcornflower None/None G3T1Q/S1 1B.2 Chaparral, Coastal prairie, Coastal scrub. Mesic sites. 3- 160m. Blooms Mar-Jun. Not Expected No suitable habitat occurs in the project site. Plagiobothrys diffusus San Francisco popcornflower None/SE G1Q/S1 1B.1 Coastal prairie, Valley and foothill grassland. Historically from grassy slopes with marine influence. 60-360m. Blooms Mar-Jun. Not Expected Grasslands present in the project site are not natural grassland communities and no occurrences have been recorded within 5 miles (CDFW 2021a). Senecio aphanactis chaparral ragwort None/None G3/S2 2B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Coastal scrub. Drying alkaline flats. 15-800m. Blooms Jan-Apr(May). Not Expected No suitable soils occur in the project site. Stuckenia filiformis ssp. alpina slender-leaved pondweed None/None G5T5/S2S3 2B.2 Marshes and swamps. Shallow, clear water of lakes and drainage channels. 300-2150m. Blooms May-Jul. Not Expected No suitable habitat nor elevation occurs in the project site Suaeda californica California seablite FE/None G1/S1 1B.1 Marshes and swamps. Margins of coastal salt marshes. 0-15m. Blooms Jul-Oct. Not Expected No suitable habitat occurs in the project site. Trifolium amoenum two-fork clover FE/None G1/S1 1B.1 Coastal bluff scrub, Valley and foothill grassland. Sometimes on serpentine soil, open sunny sites, swales. Most recently cited on roadside and eroding cliff face. 5-415m. Blooms Apr- Jun. Low Potential Grassland habitat is present; however, it is non-native, and not a natural community. One historical occurrence has been recorded in 1950, approximately 3 miles north of the project site (CDFW 2021a). ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 163 Packet Page 593 of 792 Page 5-6 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur Rationale Trifolium buckwestiorum Santa Cruz clover None/None G2/S2 1B.1 Broadleafed upland forest, Cismontane woodland, Coastal prairie. Moist grassland. Gravelly margins. 105-610m. Blooms Apr-Oct. Low Potential Suitable woodland habitat is present; however, no occurrences have been recorded within five miles of the project site (CDFW 2021a). Trifolium hydrophilum saline clover None/None G2/S2 1B.2 Marshes and swamps, Valley and foothill grassland, Vernal pools. Mesic, alkaline sites. 0- 300m. Blooms Apr-Jun. Not Expected No alkaline soils or suitable natural vegetation communities occur within the project site. No occurrences have been recorded within five (CDFW 2021a). Regional Vicinity refers to within a 9-quad search radius of site. FE = Federally Endangered FT = Federally Threatened FC = Federal Candidate Species SE = State Endangered ST = State Threatened SC = State Candidate SR = State Rare CRPR (CNPS California Rare Plant Rank): 1A=Presumed Extinct in California 1B=Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere 2A=Plants presumed extirpated in California, but more common elsewhere 2B=Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere CRPR Threat Code Extension: .1=Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat) .2=Fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened) .3=Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened) ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 164 Packet Page 594 of 792 Page 5-7 Special-Status Animal Species in the Regional Vicinity (Nine Quad) of the Project Site Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur Rationale Invertebrates Euphydryas editha bayensis Bay checkerspot butterfly FT/None G5T1/S1 Restricted to native grasslands on outcrops of serpentine soil in the vicinity of San Francisco Bay. Plantago erecta is the primary host plant; Orthocarpus densiflorus & O. purpurscens are the secondary host plants. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site Speyeria zerene myrtleae Myrtle's silverspot butterfly FE/None G5T1/S1 Restricted to the foggy, coastal dunes/hills of the Point Reyes peninsula; extirpated from coastal San Mateo County. Larval foodplant thought to be Viola adunca. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site, species has been extirpated from its range in the vicinity of the project site. Fish Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 8 steelhead - central California coast DPS FT/None G5T2T3Q/S2S3 DPS includes all naturally spawned populations of steelhead (and their progeny) in streams from the Russian River to Aptos Creek, Santa Cruz County, California (inclusive). Also includes the drainages of San Francisco and San Pablo Bays. High Potential Steelhead are known in the San Francisquito Creek watershed and have been observed in Los Trancos Creek (Leidy et al. 2005). Spirinchus thaleichthys longfin smelt FC/ST G5/S1 Euryhaline, nektonic & anadromous. Found in open waters of estuaries, mostly in middle or bottom of water column. Prefer salinities of 15-30 ppt, but can be found in completely freshwater to almost pure seawater. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site Amphibians Aneides niger Santa Cruz black salamander None/None G3/S3 SSC Mixed deciduous and coniferous woodlands and coastal grasslands in San Mateo, Santa Cruz, and Santa Clara counties. Adults found under rocks, talus, and damp woody debris. Moderate Potential Suitable habitat is present, there are five records within five miles of the project site Dicamptodon ensatus California giant salamander None/None G3/S2S3 SSC Known from wet coastal forests near streams and seeps from Mendocino County south to Monterey County, and east to Napa County. Aquatic larvae found in cold, clear streams, occasionally in lakes and ponds. Adults known from wet forests under rocks and logs near streams and lakes. Moderate Potential Suitable habitat is present, there are five records within five miles of the project site Rana boylii foothill yellow- legged frog None/SE G3/S3 SSC Partly-shaded, shallow streams and riffles with a rocky substrate in a variety of habitats. Needs at least some cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying. Needs at least 15 weeks to attain metamorphosis. Not Expected Suitable habitat is present however, the species is presumed to be extirpated from the region. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 165 Packet Page 595 of 792 Page 5-8 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur Rationale Rana draytonii California red- legged frog FT/None G2G3/S2S3 SSC Lowlands and foothills in or near permanent sources of deep water with dense, shrubby or emergent riparian vegetation. Requires 11-20 weeks of permanent water for larval development. Must have access to estivation habitat. Moderate Potential Suitable foraging habitat is present with in the project site. There are 10 recorded occurrences within five miles of the project site (CDFW 2021a). The nearest breeding habitat is approximately 2.6 miles north in San Francisquito Creek. Reptiles Emys marmorata western pond turtle None/None G3G4/S3 SSC A thoroughly aquatic turtle of ponds, marshes, rivers, streams and irrigation ditches, usually with aquatic vegetation, below 6000 ft elevation. Needs basking sites and suitable (sandy banks or grassy open fields) upland habitat up to 0.5 km from water for egg-laying. Moderate Potential Suitable habitat for breeding and foraging is present within the project site. There are three records within five miles of the project site, closest record is approximately 2.9 miles north in San Francisquito Creek. Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia San Francisco gartersnake FE/SE G5T2Q/S2 FP Vicinity of freshwater marshes, ponds and slow-moving streams in San Mateo County and extreme northern Santa Cruz County. Prefers dense cover and water depths of at least one foot. Upland areas near water are also very important. Moderate Potential Suitable habitat is present and there are 13 recorded occurrences within five miles of the project site (CDFW 2021a). Birds Asio flammeus short-eared owl None/None G5/S3 SSC Found in swamp lands, both fresh and salt; lowland meadows; irrigated alfalfa fields. Tule patches/tall grass needed for nesting/daytime seclusion. Nests on dry ground in depression concealed in vegetation. Not Expected Suitable habitat is not present and there are no recorded occurrences within five miles of the project site (CDFW 2021a). Asio otus long-eared owl None/None G5/S3? SSC Riparian bottomlands grown to tall willows and cottonwoods; also, belts of live oak paralleling stream courses. Require adjacent open land, productive of mice and the presence of old nests of crows, hawks, or magpies for breeding. Low Potential Suitable habitat is present. One historic occurrence from 1987 has been recorded within 5 miles of the project site, approximately 4 miles to the southeast (CDFW 2021a). ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 166 Packet Page 596 of 792 Page 5-9 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur Rationale Athene cunicularia burrowing owl None/None G4/S3 SSC Open, dry annual or perennial grasslands, deserts, and scrublands characterized by low- growing vegetation. Subterranean nester, dependent upon burrowing mammals, most notably, the California ground squirrel. Not Expected No suitable habitat is present within the project site. Grassland present on the site is routinely mowed and disturbed. The only recorded occurrence within 5 miles is from 2017, approximately 2.8 miles south of the project site (CDFW 2021a). Brachyramphus marmoratus marbled murrelet FT/SE G3/S2 Feeds near-shore; nests inland along coast from Eureka to Oregon border and from Half Moon Bay to Santa Cruz. Nests in old-growth redwood-dominated forests, up to six miles inland, often in Douglas-fir. Not Expected No suitable habitat present and the project site is 11 miles inland, outside of the known species range. Charadrius nivosus nivosus western snowy plover FT/None G3T3/S2 SSC Sandy beaches, salt pond levees & shores of large alkali lakes. Needs sandy, gravelly or friable soils for nesting. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site. Circus hudsonius northern harrier None/None G5/S3 SSC Coastal salt & freshwater marsh. Nest and forage in grasslands, from salt grass in desert sink to mountain cienagas. Nests on ground in shrubby vegetation, usually at marsh edge; nest built of a large mound of sticks in wet areas. Not Expected Although suitable foraging habitat is present within the project site, no nearby marshes are known and no occurrences have been recorded within five miles of the project site (CDFW 2021a). Coturnicops noveboracensis yellow rail None/None G4/S1S2 SSC Summer resident in eastern Sierra Nevada in Mono County. Small numbers winter regularly in the San Francisco Bay estuary. Not Expected Outside of usual species range and no suitable habitat present within the project site. Elanus leucurus white-tailed kite None/None G5/S3S4 FP Rolling foothills and valley margins with scattered oaks & river bottomlands or marshes next to deciduous woodland. Open grasslands, meadows, or marshes for foraging close to isolated, dense-topped trees for nesting and perching. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site. Falco peregrinus anatum American peregrine falcon FD/SD G4T4/S3S4 FP Near wetlands, lakes, rivers, or other water; on cliffs, banks, dunes, mounds; also, human- made structures. Nest consists of a scrape or a depression or ledge in an open site. Not Expected No suitable nesting habitat present within the project site. Geothlypis trichas sinuosa saltmarsh common yellowthroat None/None G5T3/S3 SSC Resident of the San Francisco Bay region, in fresh and salt water marshes. Requires thick, continuous cover down to water surface for foraging; tall grasses, tule patches, willows for nesting. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 167 Packet Page 597 of 792 Page 5-10 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur Rationale Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle FD/SE G5/S3 FP Ocean shore, lake margins, and rivers for both nesting and wintering. Most nests within 1 mile of water. Nests in large, old-growth, or dominant live tree with open branches, especially ponderosa pine. Roosts communally in winter. Not Expected No suitable nesting or foraging habitat present within the project site. Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus California black rail None/ST G3G4T1/S1 FP Inhabits freshwater marshes, wet meadows and shallow margins of saltwater marshes bordering larger bays. Needs water depths of about 1 inch that do not fluctuate during the year and dense vegetation for nesting habitat. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site Melospiza melodia pusillula Alameda song sparrow None/None G5T2?/S2S3 SSC Resident of salt marshes bordering south arm of San Francisco Bay. Inhabits Salicornia marshes; nests low in Grindelia bushes (high enough to escape high tides) and in Salicornia. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site. Rallus obsoletus obsoletus California Ridgway's rail FE/SE G3T1/S1 FP Salt water and brackish marshes traversed by tidal sloughs in the vicinity of San Francisco Bay. Associated with abundant growths of pickleweed, but feeds away from cover on invertebrates from mud-bottomed sloughs. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site. Rynchops niger black skimmer None/None G5/S2 SSC Nests on gravel bars, low islets, and sandy beaches, in unvegetated sites. Nesting colonies usually less than 200 pairs. . Not Expected No suitable nesting or foraging habitat present within the project site. Sternula antillarum browni California least tern FE/SE G4T2T3Q/S2 FP Nests along the coast from San Francisco Bay south to northern Baja California. Colonial breeder on bare or sparsely vegetated, flat substrates: sand beaches, alkali flats, land fills, or paved areas. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site. Mammals Antrozous pallidus pallid bat None/None G4/S3 SSC Found in a variety of habitats including deserts, grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, and forests. Most common in open, dry habitats with rocky areas for roosting. Roosts in crevices of rock outcrops, caves, mine tunnels, buildings, bridges, and hollows of live and dead trees which must protect bats from high temperatures. Very sensitive to disturbance of roosting sites. Moderate Potential Suitable habitat is present and there are three recorded occurrences within five miles of the project site (CDFW 2021a). Corynorhinus townsendii Townsend's big- eared bat None/None G4/S2 SSC Occurs throughout California in a wide variety of habitats. Most common in mesic sites, typically coniferous or deciduous forests. Roosts in the open, hanging from walls &amp; ceilings in caves, lava tubes, bridges, and buildings. This species is extremely sensitive to human disturbance. Moderate Potential Suitable habitat is present and there are 13 recorded occurrences within five miles of the project site (CDFW 2021a). Neotoma fuscipes annectens San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat None/None G5T2T3/S2S3 SSC Typically found in forest habitats with moderate to dense understory. Can occur in chaparral, riparian woodlands, and coniferous forests, particularly redwood. Builds middens out of grasses, leaves, and woody debris. This subspecies is found only in the San Francisco Bay region. Present Nests were observed during reconnaissance surveys. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 168 Packet Page 598 of 792 Page 5-11 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur Rationale Reithrodontomys raviventris salt-marsh harvest mouse FE/SE G1G2/S1S2 FP Only in the saline emergent wetlands of San Francisco Bay and its tributaries. Pickleweed is primary habitat but may occur in other marsh vegetation types and in adjacent upland areas. Does not burrow; builds loosely organized nests. Requires higher areas for flood escape. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site. Sorex vagrans halicoetes salt-marsh wandering shrew None/None G5T1/S1 SSC Salt marshes of the south arm of San Francisco Bay. Medium high marsh 6-8 ft above sea level where abundant driftwood is scattered among Salicornia. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site. Taxidea taxus American badger None/None G5/S3 SSC Most abundant in drier open stages of most shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats, with friable soils. Needs sufficient food, friable soils and open, uncultivated ground. Preys on burrowing rodents. Digs burrows. Not Expected No suitable habitat present within the project site. Regional Vicinity refers to within a 5-mile search radius of site. FE = Federally Endangered FT = Federally Threatened FC = Federal Candidate Species FS=Federally Sensitive SE = State Endangered ST = State Threatened SC = State Candidate SS=State Sensitive SSC = CDFW Species of Special Concern SFP = State Fully Protected ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 169 Packet Page 599 of 792 Appendix B Arborist Report ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 170 Packet Page 600 of 792 Kielty Arborist Services LLC Certified Arborist WE#0476A P.O. Box 6187 San Mateo, CA 94403 650-515-9783 June 7th, 2021, Revised August 24th, 2021 Innovative Homes, LLC c/o: John Suppes 412 Olive Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94306 Site: 575 Los Trancos Road, Palo Alto CA Dear Innovative Homes, LLC, As requested on Friday May 28th, 2021, Kielty Arborist Services visited the above site to inspect and comment on the trees. Your concerns as to the future health and safety of the trees has prompted this letter. A review of the trees and a tree protection plan will be found within this report. Preliminary site plan A1.1 dated 4/8/21 has been reviewed as a part of this report. Method: All inspections were made from the ground; the trees were not climbed for this inspection. The trees in question were located on an existing topography map provided by you. The trees were then measured for diameter at 54 inches above ground level (DBH or diameter at breast height). The trees were given a condition rating for form and vitality. The trees condition ratings are based on 50 percent vitality and 50 percent form, using the following scale. 1 - 29 Very Poor 30 - 49 Poor 50 - 69 Fair 70 - 89 Good 90 - 100 Excellent The height of the trees was measured using a Nikon Forestry 550 Hypsometer. The spread was paced off. Comments and recommendations for future maintenance are provided. Survey Key: DBH-Diameter at breast height (54” above grade) CON- Condition rating (1-100) HT/SP- Tree height/ canopy spread *indicates neighbor’s trees P-Indicates protected tree by city ordinance R-Indicates proposed tree removal ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 171 Packet Page 601 of 792 575 Los Trancos (2) Survey: Tree# Species DBH CON HT/SP Comments 1P Coast live oak 28.0 65 50/30 Good vigor, good form, near utilities and (Quercus agrifolia) existing driveway. 2P Coast live oak 19.5 60 45/30 Fair vigor, fair form, codominant at 8 feet (Quercus agrifolia) with fair union, suppressed. 3P Coast live oak 39.3 70 45/55 Good vigor, fair form, heavy laterals, (Quercus agrifolia) aesthetically pleasing, recommended to cable and prune heavy leaders. 4P Valley oak 44.1 60 65/50 Fair vigor, fair form, minor dead wood, 10” (Quercus lobata) and 6” dead limbs observed, codominant at 20 feet, heavy lateral limbs, history of limb loss, recommended to removed dead wood. 5P Valley oak 22.4 60 55/35 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed, tall for (Quercus lobata) diameter. 6P Valley oak 39.4 55 60/60 Fair vigor, poor form, codominant at 6 feet, (Quercus lobata) heavy into site, one side of canopy pruned for utilities, bleeding canker on trunk, recommended to treat canker, prune where heavy and cable where possible. 7P Coast live oak 25.5 60 55/35 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed, history of (Quercus agrifolia) limb loss. 8P Valley oak 25.7 65 60/35 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed. (Quercus lobata) 9P Coast live oak 20.4 50 35/35 Fair vigor, poor form, heavily suppressed, (Quercus agrifolia) grows towards street. 10P Coast live oak 35.0 70 60/45 Good vigor, fair form, large 10” dead limb. (Quercus agrifolia) recommended to remove dead limb. 11P Coast live oak 36.9 45 35/50 Good vigor, poor form, grows horizontally. (Quercus agrifolia) recommended to prop and prune if retained. 12P Valley oak 22.5-17.9 65 50/50 Good vigor, fair form, codominant at 2 feet, (Quercus lobata) heavy into site. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 172 Packet Page 602 of 792 575 Los Trancos (3) Survey: Tree# Species DBH CON HT/SP Comments 13P Coast live oak 22.8 45 35/30 Good vigor, poor form, topped for utilities. (Quercus agrifolia) 14 Bay 12.2-12 30 20/12 Poor vigor, poor form, dead leader, decay at (Umbellularia californica) root crown, topped. 15 Coast live oak 10.1 50 30/12 Fair vigor, poor form, topped for line (Quercus agrifolia) clearance. 16P Coast live oak 13.8 50 30/15 Fair vigor, poor form, topped for line (Quercus agrifolia) clearance. 17P Valley oak 48.8 70 65/65 Good vigor, good form, mature. (Quercus lobata) recommended to prune where heavy and to cable codominant leaders. 18P Coast live oak 22.0 70 45/30 Good vigor, fair form. (Quercus agrifolia) 19P Coast live oak 22.6-16.8 65 45/45 Fair vigor, fair form, multi leader at grade, (Quercus agrifolia) 13.6 minor dead wood. 20P Valley oak 29.8 40 50/40 Fair to poor vigor, poor form, codominant at (Quercus lobata) 10 feet, codominant leader is dead, decay at root crown, recommended to expose root crown and inspect, remove dead codominant leader. 21P Valley oak 35.2 70 60/60 Fair vigor, fair form, heavy lateral limbs. (Quercus lobata) 22P Valley oak 26.3 60 60/60 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed, signs of (Quercus lobata) decay at root crown, recommended to expose root crown and inspect. 23P Coast live oak 17.0 65 50/30 Fair vigor, fair form, slight lean into site. (Quercus agrifolia) 24P Coast live oak 17.2 50 25/35 Fair vigor, poor form, suppressed, heavy lean (Quercus agrifolia) well pruned. 25P Coast live oak 37.5 65 60/60 Fair vigor, fair form, codominant at 12 feet. (Quercus agrifolia) recommended to prune and cable. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 173 Packet Page 603 of 792 575 Los Trancos (4) Survey: Tree# Species DBH CON HT/SP Comments 26P Coast live oak 24-10 40 10/40 Good vigor, poor form, grows horizontally, (Quercus agrifolia) suppressed, recommended to prop and prune. 27P Coast live oak 32.1-22 60 60/60 Fair vigor, fair form, codominant at grade. (Quercus agrifolia) recommended to cable and prune codominant leaders. 28 Bay 14.9 50 45/30 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed. (Umbellularia californica) 29 Black walnut 29.6 30 50/45 Poor vigor, poor form, in decline. (Juglans nigra) 30P Coast live oak 19.4 60 50/35 Good vigor, fair form, codominant at 20 feet (Quercus agrifolia) with poor union, recommended to prune and cable. 31 Coast live oak 7.5 50 30/15 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed. (Quercus agrifolia) 32 Black walnut 12.0 60 45/25 Fair vigor, fair form. (Juglans nigra) 33 Bay 8.0 50 30/15 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed. (Umbellularia californica) 34 Bay 9.0 50 30/15 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed. (Umbellularia californica) 35 Bay 10.0 50 45/20 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed. (Umbellularia californica) 36P Coast live oak 24.8 60 55/40 Fair vigor, fair form, heavy lean, on creek (Quercus agrifolia) bank, crown reduction pruning recommended. 37R Red willow 6-3 0 20/12 DEAD. (Salix laevigata) 38P Coast live oak 34.3 70 55/50 Good vigor, fair form. (Quercus agrifolia) ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 174 Packet Page 604 of 792 575 Los Trancos (5) Survey: Tree# Species DBH CON HT/SP Comments 39 Big leaf maple 29.2 30 50/45 Poor vigor, poor form, large leader failure in (Acer macrophyllum) past, in decline. 40 Bay 10-12 55 40/30 Fair vigor, fair form, on creek bank, (Umbellularia californica) codominant at grade. 41 Bay 8-10 55 40/20 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed, on creek (Umbellularia californica) bank. 42 Red willow 16.3 30 30/15 Poor vigor, poor form, heavy decay on trunk, (Salix laevigata) in decline. 43R Olive 42.1 20 30/25 Poor vigor, poor form, in decline, nearly (Olea europaea) dead. 44R Olive 30.2 20 30/25 Poor vigor, poor form, in decline, nearly (Olea europaea) dead. 45R Black walnut 12.6 65 30/25 Good vigor, good form. (Juglans nigra) 46P Coast live oak 33.5 50 60/50 Fair vigor, fair form, decay at root crown, (Quercus agrifolia) recommended to expose root crown and inspect. 47P/R Coast live oak 36.0 0 50/60 DEAD (Quercus agrifolia) 48P Coast live oak 36.0 10 15/15 Fair vigor, poor form, failed tree, stump re (Quercus agrifolia) sprout. 49P Coast live oak 29.8 70 50/40 Good vigor, good form, dense canopy. (Quercus agrifolia) 50*P Coast live oak 30est 80 45/40 Good vigor, good form. (Quercus agrifolia) 51P Coast live oak 16.2 65 30/20 Good vigor, fair form, suppressed. (Quercus agrifolia) 52P Coast live oak 10-8 65 30/20 Good vigor, fai form, suppressed. (Quercus agrifolia) ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 175 Packet Page 605 of 792 575 Los Trancos (6) Survey: Tree# Species DBH CON HT/SP Comments 53 Coast live oak 11.1 50 20/30 Good vigor, poor form, suppressed, leans. (Quercus agrifolia) 54P Coast live oak 16.2 60 35/30 Good vigor, poor form, suppressed, leans. (Quercus agrifolia) 55 Bay 66.0 40 70/40 Fair to poor vigor, poor form, multi leader at (Umbellularia californica) 5 feet, ganoderma fungus at base, recommended to prune out dead wood, and test for extent of decay. 56 Bay 10-6-9-7-10-4-4-11 50 50/30 Fair vigor, poor form, multi at base. (Umbellularia californica) 57 Bay 13-12-6 50 45/30 Fair vigor, poor form, multi at base. (Umbellularia californica) 58 Bay 6.0 40 30/15 Fair vigor, poor form, suppressed. (Umbellularia californica) 59 Bay 28.6 50 60/30 Fair vigor, fair form, codominant at 8 feet. (Umbellularia californica) 60 Redwood 8.1 80 25/10 Good vigor, good form, recently planted. (Sequoia sempervirens) 61 Redwood 6.4 80 18/10 Good vigor, good form, recently planted. (Sequoia sempervirens) 62 Redwood 10.3 80 18/10 Good vigor, good form, recently planted. (Sequoia sempervirens) 63 Redwood 5.1 80 18/10 Good vigor, good form, recently planted. (Sequoia sempervirens) 64 Redwood 5.5 80 18/10 Good vigor, good form, recently planted. (Sequoia sempervirens) 65 Redwood 9.2 80 18/10 Good vigor, good form, recently planted. (Sequoia sempervirens) 66 Redwood 8.3 80 18/10 Good vigor, good form, recently planted. (Sequoia sempervirens) ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 176 Packet Page 606 of 792 575 Los Trancos (7) Survey: Tree# Species DBH CON HT/SP Comments 67 Redwood 6.7 80 18/10 Good vigor, good form, recently planted. (Sequoia sempervirens) 68 Redwood 9.9 80 18/10 Good vigor, good form, recently planted. (Sequoia sempervirens) 69 Redwood 5.5 80 18/10 Good vigor, good form, recently planted. (Sequoia sempervirens) 70 Bay 7-25-10-13-18-30-17 50 20/35 Fair to poor vigor, poor form, multi leader at (Umbellularia californica) grade. 71 White alder 24.2 45 60/25 Fair vigor, poor form, suppressed, leans (Alnus rhombifolia) against bay tree. 72 Coast live oak 10.1 60 45/25 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed. (Quercus agrifolia) 73 Coast live oak 8.6 60 45/25 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed. (Quercus agrifolia) 74 Coast live oak 5.1 50 18/12 Fair vigor, poor form, suppressed. (Quercus agrifolia) 75 Coast live oak 5.3 50 15/12 Fair vigor, poor form, suppressed. (Quercus agrifolia) 76 Elderberry 8-7 20 25/20 Poor vigor, poor form. (Sambucus nigra) 77 Black walnut 5.0 60 40/15 Good vigor, fair form. (Juglans nigra) 78 Bay 13-14-11 50 45/35 Fair vigor, poor form, multi leader at grade. (Umbellularia californica) 79 Bay 8.0 30 20/10 Fair vigor, poor form, topped for utilities, (Umbellularia californica) next to driveway. 80P Coast live oak 25.8 45 25/35 Good vigor, poor form, topped for utilities, (Quercus agrifolia) next to driveway. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 177 Packet Page 607 of 792 575 Los Trancos (8) Survey: Tree# Species DBH CON HT/SP Comments 81P Coast live oak 13.3 45 20/15 Fair vigor, poor form, topped for utilities. (Quercus agrifolia) 82 Buckeye 8.0 45 18/12 Fair vigor, poor form, under utilities, poor (Aesculus californica) location, grows towards road. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 178 Packet Page 608 of 792 575 Los Trancos (9) Showing tree locations ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 179 Packet Page 609 of 792 575 Los Trancos (10) Non-protected trees to be removed: Red willow tree #37 is dead and should be removed as soon as possible as it is hazardous and a fire hazard for the site. Olive trees #43 and #44 are in very poor condition. These trees are expected to be dead within the next few months. The trees are within the proposed driveway area. Tree removal and replacement is recommended. Black walnut tree #45 is in fair condition. This tree is also proposed for removal to facilitate the proposed construction of the driveway. Showing nearly dead olive trees #43 and #44 Protected trees proposed for removal: Coast live oak tree #47 is dead. The tree should be removed as soon as possible as it is a fire hazard for the site. Showing oak tree #47 ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 180 Packet Page 610 of 792 575 Los Trancos (11) Tree replacement measures: The tree canopy replacement standard as seen in Palo Alto’s Tree Technical Manual was used to establish the number of replacement trees required on site. Below is a list of the canopy distance for each tree to be removed followed by the number of replacement trees required to fulfill city requirements. Red Willow #37=12’ wide canopy Replacement trees= The tree is dead. No replacement trees are recommended. Olive tree #43= 25’ wide canopy Replacement trees= Three 24” box size trees or two 36” box trees Olive tree #44= 25’ wide canopy Replacement trees= Three 24” box size trees or two 36” box trees Black walnut tree #45= 25’ wide canopy Replacement trees= Three 24” box size trees or two 36” box trees Coast live oak tree #47= 60’ wide canopy Replacement trees= The tree is dead. No replacement trees are recommended. Showing tree canopy replacement standard used ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 181 Packet Page 611 of 792 575 Los Trancos (12) Summary of retained trees: Many large mature native oak trees were observed on site. Between the home and the proposed building pad are where the larger oak trees exist. These trees have grown in a grove like fashion with trees developing leans and heavy lateral limbs. Crown reduction pruning and cabling of codominant leaders is recommended for many of the larger oak trees on site. These recommendations can be seen in bold within the survey portion of the report. Oak trees #20, 22, and 46 are recommended to have their root crowns exposed and inspected as signs of possible root rot disease were observed. A large ganoderma fungus and dead wood was observed on the root crown of bay tree #55. A drill test and root crown is exposure is recommended to explore the extent of decay at the root crown. A general crown cleaning to remove dead wood is recommended for the oak trees to be retained as little to no tree Showing large oaks on site maintenance has taken place on the site. The retained oak trees are recommended to be annually inspected by a Certified Arborist for any needed work. The area underneath the dripline of the retained oak trees is recommended to maintain a dry landscape. Impacts/Recommendations: Preliminary site plan A1.1 was reviewed for writing this section of the report. The retained trees are all a fair distance away from the proposed work on site. Oak tree #3 is shown at 13 feet from the proposed driveway. Oak tree #4 is shown at 21 feet from the secondary driveway. The driveway is shown on a sloped area. It is recommended to use a retaining wall to reduce any grading needed on the tree side of the secondary driveway and main driveway when near oak trees #3 and #4. This will help to reduce impacts as much as possible due to the grading that would be needed if the driveway was to be built without a retaining wall. Excavation for the retaining wall is recommended to be done by hand while under the Project Arborist supervision when working within 10 times the diameter of the protected trees on site. Roots encountered will need to be cleanly cut. Cut root ends will need to be kept moist by covering the cut root ends with layers of wetted down burlap. A soaker hose is recommended to be installed at the retaining wall cut once the retaining wall has been built. The soaker hose is recommended to be turned on every week during the first dry season following the retaining wall build. After one year the soaker hose shall be permanently suspended. The two oak trees will need to be inspected monthly during the required monthly inspections during the proposed construction. Once construction has been completed, the trees are recommended to be inspected annually in the spring. Impacts are expected to be minor. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 182 Packet Page 612 of 792 575 Los Trancos (13) Coast Live Oak tree #3 is the closest tree to the proposed driveway. At 10 times the tree’s diameter the tree protection zone radius is 32.75 feet or a 3370 square foot area. The proposed driveway and retaining wall overlaps this area by 838 square feet. The tree’s root zone will be encroached by 24.9% as shown in the provided diagram below. This is within Best Management Practices acceptable threshold for a species with a good tolerance to construction impacts and in good condition (or 25%). The recommendations stated in the last paragraph will help to keep impacts at a minor level. This tree is also recommended to be deep water fertilized anytime between fall and early spring. Showing percentage of root zone impacted for Oak tree #3 The proposed driveway follows the same direction of the existing driveway near oak trees #1 and #2. Excavation for the new driveway when within the dripline of oak trees #1 and #2 shall not exceed more than 8” under existing grade. The finished grade of the driveway near these two trees is recommended to be at the existing grade or higher up. This will help to reduce impacts to the trees. Roots encountered measuring 2” in diameter or larger will need to be retained within the base rock section by packing base rock around roots. The existing driveway near these trees my have helped to reduce root growth in the area of proposed work through compaction. All excavation underneath the dripline of a protected tree will need to be carried out by hand while under the direct supervision of the Project Arborist. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 183 Packet Page 613 of 792 575 Los Trancos (14) A building wall is located at 11 feet from oak tree #30. Hand excavation under the Project Arborist supervision is recommended when working within 10 times the tree’s diameter. Encountered roots must be cleanly cut using a hand saw or loppers. Once the wall has been built a soaker hose is recommended to be installed at the wall cut. The soaker hose is recommended to be turned on every week during the first dry season following the wall build. After one year the soaker hose shall be permanently suspended. The oak tree will need to be inspected monthly during the required monthly inspections during the proposed construction. Once construction has been completed, the tree is recommended to be inspected annually in the spring. Tree Protection Plan: Tree protection zones should be established and maintained throughout the entire length of the project. Fencing for the protection zones should be 6-foot-tall metal chain link type supported by 2-inch diameter metal poles pounded into the ground to a depth of no less than 2 feet. The support poles should be spaced no more than 10 feet apart on center. The location for the protection fencing for the protected trees on site should be placed at the tree driplines where possible (type 1 tree protection fencing). All other non-protected trees are recommended to be protected by fencing placed at the dripline as well. No equipment or materials should be stored or cleaned inside protection zones. Signs should be placed on fencing signifying “Tree Protection Zone - Keep Out”. If fencing needs to be reduced for access or any other reasons, the non-protected areas must be protected by a landscape buffer. All tree protection and inspection schedule measures, design recommendations, watering and construction scheduling shall be implemented in full by the owner and contractor. Showing type 1 tree protection fencing ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 184 Packet Page 614 of 792 575 Los Trancos (15) Landscape Buffer Where tree protection does not cover the entire root zone of the trees at the dripline or when a smaller tree protection zone is needed for access, a landscape buffer consisting of wood chips spread to a depth of six inches with plywood or steel plates placed on top will be placed where foot traffic is expected to be heavy. The landscape buffer will help to reduce compaction to the unprotected root zone. If plywood is used the pieces of plywood shall be attached in a way that minimizes movement. Tree Pruning During construction any Pruning will be supervised by the site arborist and must stay underneath 25% of the tree total foliage. Root Cutting Any roots to be cut should be monitored and documented. Large roots or large masses of roots to be cut should be inspected by the site arborist. The site arborist may recommend irrigation or fertilizing at that time. Cut all roots clean with a saw or loppers. Roots to be left exposed for a period of time should be covered with layers of burlap and kept moist. Roots to be cut measuring larger than 1.5” in diameter shall be shown to the Project Arborist before being cut. Trenching and Excavation Trenching for irrigation, electrical, drainage or any other reason, should be located outside of the trees calculated root zone of 10 times the tree diameters when possible. If not possible, trenching shall be hand dug when beneath the dripline of desired trees. Any excavation underneath the dripline of a protected tree will need to be supervised by the Project Arborist. Hand digging and careful placement of pipes below or beside protected roots will dramatically reduce root loss, thus reducing trauma to desired trees. Trenches should be back filled as soon as possible using native materials and compacted to near original levels. Trenches to be left open with exposed roots shall be covered with burlap and kept moist. Plywood laid over the trench will help to protect roots below. Roots retained within trenches are recommended to be wrapped in layers of wetted down burlap to avoid root desiccation. Irrigation Normal irrigation should be maintained throughout the entire length of the project for the imported trees. Irrigation should consist of surface flooding, with enough water to wet the entire root zone every other week during the dry season. The native trees on site (oaks, bays, and buckeyes) shall only be irrigated during the months of May and September to combat a prolonged drought period, or if their root zones are traumatized. Grading All existing grades underneath the dripline of a protected tree shall remain as is where possible. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 185 Packet Page 615 of 792 575 Los Trancos (16) Inspections The site will be inspected after the tree protection measures are installed and before the start of construction. Monthly inspections are mandatory for a site such as this. Inspections will be carried out during the first week of each month. The inspections will be documented with inspection letters being provided to the owner, contractor, and City Arborist. Other inspections will be carried out on an as needed basis. The monthly inspections are required by the city of Palo Alto as a condition of approval. It is the contractor’s responsibility to notify the site arborist when construction is to start, and whenever there is to be work performed within the dripline of a protected tree on site at least 48 hours in advance. During the site visits the site arborist will offer mitigation measures specific to the work completed. Kielty Arborist Services can be reached at 650-515-9783 or 650-532-4418, or by email at kkarbor0476@yahoo.com. A final inspection letter will also be required by the city before final occupancy. Further information about tree protection can be found in the Tree Technical Manual provided by the city of Palo Alto. This information should be kept on site at all times. The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Kevin R. Kielty Certified Arborist WE#0476A ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 186 Packet Page 616 of 792 575 Los Trancos (17) Kielty Arborist Services P.O. Box 6187 San Mateo, CA 94403 650-515-9783 ARBORIST DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Arborists are tree specialists who use their education, knowledge, training and experience to examine trees, recommend measures to enhance the beauty and health of trees, and attempt to reduce the risk of living near trees. Clients may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations of the arborist, or seek additional advice. Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural failure of a tree. Trees are living organisms that fail in ways we do not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees and below ground. Arborists cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe under all circumstances, or for a specified period of time. Likewise, remedial treatments, like a medicine, cannot be guaranteed. Treatment, pruning, and removal of trees may involve considerations beyond the scope of the arborist’s services such as property boundaries, property ownership, site lines, disputes between neighbors, landlord-tenant matters, etc. Arborists cannot take such issues into account unless complete and accurate information is given to the arborist. The person hiring the arborist accepts full responsibility for authorizing the recommended treatment or remedial measures. Trees can be managed, but they cannot be controlled. To live near a tree is to accept some degree of risk. The only way to eliminate all risks is to eliminate all trees. Arborist: ____________________________ Kevin R. Kielty Date: August 24th, 2021 ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 187 Packet Page 617 of 792 Appendix C Geotechnical Engineering Study ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 188 Packet Page 618 of 792     April 9, 2021 File No.:  304309‐001    Mr. John Suppes  Clarum Homes  P.O. Box 60970  Palo Alto, CA 94306    PROJECT: PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE and ADU  575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD  PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA    SUBJECT: Geotechnical Engineering Study    REF.: Revised Proposal to Perform a Geotechnical Engineering Study and  Liquefaction Analysis, Proposed Single Family Residence and ADU, 575  Los Trancos Road, Palo Alto, California, by Earth Systems Pacific, dated  November 20, 2020, revised December 4, 2020.   Soil Investigation, Proposed Single‐Family Residence, Los Trancos  Property (APN 182‐46‐003), Palo Alto, California, by Harding Lawson  Associates, dated January 26, 1990.    Dear Mr. Suppes:  In accordance with your authorization of the above referenced proposal, this geotechnical  engineering study has been prepared by Earth Systems Pacific (Earth Systems) for use in the  development of plans and specifications for the proposed single family residence and accessory  dwelling unit (ADU) in Palo Alto, California.  Preliminary geotechnical recommendations for site  preparation and grading; foundations; slabs‐on‐grade; exterior flatwork; swimming pool; utility  trench backfill; site drainage and finish improvements; and observation and testing are presented  herein.    We appreciate the opportunity to have provided services for this project and look forward to  working with you again in the future.  Please do not hesitate to contact this office if there are any  questions concerning this report.    Sincerely,   Earth Systems Pacific      Phillip Penrose  Bill Zehrbach, GE 926  Staff Engineer  Principal Engineer  Doc. No.: 2104‐004.SER/kt  ii  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 189 Packet Page 619 of 792   TABLE OF CONTENTS             Page  1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1  Site Setting ........................................................................................................... 1  Site Description .................................................................................................... 1  Planned Development .......................................................................................... 1  Scope of Services .................................................................................................. 1  2.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING .......................................................................................... 2  3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING .......................................... 3  Previous Geotechnical Studies ............................................................................. 3  Subsurface Exploration (Current) ......................................................................... 3  Subsurface Profile ................................................................................................ 4  Laboratory Testing ............................................................................................... 4  4.0 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................ 5  Subsurface Soil Classification ............................................................................... 5  Seismic Design Parameters ................................................................................... 5  Static Settlement .................................................................................................. 5  Liquefaction .......................................................................................................... 5  5.0 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................. 7  Site Suitability ....................................................................................................... 7  Soil Expansion Potential ....................................................................................... 7  Foundations ......................................................................................................... 7  Site Preparation and Grading ............................................................................... 7  Groundwater ........................................................................................................ 7  Seismicity ............................................................................................................. 8  6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................... 8  Site Preparation and Grading ............................................................................... 8  Foundations ......................................................................................................... 10  Interior Slab‐on‐Grade Construction .................................................................... 11  Exterior Flatwork .................................................................................................. 12  Swimming Pool ..................................................................................................... 13  Utility Trench Backfills .......................................................................................... 13  Management of Site Drainage and Finish Improvements .................................... 14  Geotechnical Observation and Testing ................................................................. 15  7.0 CLOSURE .......................................................................................................... 16              iii  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 190 Packet Page 620 of 792 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)  FIGURES  Figure 1 – Site Location Map  Figure 2 – Site Plan  APPENDIX A  Boring Logs   Harding Lawson Associates   1990  APPENDIX B  Logs of Test Borings  Earth Systems Pacific  2021  APPENDIX C  Summary of Laboratory Test Results  APPENDIX D  Liquefaction Analysis  Dry Sand Settlement  iv  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 191 Packet Page 621 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 1 2104‐004.SER  1.0 INTRODUCTION  Site Setting  The subject property is an irregular shaped, 5.47‐acre parcel located at 575 Los Trancos Road in  Palo Alto, California (APN 182‐46‐012).  The site has a latitude of 37.3666°N and a longitude of  122.2012°W.  The general location of the site is shown on the Site Location Map (Figure 1).    Site Description  The subject property is located on the west side of Los Trancos Road, about a half mile south of  the intersection of Los Trancos Road and Alpine Road.  The property is bounded by Los Trancos  Road to the east, Los Trancos Creek and Valley Oak Street to the west, an existing residence to  the north and undeveloped land to the south.      The property is currently undeveloped.  The center of the parcel is covered with grasses and the  property borders are covered by trees and dense brush.  Los Trancos Creek runs along the  western edge of the property.  An existing gravel road starts at the northeastern corner of the  property off Los Trancos Road and grants access to the property and the neighboring property to  the north.  The center of the lot, where the proposed developments lie, is mostly flat.  The lot  slopes towards the creek on the west side and slopes upwards towards Los Trancos Road on the  east side.    Planned Development  We understand that you plan to construct a new residence in approximately the center of the  parcel.  The proposed ADU is expected to be constructed on the southern portion of the parcel  and the swimming pool is proposed on the southwestern portion of the parcel.  See Figure 2, Site  Plan.  Based on the preliminary plans by LNAI Architecture (dated February 10, 2021), it is our  understanding that the new residence will be a two‐story building with a partial second story.    Scope of Services  The scope of work for the geotechnical engineering study included a general site reconnaissance,  evaluation of the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions from a geotechnical engineering  standpoint by drilling borings and laboratory testing of selected samples, engineering analysis of  the collected data, and preparation of this report.  The analysis and subsequent  recommendations were based on our understanding of the proposed development at the subject  site.    ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 192 Packet Page 622 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 2 2104‐004.SER  The report and recommendations are intended to comply with the considerations of Section  1803 of the California Building Code (CBC), 2019 Edition, and common geotechnical engineering  practice in this area at this time under similar conditions.  The tests were performed in general  conformance with the standards noted, as modified by common geotechnical practice in this area  at this time under similar conditions.    Preliminary geotechnical recommendations for site preparation and grading, foundations, slabs‐ on‐grade, exterior flatwork, swimming pool, utility trench backfill, site drainage and finish  improvements, and geotechnical observation and testing are presented to guide the  development of project plans and specifications.  It is our intent that this report be used by the  client to form the geotechnical basis of the design of the project as described herein, and in the  preparation of plans and specifications.    Detailed evaluation of the site geology and potential geologic hazards, and analyses of the soil  for mold or other microbial content, asbestos, percolation rates, corrosion potential,  radioisotopes, hydrocarbons, or other chemical properties are beyond the scope of this report.   This report also does not address issues in the domain of contractors such as, but not limited to,  site safety, loss of volume due to stripping of the site, shrinkage of soils during compaction,  excavatability, shoring, temporary slope angles, and construction means and methods.  Ancillary  features such as swimming pools, temporary access roads, fences, light poles, and non‐structural  fills are not within our scope and are also not addressed.    To verify that pertinent issues have been addressed and to aid in conformance with the intent of  this report, it is requested that final grading and foundation plans be submitted to this office for  review.  In the event that there are any changes in the nature, design, or locations of  improvements, or if any assumptions used in the preparation of this report prove to be incorrect,  the conclusions and recommendations contained herein should not be considered valid unless  the changes are reviewed, and the conclusions of this report are verified or modified in writing  by the Geotechnical Engineer.  The criteria presented in this report are considered preliminary  until such time as they are verified or modified in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer in the  field during construction.    2.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING  According to the Geologic Map of the Palo Alto 30’ x 60’ Quadrangle, California (Brabb et. al,  2000), the site is mapped as being underlain by Pleistocene older alluvial fan deposits (Qpoaf).   The site is located in a liquefaction hazards zone as delineated by the State of California and the  County of Santa Clara.  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 193 Packet Page 623 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 3 2104‐004.SER  The entire San Francisco Bay Area is considered to be an active seismic region due to the presence  of several active faults.  Three northwest‐trending major earthquake faults that are responsible  for the majority of the movement on the San Andreas fault system extend through the Bay Area.   They include the San Andreas fault, the Hayward fault and the Calaveras fault, which are  respectively located approximately 0.4 miles to the southwest, 19.3 miles to the northeast and  22.4 miles to the northeast.  The Monte Vista‐Shannon fault is located approximately 1.4 miles  northeast of the site.  Using information from recent earthquakes, improved mapping of active  faults, and a new model for estimating earthquake probabilities, the 2014 Working Group on  California Earthquake Probabilities updated the 30 year earthquake forecast for California.  They  concluded that there is a 72 percent probability (or likelihood) of at least one earthquake of  magnitude 6.7 greater striking somewhere in the San Francisco Bay region before 2043.  A  summary of the significant faults in the near vicinity of the site are listed below.    Major Active Faults    Fault Distance from Site  (miles)  Probability of  Mw≥6.7 within 30  Years1  San Andreas 0.4 (SW) 6%  Monte‐Vista Shannon 1.9 (NE) 1%  Hayward 19.3 (NE) 21%  Calaveras 22.4 (NE) 7%  1 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 2015    3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING  Previous Geotechnical Studies  Harding Lawson Associates prepared a Soil Investigation for the subject lot dated January 26,  1990.  Their investigation included the drilling of 5 exploratory borings on the lot at the  approximate locations indicated on Figure 2, Site Plan.  The logs of these borings are presented  in Appendix A.     Subsurface Exploration (Current)  The subsurface exploration for this study consisted of drilling two exploratory borings at the site  on February 23, 2021.  The approximate locations of the test borings are shown on (Figure 2).    The borings were advanced to depths of 34 feet below ground surface (bgs).  The drilling process  consisted of using a truck‐mounted drilling rig equipped with 8‐inch diameter hollow stem  augers.  Once reaching the desired depth, a standard Mod‐Cal or SPT sampler, connected to steel  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 194 Packet Page 624 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 4 2104‐004.SER  rods was lowered into the hole.  The samplers were driven into undisturbed ground with a 140‐ pound, safety hammer falling about 30 inches per drop.  The samplers were driven up to 18  inches and the hammer blows required to drive every six inches of the samplers were recorded  and are presented on the boring logs.  The number of blows required to drive the final 12 inches  of the sampler into the undisturbed ground were used as Penetration Resistance and this was  used to interpret soil consistency/density.  The borings were then backfilled with lean cement  grout.  The boring logs show soil description including: color, major and minor components, USCS  classification, changes in soil conditions with depth, moisture content, consistency/density,  plasticity, sampler type, and sampling depths and laboratory test results.  Copies of the logs of  boring drilled for this investigation are presented in Appendix B.    Soils encountered in the borings were logged in general accordance with the Unified Soil  Classification System.  An Earth Systems engineer prepared the logs and retained samples for  laboratory testing.      Subsurface Profile  The borings drilled at the site revealed the presence of loose to very dense sand with variable  percentages of clay and gravel.  This is consistent with the geological mapping by Brabb et  al.(2000).  In Boring B‐1, the upper 5 feet consisted of medium dense well graded sand with  gravel.  Below the well‐graded sand, a clayey sand layer with variable percentages of gravel was  encountered and extended to the bottom of the boring at 34 feet bgs.  Some cobbles were  encountered in the boring at 7 feet bgs.  In Boring B‐2, loose clayey sand with gravel was  encountered at the surface and extended to 17 feet bgs.  The sand became denser at  approximately 7 feet bgs.  At 17 feet bgs, a medium dense, well graded sand with clay and gravel  layer was encountered.  The clay content increased at 23 feet and decreased again at 28 feet bgs  to well graded sand with clay and gravel, which extended to the bottom of the boring at 34 feet  bgs.       Groundwater was encountered at 17 to 18 feet bgs in the borings drilled at the site to the  maximum depth of exploration of 34 feet bgs.    Laboratory Testing  Five liner samples were tested to measure moisture content and dry density (ASTM D 2216‐17  and D 2937‐17), and four samples were tested to determine the percentage of material passing  the minus #200 sieve (ASTM D 1140‐17).  Copies of the laboratory test results are included in  Appendix C.    ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 195 Packet Page 625 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 5 2104‐004.SER  4.0 DATA ANALYSIS  Subsurface Soil Classification  Based on the subsurface data collected as a part of our subsurface exploration and our review of  the published geologic literature, the site is assigned to Site Class C (very dense soil and soft rock)  as defined by Table 20.3‐1 of the ASCE 7‐16.    Seismic Design Parameters  The following seismic design parameters represent the general procedure as outlined in Section  1613 of the CBC and in ASCE 7.  The values determined below are based on the 2009 National  Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) maps and were obtained using the United States  Geological Survey’s Design Maps Web Application.    Summary of Seismic Parameters ‐ CBC 2019  (Site Coordinates 37.3859°N, 122.1399°W)                              Static Settlement  Based on our understanding of the proposed development and because the building loads are  anticipated to be fairly light, anticipated static settlements are on the order of 1 inch with a  differential settlement of ½ inch.     Liquefaction  Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon where saturated granular soils undergo a substantial loss of  strength due to increased pore water pressure resulting from cyclic stress applications induced  by earthquakes or other vibrations.  In this process, the soil acquires mobility sufficient to permit  both vertical and horizontal movements, which may result in significant deformations.  Soils most  Parameter Design Value  Site Class C  Mapped Short Term Spectral Response Parameter, (Ss) 2.549  Mapped 1‐second Spectral Response Parameter, (S1) 1.008  Site Coefficient, (Fa) 1.2  Site Coefficient, (Fv) 1.4  Site Modified Short Term Response Parameter, (SMs) 3.059  Site Modified 1‐second Response Parameter, (SM1) 1.411  Design Short Term Response Parameter, (SDs) 2.04  Design 1‐second Response Parameter, (SD1) 0.94  Seismic Design Category E  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 196 Packet Page 626 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 6 2104‐004.SER  susceptible to liquefaction are loose, uniformly graded, fine‐grained sands.  In addition, recent  literature indicates that fine grained soils may also be susceptible to liquefaction or cyclic strain  softening.  Examples of highly susceptible fine‐grained soil include “non‐plastic silts and clayey  silts of low plasticity (PI<12) at high water content to liquid limit ratios (wc/LL>0.85).”  Examples  of soils moderately susceptible to liquefaction include “clayey silts and silty clays of moderate  plasticity (12<PI<18) at natural water content and Liquid Limits ratios (wc/LL) greater than 0.80.”  (Bray and Sancio, 2006).  It is generally acknowledged that liquefaction will not affect surface  improvements if these deposits are located at a depth greater than 50 feet below the ground  surface.  In the deeper deposits, the greater overburden pressure is sufficient to prevent  liquefaction effects from occurring.    Analysis Parameters  The referenced 1990 report by Harding Lawson Associates, gave a historic groundwater level of  8 feet bgs from an unknown reference, thus we used this value in our analysis.  It should be noted  that this value is likely conservative.  According to United States Geological Survey’s (USGS)  Unified Hazard Tool, the predominant earthquake contributor is the San Andreas fault with mean  magnitude using deaggregation of 7.8.  The liquefaction analysis was performed utilizing the peak  ground acceleration of 1.16g (PGAm) based on the Office of Statewide Health Planning and  Development Seismic Design Maps Web Application.  Any sand‐like deposit (Soil Behavior Type  Index, Ic < 2.6) below the groundwater table was assumed to be potentially liquefiable.   The  liquefaction analysis was based on the methodologies suggested by Idriss and Boulanger (2008  and 2014).  The loose sand layers above the water table are subject to dry sand settlement.  A  two‐thirds reduction in the PGA was used for the dry sand settlement, thus a separate analysis is  presented in Appendix D.     Analysis Results  The calculated seismically induced settlement (liquefaction and dry sand settlement) was  calculated to be approximately 1 to 1.7 inches.  The liquefaction and dry sand analysis results are  included in Appendix D.    Discussion  In general, there is a high potential of granular deposits to liquefy during a seismic event.    Seismically induced settlements are expected to be on the order of 1.7 inches total or less and  approximately 1 inch of differential settlement during a design level seismic event.     The creek at the rear of the property is approximately 80 feet from the building and is  approximately 10 feet high.  Estimates of lateral displacement are approximately 10 inches at the  site.  The zone of soil susceptible to liquefaction and lateral displacement are present at depths  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 197 Packet Page 627 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 7 2104‐004.SER  from 19 to 23 feet at Boring B‐1and appear to be at an elevation below the channel.  The zone of  soil susceptible to liquefaction at Boring B‐2 is 8.5 to 13.5 feet bgs, indicating that the potentially  liquefiable soils across the site are discontinuous.  This is consistent with the analysis results of  Harding Lawson Associates.  As such, the potential for lateral displacement is considered low.      5.0 CONCLUSIONS  Site Suitability  The subject site is suitable for the proposed residential improvements from a geotechnical  engineering standpoint, provided the recommendations included in this report are followed.  The  primary geotechnical concerns at the site are loose soils in the upper 5 feet and the settlement  due to sesmic shaking.    Soil Expansion Potential  The near surface soils were sandy in nature and thus not deemed expansive.  Thus, no measures  other than moisture conditioning the pad are deemed yesterday.      Foundations  Due to the settlement from sesmic shaking, the proposed loads of the residence and ADU may  be supported on a either a mat slab foundation or a post‐tensioned slab foundation.  Details of  the foundation recommendations are included in the following sections of the report.    Site Preparation and Grading  Due to the loose soil in the upper 5 feet, a program of over‐excavation is deemed necessary.  The  upper 2½ feet of existing ground in the building areas should be over‐excavated and  recompacted.  Cuts and fills to create the pad for the residence are expected to be minimal.   Additional grading work is anticipated to include backfill work related to placement of new utility  lines and construction of the driveway, patios, and pool decking.  Grading operations are  discussed in detail in the Recommendations section of this report.    Groundwater  Groundwater was encountered at approximately 17 to 18 feet bgs during our subsurface  exploration.  Harding Lawson Associates reported an historic high groundwater level of 8 feet  bgs.  Variations in rainfall, temperature, and other factors may affect water levels, and therefore  groundwater levels should not be considered constant.  Groundwater is not expected to have an  adverse effect on the construction or performance of the proposed residence and related  structures.    ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 198 Packet Page 628 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 8 2104‐004.SER  Seismicity  The San Francisco Bay area is recognized by geologists and seismologists as one of the most  seismically active regions in the United States.  The significant earthquakes in this area are  generally associated with crustal movement along well‐defined, active fault zones which  regionally trend in a northwesterly direction.  Although research on earthquake prediction has  greatly increased in recent years, seismologists cannot predict when and where an earthquake  will occur.  Nevertheless, on the basis of current technology, it is reasonable to assume that the  proposed development will be subjected to at least one moderate to severe earthquake during  its lifetime.  During such an earthquake, the danger from fault offset on the site is low, but strong  shaking of the site is likely to occur and, therefore, the project should be designed in accordance  with the seismic design provisions of the latest California Building Code.  It should be understood  that the California Building Code seismic design parameters are not intended to prevent  structural damage during an earthquake, but to reduce damage and minimize loss of life.    6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS  Site Preparation and Grading  General Site Preparation  1. The site should be prepared for grading by removing existing trees to be removed and  their root systems, vegetation, debris, and other potentially deleterious materials from  areas to receive improvements.  Existing utility lines that will not be serving the proposed  residence should be either removed or abandoned.  The appropriate method of utility  abandonment will depend upon the type and depth of the utility.  Recommendations for  abandonment can be made as necessary.    2. Due to the loose surficial soil, a program of over‐excavation and backfilling is deemed  necessary.  The upper loose soil within the area of the proposed improvements should be  (over‐excavated to 2½ feet bgs.  The lateral extent of the over‐excavation should extend  at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter of the proposed residence, ADU, driveway and pool  decking as determined in the field by the Geotechnical Engineer during grading  operations.  The exposed ground should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Engineer to  determine the need for additional excavation work.    3. Ruts or depressions resulting from the removal of tree root systems should be properly  cleaned out down to undisturbed native soil.  The bottoms of the resulting depressions  should be scarified and cross‐scarified at least 8 inches in depth, moisture conditioned  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 199 Packet Page 629 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 9 2104‐004.SER  and recompacted.  The depressions should then be backfilled with approved, compacted,  moisture conditioned structural fill, as recommended in other sections of this report.    4. Site clearing, and backfilling operations, should be conducted under the field observation  of the Geotechnical Engineer.  The Geotechnical Engineer should be notified at least 48  hours prior to commencement of grading operations.    Compaction Recommendations  1. In general, the underlying native soil in the areas proposed to receive additional fill,  exterior flatwork or new structures should be scarified at least 8 inches, moisture  conditioned and recompacted to the recommended relative compaction presented  below, unless noted otherwise.    2. Recompacted native soils and fill soils should be compacted to a minimum relative  compaction of 90 percent of maximum dry density at a moisture content at least 2  percentage points above optimum.    3. In areas to be paved, the upper 8 inches of subgrade soil should be compacted to a  minimum 92 percent of maximum dry density at a moisture content at least 2 percentage  points above optimum.  The aggregate base courses should be compacted to a minimum  95 percent of maximum dry density at a moisture content that is slightly over optimum.   The subgrade and base should be firm and unyielding when proof‐rolled with heavy,  rubber‐tired equipment prior to paving.  The pavement subgrade soils should be  frequently moistened as necessary prior to placement of the aggregate base to maintain  the soil moisture content near optimum.    Fill Recommendations  1. Structural fill is defined herein as a native or import fill material which, when properly  compacted, will support foundations, pavements, and other fills.  The on‐site native soils  that are free of debris, organics and other deleterious material, may be used as structural  fill.     2. Import fill is not anticipated at the site.  Should import fill be required, the soil should  meet the following criteria:   a. Be coarse grained and have a plasticity index of less than 12 and/or an  expansion index less than 20;  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 200 Packet Page 630 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 10 2104‐004.SER   b. Be free of organics, debris or other deleterious material;   c. Have a maximum rock size of 3 inches; and   d. Contain sufficient clay binder to allow for stable foundation and utility  trench excavations.    3. A sample of the of the soil proposed to be imported to the site should be submitted at  least three days before being transported to the site for evaluation by the geotechnical  engineer.  During importation to the site the material should be further reviewed on an  intermittent basis.    Foundations   Mat Slab Foundation   1. The proposed residence and ADU may be supported by a concrete mat foundation  bearing on the native soil.  The mat slab should be designed using a maximum localized  allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf for dead plus live load.  This value may be  increased by one‐third when transient loads such as wind or seismicity are included.  The  mat slab should be sufficiently thick to uniformly spread the concentrated loads imposed  by any building columns.  The mat should be designed using a modulus of subgrade  reaction value of 125 psi per inch.  The slab should be designed for an edge cantilever  distance of 6 feet and an interior span condition of 10 feet.    2. The mat slab should be thickened at the edges to penetrate a minimum of 6 inches into  the prepared subgrade for a minimum width of 2 feet.  The mat slab should be placed on  top of a vapor retarder and capillary break layer extending to the thickened edge along  the perimeter.      3. Resistance to lateral loads should be calculated based on a passive equivalent fluid  pressure of 300 pcf and a friction factor of 0.3.      Post‐Tensioned Slab Foundation  1. The post‐tensioned slabs should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the  current edition of the California Building Code and the recommendations of the Post‐ Tensioning Institute.  Values for Edge Moisture Variation Distance and Estimated  Differential Swell were calculated in accordance with the third edition of Design of Post‐ Tensioned Slabs‐on‐Ground by the Post‐Tensioning Institute (2008).    ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 201 Packet Page 631 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 11 2104‐004.SER  Edge Moisture Variation Distance (em)   Center Lift Condition  9.0 feet   Edge Lift Condition  5.0 feet  Estimated Differential Swell (ym)   Center Lift Condition  0.5 inches   Edge Lift Condition  0.8 inches   Allowable Bearing Capacity (dead load) 1,500 psf   Allowable Bearing Capacity (dead + live loads) 2,000 psf   Allowable Bearing Capacity (DL+LL+ wind or seismic) 2,500 psf   Subgrade Friction Factor (slab against subgrade) 0.3   Total settlement (static) < 1 inch   Differential settlement (static) < 0.5 inches    2. To further protect moisture‐sensitive floor coverings, the perimeters of the post‐ tensioned slabs should be deepened to penetrate a minimum of 6 inches into the  subgrade soil.  Also, the concrete could be proportioned to reduce its porosity (and its  corresponding potential for transmitting moisture) by limiting the w/c ratio to 0.48 or  less.    3. Post‐tensioned slabs should be constructed and maintained in accordance with the  publication Construction and Maintenance Manual for Post‐Tensioned Slab‐on‐Ground  Foundations by the Post‐Tensioning Institute.  Particular attention should be paid to the  “Property Owner Maintenance” and “Landscaping” sections of the Manual.    Interior Slab‐on‐Grade Construction   4. The building pad should be periodically moisture conditioned as necessary to maintain  the soil moisture content at a minimum of 2 percent above optimum until the placement  of concrete or vapor retarding membranes.  The moisture content of the soil should be  verified by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement of the concrete or vapor  retarding membranes.    5. In areas where moisture transmitted from the subgrade would be undesirable, a vapor  retarder underlain by a capillary break consisting of 4 inches of crushed rock should be  utilized beneath the floor slab.  The vapor retarder should comply with ASTM Standard  Specification E 1745‐17 and the latest recommendations of ACI Committee 302.  The  vapor retarder should be installed in accordance with ASTM Standard Practice E 1643‐ 18a.  Care should be taken to properly lap and seal the vapor retarder, particularly around  utilities, and to protect it from damage during construction.  A sand layer above the vapor  retarder is optional.  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 202 Packet Page 632 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 12 2104‐004.SER  6. If sand, gravel or other permeable material is to be placed over the vapor retarder, the  material over the vapor retarder should be only lightly moistened and not saturated prior  to casting the slab.  Excess water above the vapor retarder would increase the potential  for moisture damage to floor coverings.  Recent studies, including those by ACI  Committee 302, have concluded that excess water above the vapor retarder would  increase the potential for moisture damage to floor coverings and could increase the  potential for mold growth or other microbial contamination.  These studies also  concluded that it is preferable to eliminate the sand layer and place the slab in direct  contact with the vapor retarder, particularly during wet weather construction.  However,  placing the concrete directly on the vapor retarder would require special attention to  using the proper vapor retarder, concrete mix design, and finishing and curing techniques.    7. When concrete slabs are in direct contact with vapor retarders, the concrete water to  cement (w/c) ratio must be correctly specified to control bleed water and plastic  shrinkage and cracking.  The concrete w/c ratio for this type of application is typically in  the range of 0.45 to 0.50.  The concrete should be properly cured to reduce slab curling  and plastic shrinkage cracking.  Concrete materials, placement, and curing methods  should be specified by the architect/engineer.    Exterior Flatwork  1. Exterior flatwork should have a minimum thickness of 4 full inches and should be  reinforced as directed by the architect/engineer.  Patio slabs and walkways should be  underlain by a minimum 4 inches of compacted aggregate base over properly compacted  subgrade soil.    2. Assuming that movement (i.e., 1/4‐inch or more) of exterior flatwork beyond the  structure is acceptable, the flatwork should be designed to be independent of the building  foundations.  The flatwork should not be doweled to foundations, and a separator should  be placed between the two.    3. To reduce shrinkage cracks in concrete, the concrete aggregates should be of appropriate  size and proportion, the water/cement ratio should be low, the concrete should be  properly placed and finished, contraction joints should be installed, and the concrete  should be properly cured.  Concrete materials, placement and curing specifications should  be at the direction of the designer; ACI 302.1R‐04 and ACI 302.2R‐04 are suggested as  resources for the designer in preparing such specifications.    ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 203 Packet Page 633 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 13 2104‐004.SER  Swimming Pool  1. The swimming pool design should be based on a minimum soil equivalent fluid pressure  of 45 pcf.  To reduce the potential for future expansion, the soil exposed in the pool  excavation should be kept in a moist condition prior to placement of the gunite.    2. The pool may be designed with a pressure relief valve. The necessity of the valve should  be under the discretion of the pool designer.    3. The pool excavation should be observed by a representative from Earth Systems. If soft  soils or other unanticipated conditions are observed in the excavation, compaction of the  soil or other remedial measures may be recommended.  Recommendations for remedial  grading or other measures (if deemed necessary) should be provided by the Geotechnical  Engineer based on the conditions observed at the time of construction.    4. Any portions of the pool shell that will be above ground should be designed to support  the water in the pool without soil support in accordance with Section 1808.7.3 of the  California Building Code.    5. If portions of the pool walls will be within a horizontal distance of 7 feet from the top of  an adjacent slope, those portions of the wall should be capable of supporting the water  in the pool without soil support per section 1808.7.3 of the California Building Code.    Utility Trench Backfills  1. A select, noncorrosive, granular, easily compacted material should be used as bedding  and shading immediately around utility pipes.  The site soils may be used for trench  backfill above the select material.    2. Trench backfill in the upper 8 inches of subgrade beneath pavement areas should be  compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of maximum dry density at a moisture content at  least 2 percentage points above optimum moisture content and the aggregate base  courses should be compacted to a minimum 95 percent of maximum dry density at a  moisture content at least 2 percentage points over optimum.  Trench backfill in other  areas should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density at a  moisture content at least 2 percentage points above optimum moisture content.  Jetting  of utility trench backfill should not be allowed.    ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 204 Packet Page 634 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 14 2104‐004.SER  3. Where utility trenches extend under perimeter foundations, the trenches should be  backfilled entirely with approved fill soil compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of  maximum dry density at a moisture content at least 2 percentage points above optimum  moisture content.  The zone of approved fill soil should extend a minimum distance of 2  feet on both sides of the foundation.  If utility pipes pass through sleeves cast into the  perimeter foundations, the annulus between the pipes and sleeves should be completely  sealed.    4. Parallel trenches excavated in the area under foundations defined by a plane radiating at  a 45‐degree angle downward from the bottom edge of the footing should be avoided, if  possible.  Trench backfill within this zone, if necessary, should consist of Controlled  Density Fill (Flowable Fill).    Management of Site Drainage and Finish Improvements  1. Unpaved ground surfaces should be finish graded to direct surface runoff away from site  improvements at a minimum 5 percent grade for a minimum distance of 10 feet.  If this  is not practical due to the terrain or other site features, swales with improved surfaces  should be provided to divert drainage away from improvements.  The landscaping should  be planned and installed to maintain proper surface drainage conditions.    2. Runoff from driveways, roof gutters, downspouts, planter drains and other improvements  should discharge in a non‐erosive manner away from foundations, pavements, and other  improvements.  The downspouts may discharge onto splash blocks that direct the flow  away from the foundation.    3. Stabilization of surface soils, particularly those disturbed during construction, by  vegetation or other means during and following construction is essential to protect the  site from erosion damage.  Care should be taken to establish and maintain vegetation.    4. Open areas adjacent to exterior flatwork should be irrigated or otherwise maintained so  that constant moisture conditions are created throughout the year.  Irrigation systems  should be controlled to the minimum levels that will sustain the vegetation without  saturating the soil.    5. Bio‐retention swales constructed within 10 feet or less from the building foundation  should be lined with a 20‐mil pond liner.    ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 205 Packet Page 635 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 15 2104‐004.SER  Geotechnical Observation and Testing  1. It must be recognized that the recommendations contained in this report are based on a  limited number of borings and rely on continuity of the subsurface conditions  encountered.    2. It is assumed that the Geotechnical Engineer will be retained to provide consultation  during the design phase, to interpret this report during construction, and to provide  construction monitoring in the form of testing and observation.    3. Unless otherwise stated, the terms "compacted" and "recompacted" refer to soils placed  in level lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness and compacted to a minimum of 90  percent of maximum dry density.  The standard tests used to define maximum dry density  and field density should be ASTM D 1557‐12 and ASTM D 6938‐17, respectively, or other  methods acceptable to the geotechnical engineer and jurisdiction.    4. “Moisture conditioning” refers to adjusting the soil moisture to at least 3 percentage  points above optimum moisture content prior to application of compactive effort.  If the  soils are overly moist so that they become unstable, or if the recommended compaction  cannot be readily achieved, drying the soil to optimum moisture content or just above  may be necessary.  Placement of gravel layers or geotextiles may also be necessary to  help stabilize unstable soils.  The Geotechnical Engineer should be contacted for  recommendations for mitigating unstable soils.    5. At a minimum, the following should be provided by the Geotechnical Engineer:   • Review of final grading and foundation plans,  • Professional observation during site preparation, grading, and foundation  excavation,   • Oversight of soil compaction testing during grading,   • Oversight of soil special inspection during grading.    6. Special inspection of grading should be provided as per Section 1705.6 and Table 1705.6  of the CBC; the soils special inspector should be under the direction of the Geotechnical  Engineer.  In our opinion, the following operations should be subject to continuous soils  special inspection:   Scarification and recompaction,   Fill placement and compaction,   Over‐excavation to the recommended depth.  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 206 Packet Page 636 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 16 2104‐004.SER  7. In our opinion, the following operations may be subject to periodic soils special  inspection, subject to approval by the Building Official:   Site preparation,   Compaction of utility trench backfill,   Retaining wall backfill,   Pool excavation,    Removal of existing development features,   Compaction of subgrade and aggregate base,   Observation of foundation and basement excavations,   Building pad moisture conditioning.    8. It will be necessary to develop a program of quality control prior to beginning grading.  It  is the responsibility of the owner, contractor, or project manager to determine any  additional inspection items required by the architect/engineer or the governing  jurisdiction.    9. The locations and frequencies of compaction tests should be as per the recommendations  of the Geotechnical Engineer at the time of construction.  The recommended test  locations and frequencies may be subject to modification by the geotechnical engineer  based upon soil and moisture conditions encountered, the size and type of equipment  used by the contractor, the general trend of the compaction test results, and other  factors.    10. A preconstruction conference among a representative of the owner, the Geotechnical  Engineer, soils special inspector, the architect/engineer, and contractors is recommended  to discuss planned construction procedures and quality control requirements.  Earth  Systems should be notified at least 48 hours prior to beginning grading operations.    7.0 CLOSURE  This report is valid for conditions as they exist at this time for the type of project described herein.   Our intent was to perform the investigation in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill  ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in the locality of this  project at this time under similar conditions.  No representation, warranty, or guarantee is either  expressed or implied.  This report is intended for the exclusive use by the client as discussed in  the Scope of Services section.  Application beyond the stated intent is strictly at the user's risk.  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 207 Packet Page 637 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road  April 9, 2021  Palo Alto, California      304309‐001 17 2104‐004.SER  If changes with respect to the project type or location become necessary, if items not addressed  in this report are incorporated into plans, or if any of the assumptions stated in this report are  not correct, Earth Systems should be notified for modifications to this report.  Any items not  specifically addressed in this report should comply with the CBC and the requirements of the  governing jurisdiction.    The preliminary recommendations of this report are based upon the geotechnical conditions  encountered during the investigation and may be augmented by additional requirements of the  architect/engineer, or by additional recommendations provided by Earth Systems based on  conditions exposed at the time of construction.    This document, the data, conclusions, and recommendations contained herein are the property  of Earth Systems.  This report should be used in its entirety, with no individual sections  reproduced or used out of context.  Copies may be made only by Earth Systems, the client, and  his authorized agents for use exclusively on the subject project.  Any other use is subject to  federal copyright laws and the written approval of Earth Systems.    ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 208 Packet Page 638 of 792 FIGURES    Figure 1 –  Site Location Map  Figure 2   – Site Plan     ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 209 Packet Page 639 of 792 SITE Base: Google Earth (2021) Proposed Single Family Residence and ADU 575 Los Trancos Road Palo Alto, California 304309-001 Site Locaon Map TN MN 13.2 Figure 1 Earth Systems Pacific Approximate Scale in Feet 200020000 4000 ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 210 Packet Page 640 of 792 B-2 B-5 B-3 B-1 CPT-6 HLA-1CPT-7 B-1 CPT-5 304309-001 Base: Google Earth (2021) Proposed Single Family Residence and ADU 575 Los Trancos Road Palo Alto, California Site PlanEarth Systems Pacific TN MN 13.2 Figure 2 HLA-4 Approximate Boring Locaon (Harding Lawson Associates, 1989) B-2 HLA-2 HLA-4 HLA-3A HLA-3 Approximate Boring Locaon (ESP, 2021) ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 211 Packet Page 641 of 792 APPENDIX A    Boring Logs   Harding Lawson Associates  1990     ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 212 Packet Page 642 of 792 En|cX.POST rlorts +Jh s30 E tlnLXfv+J. 5+J..{ c00EC) f+J,sIg 0Llo_OOv +,I E+Jo-!o 0 I-tIL EIa Equ 8" Hollow Stem Au Laboratory Tests Elevation 520.0 ft Dat l0 30 l5* 10* 16 5 DARK BROWN SANDY SILT WITH GNAVEL (ML) medium atiff, moist, with roots DARK BROWN SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(sM) medium dense, dry, with roots, fine-grained aand becoming brown in color and decreaaing fine content19.5 percent paasing No, 200 eieve l0 increasing finee content DARK BROWN SANDY CLAY WITH GRAVEL (cLlMr) atiff to very stiff, moist PI=12 LL=34 t* lb tz.E 93 56 r5 RED AND BROWN POORLY GRADEDGRAVEL WrTH SAND (cP) denee to very dense, dry, giavel in tip of sampler 20 ORj'NGE, RED, AND BROWN CLAYEYGRAVEL wrTH SAND (CC) medium dense, moist to wei, gravela rounded and subangular, approximately 15 percent fines LIGHT BROWN SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(sM) medium dense, wet, approximately 30 percent fineg and 20 percent gravel MO?TLED ORANGE AND GRAY-BROWNoLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (sc/sM) medium dense, wet BROWN CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL(sc/cc) very denae, saturated, rounded and eubrounded gravela approxiamtely 15 percent fines 27* l6 8.0 tt7 26.1 percent paaaing No. 200 sieve (see Plate ?) 3o/3'*25 50/6" 30 *Marked blow counts represent S&H blow counts converted tonpseudo, SPT N-values" by multiplying field values by 0.6; all other valueg are SPT N-valuee as defined in ASTM D1586-84 Test Method; aee text for more detail.t*Elevations are approximate and referenced to Mean Sea Level. 35 PLATEllerdlng Llwron Arrochtor Engrneer,ng and Envrronmental Servtces Log of Boring B-l Conroe Residence Palo Alto, California (sheet I of l) 2 APP ROV E O DATEORAWN JOA NUMEEN84740-G5 19640,001.04 l/fl4q t /90 REVISEO OATE ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 213 Packet Page 643 of 792 OIETERE I r30tr3 {Jg at o-{E OaTNfv{J.laJ,.t cooEO f+J Tt.rc urtaoov {C .c+Jo-fo 0 t o-EIa 8" Hollow Stem A er Laboratory Tests Elevation 520.0 ft l0 17.5 percent passing No. 2O0 sieve DARK BROWN SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (sM) loole, moist, with rootg BROWN CRAVEL WrTH SAND (cP) loose to medium dense, dry, with roote 2.2 percent pasaing No. 200 eieve (see Plate 8) g* 72* DARK BROWN oLAYEY SAND (Sc/sM) medium dense, moist, 1{ percent gravel, with roote l0 37.6 percent passing No. 200 gieve (see Plate 9) 20* 30 I GRAY AND BROWN POORLY GRADED GRAVEL wrTH SAND (cP-cC) denae, moist, approximtely l0 percent fines and 30 percent sand ORANGE-BROWN CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC) dense, moist, approximately 15 percent fines and 20 percent rounded gravel 46 46/t" 20 No ground wat€r was encountered 30 35 40 PLATEHrrdlng Lewrcn Arrocletrr Engrneer;ng and Envrronmental Servrces Log of Boring B-2 Conroe Residence Palo Alto, California (sheet I of l) 3 APPROVE D OATEOAAWN JOB NUMBERB4740-c5 19640,001.04 w4.44 t/e0 REVISEO OATE ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 214 Packet Page 644 of 792 tcl{-posr tlorrt +b t3o t! oL+Jf,c+JA8*J...r c00EO +JI I+Jo,to 0 Boring No.B-3f,.J usTC IJLO0_oOv a (L EIa Eq 8" Hollow Stem Au Laboratorv I EStS x Elevation 520.0 ft Date l0 30 8 8* DARK BROWN SrLT (ML) eoft to medium sriff, moist, with roots DARK BROWN SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (sM) loore to medium dense, moist 30.5 percent paesing No.200 sieve (see Plate 10) 5 15*increasing gravel and eobbles on cobbles at 7.0 feet No ground water was encountered l0 l5 +JL t30 E ot*Jfc+ro!+J {JI E+J0.fo 0 Boring No B-3At +J llsc00tlOv I (L Eao Equipme 8" Hollow Stem A r Laboratorv Tests .'l C^ IooN !EOv O Elevation 520.0 ft psls l0/30/89 BRowN SILT (ML) aoft to medium stiff, moiet, with roots DARK BROWN SILTY SANDWITH GRAVEL (SM) looge to medium denee, moist increaeing gravel and cobbles at 4 feet L7 l0'5 Refugal on cobbles at 5.0 feeb. No gtound water was encountered l0 l5 PLATEHerdlng Lawrqn Anocletor Engrneer,ng and Envrronmental Services Logs of Borings B-3 and B-gA Conroe Residence Palo Alto, California 4 JOB NUMAER DATETfl"4b-cs t9640,001.04 APPROVE O | /90 REVISEO OATE ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 215 Packet Page 645 of 792 olElEnEH'pOSl rlo7l3 +Js 030-{o 0LX JI +J ALfrc uLDILoOv +JL Il-{+J O.qgttoo Equ 8" Hollow Stem Augerfv I-aboratory Tests +.n+J...t c00EO Elevation 529.0 ft Date--FlloAL 3O/5"* BLACK srLT (ML) soft to medium rtiff, moist, with rootg BROWN CLAYEY SAND WITH CRAVEL(sclcc) dry, with cobbles 5 Refusal on cobbles at 3.0 feet. No ground water was encountered. l0 l5 20 25 30 35 Log of Boring B-4 Conroe Residence Palo Alto, California (sheet I of l)PLATEHerdlng Ltwron Arocletrr Engrneer,ng and Envrronmental Se.vrces 5 ORAWN JOB NUMEE A OATEAPPROVE D84740-G5 19640,001.04 wu+tt /89 R€VISEO OATE ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 216 Packet Page 646 of 792 APPENDIX B    Logs of Test Borings  Earth Systems Pacific  2021     ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 217 Packet Page 647 of 792 DE P T H (f e e t ) US C S C L A S S SY M B O L IN T E R V A L (f e e t ) SA M P L E TY P E DR Y D E N S I T Y (p c f ) MO I S T U R E (% ) BL O W S PE R 6 I N . SAMPLE DATA SOIL DESCRIPTION PAGE 1 OF 2 JOB NO.: 304309-001 DATE: February 23, 2021AUGER TYPE: 8" Hollow Stem DRILL RIG: Mobile B-53 LOGGED BY: P. Penrose Earth Systems Pacific Boring No. 1 LEGEND: 2.5" Mod Cal Sample 2.0" Cal Sample SPT Bulk Sample Groundwater PO C K E T P E N (t . s . f ) SA M P L E NU M B E R Proposed Residence 575 Los Trancos Road Palo Alto, California 13.5-15.0 1-4 3.5-5.0 1-2 7.5-9.0 1-3 6 9 9 24 21 22 16 40 17 Well graded SAND with GRAVEL; medium dense, dark gray brown, very moist, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel SW - cobbles, dense 18.5-20.0 1-5 9 6 8 23.5-24.0 1-6 50/5" - very dense, less clay, more gravel 113.4 7.3 CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL; medium dense, gray brown, very moist, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel SC CLAYEY SAND; loose, brown, wet, mostly fine to medium sand, trace gravel SC 1.0-2.5 1-1 8 9 16110.6 4.9 [% passing #200 = 18%] ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 218 Packet Page 648 of 792 DE P T H (f e e t ) US C S C L A S S SY M B O L IN T E R V A L (f e e t ) SA M P L E TY P E DR Y D E N S I T Y (p c f ) MO I S T U R E (% ) BL O W S PE R 6 I N . SAMPLE DATA SOIL DESCRIPTION PAGE 2 OF 2 JOB NO.: 304309-001 DATE: February 23, 2021AUGER TYPE: 8" Hollow Stem DRILL RIG: Mobile B-53 LOGGED BY: P. Penrose Earth Systems Pacific Boring No. 1 LEGEND: 2.5" Mod Cal Sample 2.0" Cal Sample SPT Bulk Sample Groundwater PO C K E T P E N (t . s . f ) SA M P L E NU M B E R Proposed Residence 575 Los Trancos Road Palo Alto, California CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (same as above)SC Bottom of boring at 34' bgs No Groundwater encountered 1-8 50/5"33.5-34.0 - blue gray 1-7 50/4"28.5-29.0 ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 219 Packet Page 649 of 792 DE P T H (f e e t ) US C S C L A S S SY M B O L IN T E R V A L (f e e t ) SA M P L E TY P E DR Y D E N S I T Y (p c f ) MO I S T U R E (% ) BL O W S PE R 6 I N . SAMPLE DATA SOIL DESCRIPTION PAGE 1 OF 2 JOB NO.: 304309-001 DATE: February 23, 2021AUGER TYPE: 8" Hollow Stem DRILL RIG: Mobile B-53 LOGGED BY: P. Penrose Earth Systems Pacific Boring No. 2 LEGEND: 2.5" Mod Cal Sample 2.0" Cal Sample SPT Bulk Sample Groundwater PO C K E T P E N (t . s . f ) SA M P L E NU M B E R Proposed Residence 575 Los Trancos Road Palo Alto, California 13.5-15.0 2-4 3.5-5.0 2-2 8.5-10.0 2-3 5 6 6 6 9 12 5 10 41 CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL; loose, gray brown, moist, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel SC - medium dense 18.5-20.0 2-5 10 15 20 23.5-25.0 2-6 25 12 16 - very dense, gray, very moist 102.1 11.1 115.7 18.4 Well graded SAND with CLAY and GRAVEL; medium dense, gray brown, wet, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel SW- SC 1.0-2.5 2-1 5 5 6103.4 12.9 CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL; medium dense, gray brown, wet, fine to coarse sand, fine gravel SC [% passing #200 = 21%] [% passing #200 = 9%] [% passing #200 = 31%] ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 220 Packet Page 650 of 792 DE P T H (f e e t ) US C S C L A S S SY M B O L IN T E R V A L (f e e t ) SA M P L E TY P E DR Y D E N S I T Y (p c f ) MO I S T U R E (% ) BL O W S PE R 6 I N . SAMPLE DATA SOIL DESCRIPTION PAGE 2 OF 2 JOB NO.: 304309-001 DATE: February 23, 2021AUGER TYPE: 8" Hollow Stem DRILL RIG: Mobile B-53 LOGGED BY: P. Penrose Earth Systems Pacific Boring No. 2 LEGEND: 2.5" Mod Cal Sample 2.0" Cal Sample SPT Bulk Sample Groundwater PO C K E T P E N (t . s . f ) SA M P L E NU M B E R Proposed Residence 575 Los Trancos Road Palo Alto, California CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (same as above)SC Bottom of boring at 34' bgs Groundwater encountered at 17' bgs 2-8 50/6"33.5-34.0 2-7 9 11 3028.5-29.0 Well graded SAND with CLAY and GRAVEL; dense, gray brown, wet, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel SW- SC ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 221 Packet Page 651 of 792 APPENDIX C    Summary of Laboratory Test Results   ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 222 Packet Page 652 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road 304309‐001 BULK DENSITY TEST RESULTS ASTM D 2937‐17 (modified for ring liners) March 4, 2021 BORING DEPTH MOISTURE WET DRY NO.feet CONTENT, % DENSITY, pcf DENSITY, pcf 1‐1 2.0 ‐ 2.5 4.9 116.0 110.6 1‐2 4.5 ‐ 5.0 7.3 121.7 113.4 2‐1 2.0 ‐ 2.5 12.9 116.7 103.4 2‐2 4.5 ‐ 5.0 11.1 113.4 102.1 2‐4 14.5 ‐ 15.0 18.4 137.0 115.7 ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 223 Packet Page 653 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road 304309‐001 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D 422‐63/07; D 1140‐17 Boring #1 @ 18.5 ‐ 20.0'March 4, 2021 Sieve size % Retained % Passing 3" (75‐mm)0 100 2" (50‐mm)0 100 1.5" (37.5‐mm)0 100 1" (25‐mm)0 100 3/4" (19‐mm)0 100 1/2" (12.5‐mm)0 100 3/8" (9.5‐mm)0 100 #4 (4.75‐mm)0 100 #8 (2.36‐mm)0 100 #16 (1.18‐mm)0 100 #30 (600‐µm)0 100 #50 (300‐µm)0 100 #100 (150‐µm)0 100 #200 (75‐µm)82 18 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 1/2 3/8 4 8 16 30 50 100 200 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.010.1110100 PE R C E N T P A S S I N G GRAIN SIZE, mm U. S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERSU. S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 224 Packet Page 654 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road 304309‐001 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D 422‐63/07; D 1140‐14 Boring #2 @ 8.5 ‐ 10.0'March 4, 2021 Dark Brown Well Graded Sand with Clay and Gravel (SW‐SC) Sieve size % Retained % Passing 3" (75‐mm)0 100 2" (50‐mm)0 100 1.5" (37.5‐mm)0 100 1" (25‐mm)0 100 3/4" (19‐mm)0 100 1/2" (12.5‐mm)0 100 3/8" (9.5‐mm)0 100 #4 (4.75‐mm)0 100 #8 (2.36‐mm)0 100 #16 (1.18‐mm)0 100 #30 (600‐µm)0 100 #50 (300‐µm)0 100 #100 (150‐µm)0 100 #200 (75‐µm)79 21 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 1/2 3/8 4 8 16 30 50 100 200 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.010.1110100 PE R C E N T P A S S I N G GRAIN SIZE, mm U. S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERSU. S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 225 Packet Page 655 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road 304309‐001 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D 422‐63/07; D 1140‐17 Boring #2 @ 18.5 ‐ 20.0'March 4, 2021 Dark Yellowish Brown Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC) Sieve size % Retained % Passing 3" (75‐mm)0 100 2" (50‐mm)0 100 1.5" (37.5‐mm)0 100 1" (25‐mm)0 100 3/4" (19‐mm)0 100 1/2" (12.5‐mm)0 100 3/8" (9.5‐mm)0 100 #4 (4.75‐mm)0 100 #8 (2.36‐mm)0 100 #16 (1.18‐mm)0 100 #30 (600‐µm)0 100 #50 (300‐µm)0 100 #100 (150‐µm)0 100 #200 (75‐µm)91 9 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 1/2 3/8 4 8 16 30 50 100 200 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.010.1110100 PE R C E N T P A S S I N G GRAIN SIZE, mm U. S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERSU. S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 226 Packet Page 656 of 792 575 Los Trancos Road 304309‐001 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D 422‐63/07; D 1140‐17 Boring #2 @ 23.5 ‐ 25.0'March 4, 2021 Dark Yellowish Brown Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC) Sieve size % Retained % Passing 3" (75‐mm)0 100 2" (50‐mm)0 100 1.5" (37.5‐mm)0 100 1" (25‐mm)0 100 3/4" (19‐mm)0 100 1/2" (12.5‐mm)0 100 3/8" (9.5‐mm)0 100 #4 (4.75‐mm)0 100 #8 (2.36‐mm)0 100 #16 (1.18‐mm)0 100 #30 (600‐µm)0 100 #50 (300‐µm)0 100 #100 (150‐µm)0 100 #200 (75‐µm)69 31 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 1/2 3/8 4 8 16 30 50 100 200 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.010.1110100 PE R C E N T P A S S I N G GRAIN SIZE, mm U. S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERSU. S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 227 Packet Page 657 of 792 APPENDIX D    Liquefaction Analysis  Dry Sand Settlement  ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 228 Packet Page 658 of 792 SPT BA S ED LIQUEFA CTION A NA LYS IS REPORT :: Input parameters and analysis properties :: Analysis method: Fines correction method: Sampling method: Borehole diameter: Rod length: Hammer energy ratio: Boulanger & Idriss, 2014 Boulanger & Idriss, 2014 Standard Sampler 200mm 3.30 ft 1.00 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.): Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Eq. external load: Project title : 575 Los Trancos Road Residence Location : Palo Alto, California SPT Name: B-1 18.00 ft 8.00 ft 7.80 1.16 g 0.00 tsf Raw SPT Data SPT Count (blows/ft) 50403020100 De p t h ( f t ) 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Raw SPT Data Insitu CSR - CRR Plot CSR - CRR 10.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 CSR - CRR Plot During earthq. FS Plot Factor of Safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential 50 De p t h ( f t ) 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 LPI During earthq. CRR 7.50 clean sand curve Corrected Blow Count N1(60),cs 50454035302520151050 Cy c l i c S t r e s s R a t i o * 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 CRR 7.50 clean sand curve Liquefaction No Liquefaction F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy LPI color scheme Very high risk High risk Low risk Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 1LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 229 Packet Page 659 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific Raw SPT Data SPT Count (blows/ft) 50403020100 De p t h ( f t ) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Raw SPT Data Insitu CSR - CRR Plot CSR - CRR 10.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 CSR - CRR Plot During earthq. FS Plot Factor of Safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 FS Plot During earthq. Vertical Liq. Settlements Cuml. Settlement (in) 10.50 De p t h ( f t ) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Vertical Liq. Settlements During earthq. Lateral Liq. Displacements Cuml. Displacement (ft) 0.50 De p t h ( f t ) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Lateral Liq. Displacements During earthq. :: Overall Liquefaction Assessment Analysis Plots :: Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 2LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 230 Packet Page 660 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific Test Depth (ft) :: Field input data :: SPT Field Value (blows) Fines Content (%) Unit Weight (pcf) Infl. Thickness (ft) Can Liquefy 0.50 16 5.00 116.00 1.00 Yes 1.50 16 5.00 116.00 1.00 Yes 2.50 16 5.00 116.00 1.00 Yes 3.50 12 5.00 122.00 1.00 Yes 4.50 12 5.00 122.00 1.00 Yes 5.50 12 18.00 122.00 1.00 Yes 6.50 12 18.00 122.00 1.00 Yes 7.50 43 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 8.50 43 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 9.50 43 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 10.50 43 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 11.50 43 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 12.50 43 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 13.50 33 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 14.50 33 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 15.50 33 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 16.50 33 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 17.50 33 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 18.50 14 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 19.50 14 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 20.50 14 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 21.50 14 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 22.50 14 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 23.50 100 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 24.50 100 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 25.50 100 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 26.50 100 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 27.50 100 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 28.50 100 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 29.50 100 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 30.50 100 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 31.50 100 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 32.50 100 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 33.50 100 18.00 120.00 1.00 Yes Abbreviations Depth: SPT Field Value: Fines Content: Unit Weight: Infl. Thickness: Can Liquefy: Depth at which test was performed (ft) Number of blows per foot Fines content at test depth (%) Unit weight at test depth (pcf) Thickness of the soil layer to be considered in settlements analysis (ft) User defined switch for excluding/including test depth from the analysis procedure :: Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) calculation data :: CRR7.5Depth (ft) SPT Field Value CN CE CB CR CS (N1)60 (N1)60csFC (%) σv(tsf) uo(tsf) σ'vo(tsf) Unit Weight (pcf) Δ(Ν1)60m 0.50 16 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 23 23 4.0005.00116.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.41 0.00 1.50 16 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 23 23 4.0005.00116.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.41 0.00 2.50 16 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 23 23 4.0005.00116.00 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.41 0.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 3LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 231 Packet Page 661 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific :: Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) calculation data :: CRR7.5Depth (ft) SPT Field Value CN CE CB CR CS (N1)60 (N1)60csFC (%) σv(tsf) uo(tsf) σ'vo(tsf) Unit Weight (pcf) Δ(Ν1)60m 3.50 12 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 18 18 4.0005.00122.00 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.46 0.00 4.50 12 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 18 18 4.0005.00122.00 0.27 0.00 0.27 0.46 0.00 5.50 12 1.62 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 17 21 4.00018.00122.00 0.33 0.00 0.33 0.41 4.09 6.50 12 1.53 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 16 20 4.00018.00122.00 0.39 0.00 0.39 0.42 4.09 7.50 43 1.25 1.00 1.15 0.80 1.00 50 54 4.00018.00120.00 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.26 4.09 8.50 43 1.21 1.00 1.15 0.80 1.00 48 52 4.00018.00120.00 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.26 4.09 9.50 43 1.18 1.00 1.15 0.80 1.00 47 51 4.00018.00120.00 0.57 0.00 0.57 0.26 4.09 10.50 43 1.15 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 48 52 4.00018.00120.00 0.63 0.00 0.63 0.26 4.09 11.50 43 1.12 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 47 51 4.00018.00120.00 0.69 0.00 0.69 0.26 4.09 12.50 43 1.10 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 46 50 4.00018.00120.00 0.75 0.00 0.75 0.26 4.09 13.50 33 1.08 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 35 39 4.00018.00120.00 0.81 0.00 0.81 0.30 4.09 14.50 33 1.06 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 34 38 4.00018.00120.00 0.87 0.00 0.87 0.31 4.09 15.50 33 1.04 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 34 38 4.00018.00120.00 0.93 0.00 0.93 0.31 4.09 16.50 33 1.02 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 37 41 4.00018.00120.00 0.99 0.00 0.99 0.29 4.09 17.50 33 1.00 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 36 40 4.00018.00120.00 1.05 0.00 1.05 0.30 4.09 18.50 14 0.99 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 15 19 0.19418.00120.00 1.11 0.02 1.09 0.45 4.09 19.50 14 0.97 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 15 19 0.19418.00120.00 1.17 0.05 1.12 0.45 4.09 20.50 14 0.96 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 15 19 0.19418.00120.00 1.23 0.08 1.15 0.45 4.09 21.50 14 0.95 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 15 19 0.19418.00120.00 1.29 0.11 1.18 0.45 4.09 22.50 14 0.94 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 14 18 0.18418.00120.00 1.35 0.14 1.21 0.46 4.09 23.50 100 0.96 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 105 109 4.00018.00120.00 1.41 0.17 1.24 0.26 4.09 24.50 100 0.95 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 104 108 4.00018.00120.00 1.47 0.20 1.27 0.26 4.09 25.50 100 0.95 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 104 108 4.00018.00120.00 1.53 0.23 1.30 0.26 4.09 26.50 100 0.94 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 103 107 4.00018.00120.00 1.59 0.27 1.32 0.26 4.09 27.50 100 0.94 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 102 106 4.00018.00120.00 1.65 0.30 1.35 0.26 4.09 28.50 100 0.93 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 102 106 4.00018.00120.00 1.71 0.33 1.38 0.26 4.09 29.50 100 0.93 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 101 105 4.00018.00120.00 1.77 0.36 1.41 0.26 4.09 30.50 100 0.92 1.00 1.15 1.00 1.00 106 110 4.00018.00120.00 1.83 0.39 1.44 0.26 4.09 31.50 100 0.92 1.00 1.15 1.00 1.00 106 110 4.00018.00120.00 1.89 0.42 1.47 0.26 4.09 32.50 100 0.91 1.00 1.15 1.00 1.00 105 109 4.00018.00120.00 1.95 0.45 1.50 0.26 4.09 33.50 100 0.91 1.00 1.15 1.00 1.00 104 108 4.00018.00120.00 2.01 0.48 1.53 0.26 4.09 σv: uo: σ'vo: m: CN: CE: CB: CR: CS: N1(60): Δ(Ν1)60 N1 (60) cs: CRR7.5: Total stress during SPT test (tsf) Water pore pressure during SPT test (tsf) Effective overburden pressure during SPT test (tsf) Stress exponent normalization factor Overburden corretion factor Energy correction factor Borehole diameter correction factor Rod length correction factor Liner correction factor Corrected NSPT to a 60% energy ratio Equivalent clean sand adjustment Corected N1(60) value for fines content Cyclic resistance ratio for M=7.5 Abbreviations σv,eq(tsf) rd CSR MSF CSReq,M=7.5 Ksigma CSR* :: Cyclic Stress Ratio calculation (CSR fully adjusted and normalized) :: Depth (ft) Unit Weight (pcf) uo,eq(tsf) σ'vo,eq(tsf) FSMSFmax(N1)60csα 0.50 116.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 1.01 0.758 0.94 0.806 1.10 0.733 2.0001.62 231.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 4LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 232 Packet Page 662 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific σv,eq(tsf) rd CSR MSF CSReq,M=7.5 Ksigma CSR* :: Cyclic Stress Ratio calculation (CSR fully adjusted and normalized) :: Depth (ft) Unit Weight (pcf) uo,eq(tsf) σ'vo,eq(tsf) FSMSFmax(N1)60csα 1.50 116.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 1.00 0.757 0.94 0.805 1.10 0.731 2.0001.62 231.00 2.50 116.00 0.15 0.00 0.15 1.00 0.755 0.94 0.803 1.10 0.730 2.0001.62 231.00 3.50 122.00 0.21 0.00 0.21 1.00 0.754 0.96 0.785 1.10 0.714 2.0001.42 181.00 4.50 122.00 0.27 0.00 0.27 1.00 0.752 0.96 0.784 1.10 0.712 2.0001.42 181.00 5.50 122.00 0.33 0.00 0.33 1.00 0.751 0.95 0.791 1.10 0.719 2.0001.53 211.00 6.50 122.00 0.39 0.00 0.39 0.99 0.749 0.95 0.787 1.10 0.715 2.0001.49 201.00 7.50 120.00 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.99 0.748 0.89 0.845 1.10 0.768 2.0002.20 541.00 8.50 120.00 0.51 0.02 0.49 0.99 0.770 0.89 0.870 1.10 0.791 2.0002.20 521.00 9.50 120.00 0.57 0.05 0.52 0.99 0.811 0.89 0.916 1.10 0.833 2.0002.20 511.00 10.50 120.00 0.63 0.08 0.55 0.98 0.848 0.89 0.958 1.10 0.871 2.0002.20 521.00 11.50 120.00 0.69 0.11 0.58 0.98 0.880 0.89 0.995 1.10 0.904 2.0002.20 511.00 12.50 120.00 0.75 0.14 0.61 0.98 0.909 0.89 1.027 1.10 0.934 2.0002.20 501.00 13.50 120.00 0.81 0.17 0.64 0.98 0.935 0.89 1.057 1.10 0.961 2.0002.20 391.00 14.50 120.00 0.87 0.20 0.67 0.97 0.959 0.89 1.083 1.10 0.985 2.0002.20 381.00 15.50 120.00 0.93 0.23 0.70 0.97 0.980 0.89 1.107 1.10 1.006 2.0002.20 381.00 16.50 120.00 0.99 0.27 0.72 0.97 0.999 0.89 1.128 1.10 1.026 2.0002.20 411.00 17.50 120.00 1.05 0.30 0.75 0.97 1.016 0.89 1.148 1.10 1.043 2.0002.20 401.00 18.50 120.00 1.11 0.33 0.78 0.96 1.031 0.96 1.078 1.04 1.038 0.1871.45 191.00 19.50 120.00 1.17 0.36 0.81 0.96 1.045 0.96 1.093 1.03 1.056 0.1841.45 191.00 20.50 120.00 1.23 0.39 0.84 0.96 1.058 0.96 1.106 1.03 1.074 0.1811.45 191.00 21.50 120.00 1.29 0.42 0.87 0.95 1.069 0.96 1.118 1.03 1.090 0.1781.45 191.00 22.50 120.00 1.35 0.45 0.90 0.95 1.079 0.96 1.124 1.02 1.102 0.1671.42 181.00 23.50 120.00 1.41 0.48 0.93 0.95 1.089 0.89 1.230 1.04 1.183 2.0002.20 1091.00 24.50 120.00 1.47 0.51 0.95 0.95 1.097 0.89 1.240 1.03 1.203 2.0002.20 1081.00 25.50 120.00 1.53 0.55 0.98 0.94 1.105 0.89 1.248 1.02 1.222 2.0002.20 1081.00 26.50 120.00 1.59 0.58 1.01 0.94 1.111 0.89 1.256 1.01 1.239 2.0002.20 1071.00 27.50 120.00 1.65 0.61 1.04 0.94 1.118 0.89 1.263 1.00 1.256 2.0002.20 1061.00 28.50 120.00 1.71 0.64 1.07 0.93 1.123 0.89 1.269 1.00 1.273 2.0002.20 1061.00 29.50 120.00 1.77 0.67 1.10 0.93 1.128 0.89 1.274 0.99 1.288 2.0002.20 1051.00 30.50 120.00 1.83 0.70 1.13 0.93 1.132 0.89 1.279 0.98 1.303 2.0002.20 1101.00 31.50 120.00 1.89 0.73 1.16 0.92 1.136 0.89 1.283 0.97 1.317 2.0002.20 1101.00 32.50 120.00 1.95 0.76 1.18 0.92 1.139 0.89 1.287 0.97 1.331 2.0002.20 1091.00 33.50 120.00 2.01 0.80 1.21 0.91 1.141 0.89 1.290 0.96 1.344 2.0002.20 1081.00 σv,eq: uo,eq: σ'vo,eq: rd: α: CSR : MSF : CSReq,M=7.5: Ksigma: CSR*: FS: Total overburden pressure at test point, during earthquake (tsf) Water pressure at test point, during earthquake (tsf) Effective overburden pressure, during earthquake (tsf) Nonlinear shear mass factor Improvement factor due to stone columns Cyclic Stress Ratio Magnitude Scaling Factor CSR adjusted for M=7.5 Effective overburden stress factor CSR fully adjusted (user FS applied)*** Calculated factor of safety against soil liquefaction Abbreviations 1.00* ** User FS: :: Liquefaction potential according to Iwasaki :: Depth (ft) FS F Thickness (ft) wz IL Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 5LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 233 Packet Page 663 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific :: Liquefaction potential according to Iwasaki :: Depth (ft) FS F Thickness (ft) wz IL 0.50 2.000 0.00 9.92 0.001.00 1.50 2.000 0.00 9.77 0.001.00 2.50 2.000 0.00 9.62 0.001.00 3.50 2.000 0.00 9.47 0.001.00 4.50 2.000 0.00 9.31 0.001.00 5.50 2.000 0.00 9.16 0.001.00 6.50 2.000 0.00 9.01 0.001.00 7.50 2.000 0.00 8.86 0.001.00 8.50 2.000 0.00 8.70 0.001.00 9.50 2.000 0.00 8.55 0.001.00 10.50 2.000 0.00 8.40 0.001.00 11.50 2.000 0.00 8.25 0.001.00 12.50 2.000 0.00 8.10 0.001.00 13.50 2.000 0.00 7.94 0.001.00 14.50 2.000 0.00 7.79 0.001.00 15.50 2.000 0.00 7.64 0.001.00 16.50 2.000 0.00 7.49 0.001.00 17.50 2.000 0.00 7.33 0.001.00 18.50 0.187 0.81 7.18 1.781.00 19.50 0.184 0.82 7.03 1.751.00 20.50 0.181 0.82 6.88 1.721.00 21.50 0.178 0.82 6.72 1.681.00 22.50 0.167 0.83 6.57 1.671.00 23.50 2.000 0.00 6.42 0.001.00 24.50 2.000 0.00 6.27 0.001.00 25.50 2.000 0.00 6.11 0.001.00 26.50 2.000 0.00 5.96 0.001.00 27.50 2.000 0.00 5.81 0.001.00 28.50 2.000 0.00 5.66 0.001.00 29.50 2.000 0.00 5.50 0.001.00 30.50 2.000 0.00 5.35 0.001.00 31.50 2.000 0.00 5.20 0.001.00 32.50 2.000 0.00 5.05 0.001.00 33.50 2.000 0.00 4.89 0.001.00 8.60 IL = 0.00 - No liquefaction IL between 0.00 and 5 - Liquefaction not probable IL between 5 and 15 - Liquefaction probable IL > 15 - Liquefaction certain Overall potential IL : :: Vertical settlements estimation for dry sands :: Depth (ft) (N1)60 τav p Gmax (tsf) α b γ ε15 Nc εNc (%) ΔS (in) Δh (ft) 0.50 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 1.50 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 2.50 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 3.50 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 6LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 234 Packet Page 664 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific :: Vertical settlements estimation for dry sands :: Depth (ft) (N1)60 τav p Gmax(tsf) α b γ ε15 Nc εNc(%) ΔS (in) Δh (ft) 4.50 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 5.50 17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 6.50 16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 7.50 50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 Abbreviations τav: p: Gmax: α, b: γ: ε15: Nc: εNc: Δh: ΔS: Average cyclic shear stress Average stress Maximum shear modulus (tsf) Shear strain formula variables Average shear strain Volumetric strain after 15 cycles Number of cycles Volumetric strain for number of cycles Nc (%) Thickness of soil layer (in) Settlement of soil layer (in) 0.000Cumulative settlemetns: :: Vertical & Lateral displ.acements estimation for saturated sands :: Depth (ft) γlim (%) ev (%) dz (ft) Sv-1D (in) (N1)60cs Fα γmax (%) FSliq LDI (ft) 8.50 52 0.01 -1.75 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 9.50 51 0.02 -1.67 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 10.50 52 0.01 -1.75 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 11.50 51 0.02 -1.67 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 12.50 50 0.04 -1.59 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 13.50 39 1.07 -0.73 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 14.50 38 1.30 -0.65 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 15.50 38 1.30 -0.65 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 16.50 41 0.70 -0.88 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 17.50 40 0.87 -0.80 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 18.50 19 17.78 0.57 0.187 17.78 2.40 1.00 0.288 0.18 19.50 19 17.78 0.57 0.184 17.78 2.40 1.00 0.288 0.18 20.50 19 17.78 0.57 0.181 17.78 2.40 1.00 0.288 0.18 21.50 19 17.78 0.57 0.178 17.78 2.40 1.00 0.288 0.18 22.50 18 19.85 0.62 0.167 19.85 2.51 1.00 0.301 0.20 23.50 109 0.00 -6.93 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 24.50 108 0.00 -6.84 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 25.50 108 0.00 -6.84 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 26.50 107 0.00 -6.74 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 27.50 106 0.00 -6.64 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 28.50 106 0.00 -6.64 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 29.50 105 0.00 -6.55 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 30.50 110 0.00 -7.03 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 31.50 110 0.00 -7.03 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 32.50 109 0.00 -6.93 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 33.50 108 0.00 -6.84 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 7LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 235 Packet Page 665 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific :: Vertical & Lateral displ.acements estimation for saturated sands :: Depth (ft) γlim(%) ev(%) dz (ft) Sv-1D(in) (N1)60cs Fα γmax(%) FSliq LDI (ft) Abbreviations 1.454Cumulative settlements: γlim: Fα/N: γmax: ev:: Sv-1D: LDI: Limiting shear strain (%) Maximun shear strain factor Maximum shear strain (%) Post liquefaction volumetric strain (%) Estimated vertical settlement (in) Estimated lateral displacement (ft) 0.91 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 8LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 236 Packet Page 666 of 792 SPT BA S ED LIQUEFA CTION A NA LYS IS REPORT :: Input parameters and analysis properties :: Analysis method: Fines correction method: Sampling method: Borehole diameter: Rod length: Hammer energy ratio: Boulanger & Idriss, 2014 Boulanger & Idriss, 2014 Standard Sampler 200mm 3.30 ft 1.00 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.): Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Eq. external load: Project title : 575 Los Trancos Road Residence Location : Palo Alto, California SPT Name: B-2 17.00 ft 8.00 ft 7.80 1.16 g 0.00 tsf Raw SPT Data SPT Count (blows/ft) 50403020100 De p t h ( f t ) 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Raw SPT Data Insitu CSR - CRR Plot CSR - CRR 10.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 CSR - CRR Plot During earthq. FS Plot Factor of Safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential 6420 De p t h ( f t ) 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 LPI During earthq. CRR 7.50 clean sand curve Corrected Blow Count N1(60),cs 50454035302520151050 Cy c l i c S t r e s s R a t i o * 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 CRR 7.50 clean sand curve Liquefaction No Liquefaction F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy LPI color scheme Very high risk High risk Low risk Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 9LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 237 Packet Page 667 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific Raw SPT Data SPT Count (blows/ft) 50403020100 De p t h ( f t ) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Raw SPT Data Insitu CSR - CRR Plot CSR - CRR 10.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 CSR - CRR Plot During earthq. FS Plot Factor of Safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 FS Plot During earthq. Vertical Liq. Settlements Cuml. Settlement (in) 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Vertical Liq. Settlements During earthq. Lateral Liq. Displacements Cuml. Displacement (ft) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Lateral Liq. Displacements During earthq. :: Overall Liquefaction Assessment Analysis Plots :: Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 10LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 238 Packet Page 668 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific Test Depth (ft) :: Field input data :: SPT Field Value (blows) Fines Content (%) Unit Weight (pcf) Infl. Thickness (ft) Can Liquefy 0.50 7 21.00 117.00 1.00 Yes 1.50 7 21.00 117.00 1.00 Yes 2.50 7 21.00 117.00 1.00 Yes 3.50 8 21.00 113.00 1.00 Yes 4.50 8 21.00 113.00 1.00 Yes 5.50 8 21.00 113.00 1.00 Yes 6.50 8 21.00 113.00 1.00 Yes 7.50 8 21.00 113.00 1.00 Yes 8.50 21 21.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 9.50 21 21.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 10.50 21 21.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 11.50 21 21.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 12.50 21 21.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 13.50 33 21.00 137.00 1.00 Yes 14.50 33 21.00 137.00 1.00 Yes 15.50 33 21.00 137.00 1.00 Yes 16.50 33 21.00 137.00 1.00 Yes 17.50 33 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 18.50 35 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 19.50 35 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 20.50 35 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 21.50 35 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 22.50 35 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 23.50 41 31.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 24.50 41 31.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 25.50 41 31.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 26.50 41 31.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 27.50 41 31.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 28.50 41 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 29.50 41 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 30.50 41 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 31.50 41 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 32.50 41 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes 33.50 100 9.00 120.00 1.00 Yes Abbreviations Depth: SPT Field Value: Fines Content: Unit Weight: Infl. Thickness: Can Liquefy: Depth at which test was performed (ft) Number of blows per foot Fines content at test depth (%) Unit weight at test depth (pcf) Thickness of the soil layer to be considered in settlements analysis (ft) User defined switch for excluding/including test depth from the analysis procedure :: Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) calculation data :: CRR7.5Depth (ft) SPT Field Value CN CE CB CR CS (N1)60 (N1)60csFC (%) σv(tsf) uo(tsf) σ'vo(tsf) Unit Weight (pcf) Δ(Ν1)60m 0.50 7 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 10 15 4.00021.00117.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.46 4.63 1.50 7 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 10 15 4.00021.00117.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.46 4.63 2.50 7 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 10 15 4.00021.00117.00 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.46 4.63 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 11LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 239 Packet Page 669 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific :: Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) calculation data :: CRR7.5Depth (ft) SPT Field Value CN CE CB CR CS (N1)60 (N1)60csFC (%) σv(tsf) uo(tsf) σ'vo(tsf) Unit Weight (pcf) Δ(Ν1)60m 3.50 8 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 12 17 4.00021.00113.00 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.44 4.63 4.50 8 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 12 17 4.00021.00113.00 0.26 0.00 0.26 0.44 4.63 5.50 8 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 12 17 4.00021.00113.00 0.32 0.00 0.32 0.44 4.63 6.50 8 1.61 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 11 16 4.00021.00113.00 0.37 0.00 0.37 0.45 4.63 7.50 8 1.51 1.00 1.15 0.80 1.00 11 16 4.00021.00113.00 0.43 0.00 0.43 0.46 4.63 8.50 21 1.31 1.00 1.15 0.80 1.00 25 30 0.48521.00120.00 0.49 0.00 0.49 0.35 4.63 9.50 21 1.27 1.00 1.15 0.80 1.00 24 29 0.42921.00120.00 0.55 0.00 0.55 0.36 4.63 10.50 21 1.22 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 25 30 0.48521.00120.00 0.61 0.00 0.61 0.36 4.63 11.50 21 1.18 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 24 29 0.42921.00120.00 0.67 0.00 0.67 0.36 4.63 12.50 21 1.15 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 24 29 0.42921.00120.00 0.73 0.00 0.73 0.37 4.63 13.50 33 1.09 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 35 40 4.00021.00137.00 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.30 4.63 14.50 33 1.06 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 34 39 4.00021.00137.00 0.87 0.00 0.87 0.30 4.63 15.50 33 1.04 1.00 1.15 0.85 1.00 34 39 4.00021.00137.00 0.93 0.00 0.93 0.31 4.63 16.50 33 1.02 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 37 42 4.00021.00137.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.29 4.63 17.50 33 1.00 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 36 37 4.0009.00120.00 1.06 0.02 1.05 0.32 0.72 18.50 35 0.99 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 38 39 4.0009.00120.00 1.12 0.05 1.08 0.31 0.72 19.50 35 0.99 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 38 39 4.0009.00120.00 1.18 0.08 1.10 0.31 0.72 20.50 35 0.98 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 37 38 4.0009.00120.00 1.24 0.11 1.13 0.31 0.72 21.50 35 0.97 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 37 38 4.0009.00120.00 1.30 0.14 1.16 0.31 0.72 22.50 35 0.96 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 37 38 4.0009.00120.00 1.36 0.17 1.19 0.31 0.72 23.50 41 0.96 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 43 48 4.00031.00120.00 1.42 0.20 1.22 0.26 5.40 24.50 41 0.96 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 43 48 4.00031.00120.00 1.48 0.23 1.25 0.26 5.40 25.50 41 0.95 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 43 48 4.00031.00120.00 1.54 0.27 1.28 0.26 5.40 26.50 41 0.95 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 42 47 4.00031.00120.00 1.60 0.30 1.31 0.26 5.40 27.50 41 0.94 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 42 47 4.00031.00120.00 1.66 0.33 1.34 0.26 5.40 28.50 41 0.93 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 42 43 4.0009.00120.00 1.72 0.36 1.36 0.28 0.72 29.50 41 0.92 1.00 1.15 0.95 1.00 41 42 4.0009.00120.00 1.78 0.39 1.39 0.29 0.72 30.50 41 0.92 1.00 1.15 1.00 1.00 43 44 4.0009.00120.00 1.84 0.42 1.42 0.27 0.72 31.50 41 0.92 1.00 1.15 1.00 1.00 43 44 4.0009.00120.00 1.90 0.45 1.45 0.28 0.72 32.50 41 0.91 1.00 1.15 1.00 1.00 43 44 4.0009.00120.00 1.96 0.48 1.48 0.28 0.72 33.50 100 0.91 1.00 1.15 1.00 1.00 105 106 4.0009.00120.00 2.02 0.51 1.51 0.26 0.72 σv: uo: σ'vo: m: CN: CE: CB: CR: CS: N1(60): Δ(Ν1)60 N1 (60) cs: CRR7.5: Total stress during SPT test (tsf) Water pore pressure during SPT test (tsf) Effective overburden pressure during SPT test (tsf) Stress exponent normalization factor Overburden corretion factor Energy correction factor Borehole diameter correction factor Rod length correction factor Liner correction factor Corrected NSPT to a 60% energy ratio Equivalent clean sand adjustment Corected N1(60) value for fines content Cyclic resistance ratio for M=7.5 Abbreviations σv,eq(tsf) rd CSR MSF CSReq,M=7.5 Ksigma CSR* :: Cyclic Stress Ratio calculation (CSR fully adjusted and normalized) :: Depth (ft) Unit Weight (pcf) uo,eq(tsf) σ'vo,eq(tsf) FSMSFmax(N1)60csα 0.50 117.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 1.01 0.758 0.97 0.782 1.10 0.711 2.0001.32 151.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 12LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 240 Packet Page 670 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific σv,eq(tsf) rd CSR MSF CSReq,M=7.5 Ksigma CSR* :: Cyclic Stress Ratio calculation (CSR fully adjusted and normalized) :: Depth (ft) Unit Weight (pcf) uo,eq(tsf) σ'vo,eq(tsf) FSMSFmax(N1)60csα 1.50 117.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 1.00 0.757 0.97 0.780 1.10 0.709 2.0001.32 151.00 2.50 117.00 0.15 0.00 0.15 1.00 0.755 0.97 0.779 1.10 0.708 2.0001.32 151.00 3.50 113.00 0.20 0.00 0.20 1.00 0.754 0.96 0.782 1.10 0.711 2.0001.38 171.00 4.50 113.00 0.26 0.00 0.26 1.00 0.752 0.96 0.781 1.10 0.710 2.0001.38 171.00 5.50 113.00 0.32 0.00 0.32 1.00 0.751 0.96 0.779 1.10 0.709 2.0001.38 171.00 6.50 113.00 0.37 0.00 0.37 0.99 0.749 0.97 0.775 1.10 0.705 2.0001.35 161.00 7.50 113.00 0.43 0.00 0.43 0.99 0.748 0.97 0.774 1.10 0.703 2.0001.35 161.00 8.50 120.00 0.49 0.02 0.47 0.99 0.771 0.90 0.852 1.10 0.775 0.6262.00 301.00 9.50 120.00 0.55 0.05 0.50 0.99 0.814 0.91 0.894 1.10 0.813 0.5281.94 291.00 10.50 120.00 0.61 0.08 0.53 0.98 0.852 0.90 0.942 1.10 0.856 0.5662.00 301.00 11.50 120.00 0.67 0.11 0.56 0.98 0.885 0.91 0.973 1.10 0.884 0.4851.94 291.00 12.50 120.00 0.73 0.14 0.59 0.98 0.915 0.91 1.005 1.10 0.914 0.4691.94 291.00 13.50 137.00 0.80 0.17 0.63 0.98 0.939 0.89 1.061 1.10 0.965 2.0002.20 401.00 14.50 137.00 0.87 0.20 0.66 0.97 0.960 0.89 1.084 1.10 0.986 2.0002.20 391.00 15.50 137.00 0.93 0.23 0.70 0.97 0.978 0.89 1.105 1.10 1.004 2.0002.20 391.00 16.50 137.00 1.00 0.27 0.74 0.97 0.994 0.89 1.123 1.10 1.021 2.0002.20 421.00 17.50 120.00 1.06 0.30 0.77 0.97 1.011 0.89 1.142 1.10 1.043 2.0002.20 371.00 18.50 120.00 1.12 0.33 0.80 0.96 1.026 0.89 1.159 1.08 1.069 2.0002.20 391.00 19.50 120.00 1.18 0.36 0.82 0.96 1.040 0.89 1.175 1.07 1.094 2.0002.20 391.00 20.50 120.00 1.24 0.39 0.85 0.96 1.052 0.89 1.189 1.06 1.118 2.0002.20 381.00 21.50 120.00 1.30 0.42 0.88 0.95 1.064 0.89 1.202 1.05 1.140 2.0002.20 381.00 22.50 120.00 1.36 0.45 0.91 0.95 1.074 0.89 1.213 1.04 1.162 2.0002.20 381.00 23.50 120.00 1.42 0.48 0.94 0.95 1.083 0.89 1.224 1.04 1.182 2.0002.20 481.00 24.50 120.00 1.48 0.51 0.97 0.95 1.092 0.89 1.233 1.03 1.202 2.0002.20 481.00 25.50 120.00 1.54 0.55 1.00 0.94 1.099 0.89 1.242 1.02 1.220 2.0002.20 481.00 26.50 120.00 1.60 0.58 1.03 0.94 1.106 0.89 1.250 1.01 1.238 2.0002.20 471.00 27.50 120.00 1.66 0.61 1.05 0.94 1.112 0.89 1.257 1.00 1.255 2.0002.20 471.00 28.50 120.00 1.72 0.64 1.08 0.93 1.118 0.89 1.263 0.99 1.271 2.0002.20 431.00 29.50 120.00 1.78 0.67 1.11 0.93 1.122 0.89 1.268 0.99 1.287 2.0002.20 421.00 30.50 120.00 1.84 0.70 1.14 0.93 1.127 0.89 1.273 0.98 1.302 2.0002.20 441.00 31.50 120.00 1.90 0.73 1.17 0.92 1.130 0.89 1.277 0.97 1.316 2.0002.20 441.00 32.50 120.00 1.96 0.76 1.20 0.92 1.134 0.89 1.281 0.96 1.330 2.0002.20 441.00 33.50 120.00 2.02 0.80 1.23 0.91 1.136 0.89 1.284 0.96 1.343 2.0002.20 1061.00 σv,eq: uo,eq: σ'vo,eq: rd: α: CSR : MSF : CSReq,M=7.5: Ksigma: CSR*: FS: Total overburden pressure at test point, during earthquake (tsf) Water pressure at test point, during earthquake (tsf) Effective overburden pressure, during earthquake (tsf) Nonlinear shear mass factor Improvement factor due to stone columns Cyclic Stress Ratio Magnitude Scaling Factor CSR adjusted for M=7.5 Effective overburden stress factor CSR fully adjusted (user FS applied)*** Calculated factor of safety against soil liquefaction Abbreviations 1.00* ** User FS: :: Liquefaction potential according to Iwasaki :: Depth (ft) FS F Thickness (ft) wz IL Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 13LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 241 Packet Page 671 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific :: Liquefaction potential according to Iwasaki :: Depth (ft) FS F Thickness (ft) wz IL 0.50 2.000 0.00 9.92 0.001.00 1.50 2.000 0.00 9.77 0.001.00 2.50 2.000 0.00 9.62 0.001.00 3.50 2.000 0.00 9.47 0.001.00 4.50 2.000 0.00 9.31 0.001.00 5.50 2.000 0.00 9.16 0.001.00 6.50 2.000 0.00 9.01 0.001.00 7.50 2.000 0.00 8.86 0.001.00 8.50 0.626 0.37 8.70 0.991.00 9.50 0.528 0.47 8.55 1.231.00 10.50 0.566 0.43 8.40 1.111.00 11.50 0.485 0.51 8.25 1.291.00 12.50 0.469 0.53 8.10 1.311.00 13.50 2.000 0.00 7.94 0.001.00 14.50 2.000 0.00 7.79 0.001.00 15.50 2.000 0.00 7.64 0.001.00 16.50 2.000 0.00 7.49 0.001.00 17.50 2.000 0.00 7.33 0.001.00 18.50 2.000 0.00 7.18 0.001.00 19.50 2.000 0.00 7.03 0.001.00 20.50 2.000 0.00 6.88 0.001.00 21.50 2.000 0.00 6.72 0.001.00 22.50 2.000 0.00 6.57 0.001.00 23.50 2.000 0.00 6.42 0.001.00 24.50 2.000 0.00 6.27 0.001.00 25.50 2.000 0.00 6.11 0.001.00 26.50 2.000 0.00 5.96 0.001.00 27.50 2.000 0.00 5.81 0.001.00 28.50 2.000 0.00 5.66 0.001.00 29.50 2.000 0.00 5.50 0.001.00 30.50 2.000 0.00 5.35 0.001.00 31.50 2.000 0.00 5.20 0.001.00 32.50 2.000 0.00 5.05 0.001.00 33.50 2.000 0.00 4.89 0.001.00 5.94 IL = 0.00 - No liquefaction IL between 0.00 and 5 - Liquefaction not probable IL between 5 and 15 - Liquefaction probable IL > 15 - Liquefaction certain Overall potential IL : :: Vertical settlements estimation for dry sands :: Depth (ft) (N1)60 τav p Gmax (tsf) α b γ ε15 Nc εNc (%) ΔS (in) Δh (ft) 0.50 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 1.50 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 2.50 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 3.50 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 14LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 242 Packet Page 672 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific :: Vertical settlements estimation for dry sands :: Depth (ft) (N1)60 τav p Gmax(tsf) α b γ ε15 Nc εNc(%) ΔS (in) Δh (ft) 4.50 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 5.50 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 6.50 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 7.50 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001.00 Abbreviations τav: p: Gmax: α, b: γ: ε15: Nc: εNc: Δh: ΔS: Average cyclic shear stress Average stress Maximum shear modulus (tsf) Shear strain formula variables Average shear strain Volumetric strain after 15 cycles Number of cycles Volumetric strain for number of cycles Nc (%) Thickness of soil layer (in) Settlement of soil layer (in) 0.000Cumulative settlemetns: :: Vertical & Lateral displ.acements estimation for saturated sands :: Depth (ft) γlim (%) ev (%) dz (ft) Sv-1D (in) (N1)60cs Fα γmax (%) FSliq LDI (ft) 8.50 30 4.65 -0.09 0.626 4.65 0.92 1.00 0.111 0.00 9.50 29 5.33 -0.02 0.528 5.33 1.10 1.00 0.131 0.00 10.50 30 4.65 -0.09 0.566 4.65 0.92 1.00 0.111 0.00 11.50 29 5.33 -0.02 0.485 5.33 1.10 1.00 0.131 0.00 12.50 29 5.33 -0.02 0.469 5.33 1.10 1.00 0.131 0.00 13.50 40 0.87 -0.80 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 14.50 39 1.07 -0.73 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 15.50 39 1.07 -0.73 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 16.50 42 0.56 -0.96 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 17.50 37 1.56 -0.58 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 18.50 39 1.07 -0.73 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 19.50 39 1.07 -0.73 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 20.50 38 1.30 -0.65 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 21.50 38 1.30 -0.65 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 22.50 38 1.30 -0.65 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 23.50 48 0.09 -1.43 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 24.50 48 0.09 -1.43 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 25.50 48 0.09 -1.43 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 26.50 47 0.13 -1.35 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 27.50 47 0.13 -1.35 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 28.50 43 0.44 -1.03 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 29.50 42 0.56 -0.96 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 30.50 44 0.34 -1.11 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 31.50 44 0.34 -1.11 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 32.50 44 0.34 -1.11 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 33.50 106 0.00 -6.64 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 15LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 243 Packet Page 673 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific :: Vertical & Lateral displ.acements estimation for saturated sands :: Depth (ft) γlim(%) ev(%) dz (ft) Sv-1D(in) (N1)60cs Fα γmax(%) FSliq LDI (ft) Abbreviations 0.616Cumulative settlements: γlim: Fα/N: γmax: ev:: Sv-1D: LDI: Limiting shear strain (%) Maximun shear strain factor Maximum shear strain (%) Post liquefaction volumetric strain (%) Estimated vertical settlement (in) Estimated lateral displacement (ft) 0.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\liq anaylsis.lsvs Page: 16LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 244 Packet Page 674 of 792 References ⦁ Ronald D. Andrus, Hossein Hayati, Nisha P. Mohanan, 2009. Correcting Liquefaction Resistance for Aged Sands Using Measured to Estimated Velocity Ratio, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 135, No. 6, June 1 ⦁ Boulanger, R.W. and Idriss, I. M., 2014. CPT AND SPT BASED LIQUEFACTION TRIGGERING PROCEDURES. DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS ⦁ Dipl.-Ing. Heinz J. Priebe, Vibro Replacement to Prevent Earthquake Induced Liquefaction, Proceedings of the Geotechnique- Colloquium at Darmstadt, Germany, on March 19th, 1998 (also published in Ground Engineering, September 1998), Technical paper 12-57E ⦁ Robertson, P.K. and Cabal, K.L., 2007,Guide to Cone Penetration Testing for Geotechnical Engineering. Available at no cost at http://www.geologismiki.gr/ ⦁ Youd, T.L., Idriss, I.M., Andrus, R.D., Arango, I., Castro, G., Christian, J.T., Dobry, R., Finn, W.D.L., Harder, L.F., Hynes, M.E., Ishihara, K., Koester, J., Liao, S., Marcuson III, W.F., Martin, G.R., Mitchell, J.K., Moriwaki, Y., Power, M.S., Robertson, P.K., Seed, R., and Stokoe, K.H., Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, October, pp 817-833 ⦁ Zhang, G., Robertson. P.K., Brachman, R., 2002, Estimating Liquefaction Induced Ground Settlements from the CPT, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39: pp 1168-1180 ⦁ Zhang, G., Robertson. P.K., Brachman, R., 2004, Estimating Liquefaction Induced Lateral Displacements using the SPT and CPT, ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 8, 861-871 ⦁ Pradel, D., 1998, Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy Soils, ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 124, No. 4, 364-368 ⦁ R. Kayen, R. E. S. Moss, E. M. Thompson, R. B. Seed, K. O. Cetin, A. Der Kiureghian, Y. Tanaka, K. Tokimatsu, 2013. Shear- Wave Velocity–Based Probabilistic and Deterministic Assessment of Seismic Soil Liquefaction Potential, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 139, No. 3, March 1 LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 245 Packet Page 675 of 792 SPT BA S ED LIQUEFA CTION A NA LYS IS REPORT :: Input parameters and analysis properties :: Analysis method: Fines correction method: Sampling method: Borehole diameter: Rod length: Hammer energy ratio: Boulanger & Idriss, 2014 Boulanger & Idriss, 2014 Standard Sampler 200mm 3.30 ft 1.00 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.): Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Eq. external load: Project title : 575 Los Trancos Road Residence, Dry Sand Location : Palo Alto, California SPT Name: B-1 18.00 ft 8.00 ft 7.80 0.77 g 0.00 tsf Raw SPT Data SPT Count (blows/ft) 50403020100 De p t h ( f t ) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Raw SPT Data Insitu CSR - CRR Plot CSR - CRR 10.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 CSR - CRR Plot During earthq. FS Plot Factor of Safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential 0 De p t h ( f t ) 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 LPI During earthq. CRR 7.50 clean sand curve Corrected Blow Count N1(60),cs 50454035302520151050 Cy c l i c S t r e s s R a t i o * 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 CRR 7.50 clean sand curve Liquefaction No Liquefaction F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy LPI color scheme Very high risk High risk Low risk Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\dry sand anaylsis.lsvs Page: 1LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 246 Packet Page 676 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific Raw SPT Data SPT Count (blows/ft) 50403020100 De p t h ( f t ) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Raw SPT Data Insitu CSR - CRR Plot CSR - CRR 10.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 8.4 8.2 8 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.2 6 5.8 5.6 5.4 5.2 5 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 CSR - CRR Plot During earthq. FS Plot Factor of Safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 8.4 8.2 8 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.2 6 5.8 5.6 5.4 5.2 5 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 FS Plot During earthq. Vertical Liq. Settlements Cuml. Settlement (in) 0.20.10 De p t h ( f t ) 8.4 8.2 8 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.2 6 5.8 5.6 5.4 5.2 5 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 Vertical Liq. Settlements During earthq. Lateral Liq. Displacements Cuml. Displacement (ft) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 8.4 8.2 8 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.2 6 5.8 5.6 5.4 5.2 5 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 Lateral Liq. Displacements During earthq. :: Overall Liquefaction Assessment Analysis Plots :: Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\dry sand anaylsis.lsvs Page: 2LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 247 Packet Page 677 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific Test Depth (ft) :: Field input data :: SPT Field Value (blows) Fines Content (%) Unit Weight (pcf) Infl. Thickness (ft) Can Liquefy 0.50 16 5.00 116.00 1.00 Yes 1.50 16 5.00 116.00 1.00 Yes 2.50 16 5.00 116.00 1.00 Yes 3.50 12 5.00 122.00 1.00 Yes 4.50 12 5.00 122.00 1.00 Yes 5.50 12 18.00 122.00 1.00 Yes 6.50 12 18.00 122.00 1.00 Yes 7.50 43 18.00 120.00 1.00 No 8.50 43 18.00 120.00 1.00 No Abbreviations Depth: SPT Field Value: Fines Content: Unit Weight: Infl. Thickness: Can Liquefy: Depth at which test was performed (ft) Number of blows per foot Fines content at test depth (%) Unit weight at test depth (pcf) Thickness of the soil layer to be considered in settlements analysis (ft) User defined switch for excluding/including test depth from the analysis procedure :: Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) calculation data :: CRR7.5Depth (ft) SPT Field Value CN CE CB CR CS (N1)60 (N1)60csFC (%) σv (tsf) uo (tsf) σ'vo (tsf) Unit Weight (pcf) Δ(Ν1)60m 0.50 16 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 23 23 4.0005.00116.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.41 0.00 1.50 16 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 23 23 4.0005.00116.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.41 0.00 2.50 16 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 23 23 4.0005.00116.00 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.41 0.00 3.50 12 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 18 18 4.0005.00122.00 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.46 0.00 4.50 12 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 18 18 4.0005.00122.00 0.27 0.00 0.27 0.46 0.00 5.50 12 1.62 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 17 21 4.00018.00122.00 0.33 0.00 0.33 0.41 4.09 6.50 12 1.53 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 16 20 4.00018.00122.00 0.39 0.00 0.39 0.42 4.09 7.50 43 1.25 1.00 1.15 0.80 1.00 50 54 4.00018.00120.00 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.26 4.09 8.50 43 1.21 1.00 1.15 0.80 1.00 48 52 4.00018.00120.00 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.26 4.09 σv: uo: σ'vo: m: CN: CE: CB: CR: CS: N1(60): Δ(Ν1)60 N1 (60) cs: CRR7.5: Total stress during SPT test (tsf) Water pore pressure during SPT test (tsf) Effective overburden pressure during SPT test (tsf) Stress exponent normalization factor Overburden corretion factor Energy correction factor Borehole diameter correction factor Rod length correction factor Liner correction factor Corrected NSPT to a 60% energy ratio Equivalent clean sand adjustment Corected N1(60) value for fines content Cyclic resistance ratio for M=7.5 Abbreviations σv,eq (tsf) rd CSR MSF CSReq,M=7.5 Ksigma CSR* :: Cyclic Stress Ratio calculation (CSR fully adjusted and normalized) :: Depth (ft) Unit Weight (pcf) uo,eq (tsf) σ'vo,eq (tsf) FSMSFmax(N1)60csα 0.50 116.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 1.01 0.503 0.94 0.535 1.10 0.486 2.0001.62 231.00 1.50 116.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 1.00 0.502 0.94 0.534 1.10 0.486 2.0001.62 231.00 2.50 116.00 0.15 0.00 0.15 1.00 0.501 0.94 0.533 1.10 0.485 2.0001.62 231.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\dry sand anaylsis.lsvs Page: 3LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 248 Packet Page 678 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific σv,eq(tsf) rd CSR MSF CSReq,M=7.5 Ksigma CSR* :: Cyclic Stress Ratio calculation (CSR fully adjusted and normalized) :: Depth (ft) Unit Weight (pcf) uo,eq(tsf) σ'vo,eq(tsf) FSMSFmax(N1)60csα 3.50 122.00 0.21 0.00 0.21 1.00 0.500 0.96 0.521 1.10 0.474 2.0001.42 181.00 4.50 122.00 0.27 0.00 0.27 1.00 0.499 0.96 0.520 1.10 0.473 2.0001.42 181.00 5.50 122.00 0.33 0.00 0.33 1.00 0.498 0.95 0.525 1.10 0.478 2.0001.53 211.00 6.50 122.00 0.39 0.00 0.39 0.99 0.497 0.95 0.522 1.10 0.475 2.0001.49 201.00 7.50 120.00 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.99 0.496 0.89 0.561 1.10 0.510 2.0002.20 541.00 8.50 120.00 0.51 0.02 0.49 0.99 0.511 0.89 0.577 1.10 0.525 2.0002.20 521.00 σv,eq: uo,eq: σ'vo,eq: rd: α: CSR : MSF : CSReq,M=7.5: Ksigma: CSR*: FS: Total overburden pressure at test point, during earthquake (tsf) Water pressure at test point, during earthquake (tsf) Effective overburden pressure, during earthquake (tsf) Nonlinear shear mass factor Improvement factor due to stone columns Cyclic Stress Ratio Magnitude Scaling Factor CSR adjusted for M=7.5 Effective overburden stress factor CSR fully adjusted (user FS applied)*** Calculated factor of safety against soil liquefaction Abbreviations 1.00* ** User FS: :: Liquefaction potential according to Iwasaki :: Depth (ft) FS F Thickness (ft) wz IL 0.50 2.000 0.00 9.92 0.001.00 1.50 2.000 0.00 9.77 0.001.00 2.50 2.000 0.00 9.62 0.001.00 3.50 2.000 0.00 9.47 0.001.00 4.50 2.000 0.00 9.31 0.001.00 5.50 2.000 0.00 9.16 0.001.00 6.50 2.000 0.00 9.01 0.001.00 7.50 2.000 0.00 8.86 0.001.00 8.50 2.000 0.00 8.70 0.001.00 0.00 IL = 0.00 - No liquefaction IL between 0.00 and 5 - Liquefaction not probable IL between 5 and 15 - Liquefaction probable IL > 15 - Liquefaction certain Overall potential IL : :: Vertical settlements estimation for dry sands :: Depth (ft) (N1)60 τav p Gmax (tsf) α b γ ε15 Nc εNc (%) ΔS (in) Δh (ft) 0.50 23 0.01 0.02 0.18 0.13 53547.74 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.08 0.0181.00 1.50 23 0.04 0.06 0.31 0.13 27699.28 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.09 0.0211.00 2.50 23 0.07 0.10 0.40 0.13 20387.27 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.10 0.0231.00 3.50 18 0.10 0.14 0.44 0.13 16514.28 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.20 0.0471.00 4.50 18 0.13 0.18 0.50 0.13 14134.26 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.21 0.0491.00 5.50 17 0.16 0.22 0.58 0.14 12492.68 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.15 0.0351.00 6.50 16 0.19 0.26 0.62 0.14 11277.43 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.17 0.0411.00 7.50 50 0.22 0.30 0.93 0.14 10347.42 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.02 0.0051.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\dry sand anaylsis.lsvs Page: 4LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 249 Packet Page 679 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific :: Vertical settlements estimation for dry sands :: Depth (ft) (N1)60 τav p Gmax(tsf) α b γ ε15 Nc εNc(%) ΔS (in) Δh (ft) Abbreviations τav: p: Gmax: α, b: γ: ε15: Nc: εNc: Δh: ΔS: Average cyclic shear stress Average stress Maximum shear modulus (tsf) Shear strain formula variables Average shear strain Volumetric strain after 15 cycles Number of cycles Volumetric strain for number of cycles Nc (%) Thickness of soil layer (in) Settlement of soil layer (in) 0.239Cumulative settlemetns: :: Vertical & Lateral displ.acements estimation for saturated sands :: Depth (ft) γlim (%) ev (%) dz (ft) Sv-1D (in) (N1)60cs Fα γmax (%) FSliq LDI (ft) 8.50 52 0.00 0.00 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 Abbreviations 0.000Cumulative settlements: γlim: Fα/N: γmax: ev:: Sv-1D: LDI: Limiting shear strain (%) Maximun shear strain factor Maximum shear strain (%) Post liquefaction volumetric strain (%) Estimated vertical settlement (in) Estimated lateral displacement (ft) 0.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\dry sand anaylsis.lsvs Page: 5LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 250 Packet Page 680 of 792 SPT BA S ED LIQUEFA CTION A NA LYS IS REPORT :: Input parameters and analysis properties :: Analysis method: Fines correction method: Sampling method: Borehole diameter: Rod length: Hammer energy ratio: Boulanger & Idriss, 2014 Boulanger & Idriss, 2014 Standard Sampler 200mm 3.30 ft 1.00 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.): Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Eq. external load: Project title : 575 Los Trancos Road Residence, Dry Sand Location : Palo Alto, California SPT Name: B-2 17.00 ft 8.00 ft 7.80 0.77 g 0.00 tsf Raw SPT Data SPT Count (blows/ft) 50403020100 De p t h ( f t ) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Raw SPT Data Insitu CSR - CRR Plot CSR - CRR 10.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 CSR - CRR Plot During earthq. FS Plot Factor of Safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential 0 De p t h ( f t ) 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 LPI During earthq. CRR 7.50 clean sand curve Corrected Blow Count N1(60),cs 50454035302520151050 Cy c l i c S t r e s s R a t i o * 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 CRR 7.50 clean sand curve Liquefaction No Liquefaction F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy LPI color scheme Very high risk High risk Low risk Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\dry sand anaylsis.lsvs Page: 6LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 251 Packet Page 681 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific Raw SPT Data SPT Count (blows/ft) 50403020100 De p t h ( f t ) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Raw SPT Data Insitu CSR - CRR Plot CSR - CRR 10.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 8.4 8.2 8 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.2 6 5.8 5.6 5.4 5.2 5 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 CSR - CRR Plot During earthq. FS Plot Factor of Safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 8.4 8.2 8 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.2 6 5.8 5.6 5.4 5.2 5 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 FS Plot During earthq. Vertical Liq. Settlements Cuml. Settlement (in) 0.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 8.4 8.2 8 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.2 6 5.8 5.6 5.4 5.2 5 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 Vertical Liq. Settlements During earthq. Lateral Liq. Displacements Cuml. Displacement (ft) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 8.4 8.2 8 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.2 6 5.8 5.6 5.4 5.2 5 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 Lateral Liq. Displacements During earthq. :: Overall Liquefaction Assessment Analysis Plots :: Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\dry sand anaylsis.lsvs Page: 7LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 252 Packet Page 682 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific Test Depth (ft) :: Field input data :: SPT Field Value (blows) Fines Content (%) Unit Weight (pcf) Infl. Thickness (ft) Can Liquefy 0.50 7 21.00 117.00 1.00 Yes 1.50 7 21.00 117.00 1.00 Yes 2.50 7 21.00 117.00 1.00 Yes 3.50 8 21.00 113.00 1.00 Yes 4.50 8 21.00 113.00 1.00 Yes 5.50 8 21.00 113.00 1.00 Yes 6.50 8 21.00 113.00 1.00 Yes 7.50 8 21.00 113.00 1.00 No 8.50 21 21.00 120.00 1.00 No Abbreviations Depth: SPT Field Value: Fines Content: Unit Weight: Infl. Thickness: Can Liquefy: Depth at which test was performed (ft) Number of blows per foot Fines content at test depth (%) Unit weight at test depth (pcf) Thickness of the soil layer to be considered in settlements analysis (ft) User defined switch for excluding/including test depth from the analysis procedure :: Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) calculation data :: CRR7.5Depth (ft) SPT Field Value CN CE CB CR CS (N1)60 (N1)60csFC (%) σv (tsf) uo (tsf) σ'vo (tsf) Unit Weight (pcf) Δ(Ν1)60m 0.50 7 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 10 15 4.00021.00117.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.46 4.63 1.50 7 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 10 15 4.00021.00117.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.46 4.63 2.50 7 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 10 15 4.00021.00117.00 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.46 4.63 3.50 8 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 12 17 4.00021.00113.00 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.44 4.63 4.50 8 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 12 17 4.00021.00113.00 0.26 0.00 0.26 0.44 4.63 5.50 8 1.70 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 12 17 4.00021.00113.00 0.32 0.00 0.32 0.44 4.63 6.50 8 1.61 1.00 1.15 0.75 1.00 11 16 4.00021.00113.00 0.37 0.00 0.37 0.45 4.63 7.50 8 1.51 1.00 1.15 0.80 1.00 11 16 4.00021.00113.00 0.43 0.00 0.43 0.46 4.63 8.50 21 1.31 1.00 1.15 0.80 1.00 25 30 4.00021.00120.00 0.49 0.00 0.49 0.35 4.63 σv: uo: σ'vo: m: CN: CE: CB: CR: CS: N1(60): Δ(Ν1)60 N1 (60) cs: CRR7.5: Total stress during SPT test (tsf) Water pore pressure during SPT test (tsf) Effective overburden pressure during SPT test (tsf) Stress exponent normalization factor Overburden corretion factor Energy correction factor Borehole diameter correction factor Rod length correction factor Liner correction factor Corrected NSPT to a 60% energy ratio Equivalent clean sand adjustment Corected N1(60) value for fines content Cyclic resistance ratio for M=7.5 Abbreviations σv,eq (tsf) rd CSR MSF CSReq,M=7.5 Ksigma CSR* :: Cyclic Stress Ratio calculation (CSR fully adjusted and normalized) :: Depth (ft) Unit Weight (pcf) uo,eq (tsf) σ'vo,eq (tsf) FSMSFmax(N1)60csα 0.50 117.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 1.01 0.503 0.97 0.519 1.10 0.472 2.0001.32 151.00 1.50 117.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 1.00 0.502 0.97 0.518 1.10 0.471 2.0001.32 151.00 2.50 117.00 0.15 0.00 0.15 1.00 0.501 0.97 0.517 1.10 0.470 2.0001.32 151.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\dry sand anaylsis.lsvs Page: 8LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 253 Packet Page 683 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific σv,eq(tsf) rd CSR MSF CSReq,M=7.5 Ksigma CSR* :: Cyclic Stress Ratio calculation (CSR fully adjusted and normalized) :: Depth (ft) Unit Weight (pcf) uo,eq(tsf) σ'vo,eq(tsf) FSMSFmax(N1)60csα 3.50 113.00 0.20 0.00 0.20 1.00 0.500 0.96 0.519 1.10 0.472 2.0001.38 171.00 4.50 113.00 0.26 0.00 0.26 1.00 0.499 0.96 0.518 1.10 0.471 2.0001.38 171.00 5.50 113.00 0.32 0.00 0.32 1.00 0.498 0.96 0.517 1.10 0.470 2.0001.38 171.00 6.50 113.00 0.37 0.00 0.37 0.99 0.497 0.97 0.515 1.10 0.468 2.0001.35 161.00 7.50 113.00 0.43 0.00 0.43 0.99 0.496 0.97 0.513 1.10 0.467 2.0001.35 161.00 8.50 120.00 0.49 0.02 0.47 0.99 0.512 0.90 0.566 1.10 0.514 2.0002.00 301.00 σv,eq: uo,eq: σ'vo,eq: rd: α: CSR : MSF : CSReq,M=7.5: Ksigma: CSR*: FS: Total overburden pressure at test point, during earthquake (tsf) Water pressure at test point, during earthquake (tsf) Effective overburden pressure, during earthquake (tsf) Nonlinear shear mass factor Improvement factor due to stone columns Cyclic Stress Ratio Magnitude Scaling Factor CSR adjusted for M=7.5 Effective overburden stress factor CSR fully adjusted (user FS applied)*** Calculated factor of safety against soil liquefaction Abbreviations 1.00* ** User FS: :: Liquefaction potential according to Iwasaki :: Depth (ft) FS F Thickness (ft) wz IL 0.50 2.000 0.00 9.92 0.001.00 1.50 2.000 0.00 9.77 0.001.00 2.50 2.000 0.00 9.62 0.001.00 3.50 2.000 0.00 9.47 0.001.00 4.50 2.000 0.00 9.31 0.001.00 5.50 2.000 0.00 9.16 0.001.00 6.50 2.000 0.00 9.01 0.001.00 7.50 2.000 0.00 8.86 0.001.00 8.50 2.000 0.00 8.70 0.001.00 0.00 IL = 0.00 - No liquefaction IL between 0.00 and 5 - Liquefaction not probable IL between 5 and 15 - Liquefaction probable IL > 15 - Liquefaction certain Overall potential IL : :: Vertical settlements estimation for dry sands :: Depth (ft) (N1)60 τav p Gmax (tsf) α b γ ε15 Nc εNc (%) ΔS (in) Δh (ft) 0.50 10 0.01 0.02 0.15 0.13 53272.67 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.28 0.0661.00 1.50 10 0.04 0.06 0.27 0.13 27556.98 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.29 0.0701.00 2.50 10 0.07 0.10 0.35 0.13 20282.55 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.31 0.0741.00 3.50 12 0.10 0.14 0.42 0.13 16672.60 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.23 0.0551.00 4.50 12 0.13 0.17 0.48 0.13 14386.29 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.24 0.0571.00 5.50 12 0.16 0.21 0.53 0.14 12781.27 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.25 0.0591.00 6.50 11 0.19 0.25 0.56 0.14 11579.22 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.30 0.0721.00 7.50 11 0.21 0.29 0.60 0.14 10637.94 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.31 0.0741.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\dry sand anaylsis.lsvs Page: 9LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 254 Packet Page 684 of 792 This software is registered to: Earth Systems Pacific :: Vertical settlements estimation for dry sands :: Depth (ft) (N1)60 τav p Gmax(tsf) α b γ ε15 Nc εNc(%) ΔS (in) Δh (ft) Abbreviations τav: p: Gmax: α, b: γ: ε15: Nc: εNc: Δh: ΔS: Average cyclic shear stress Average stress Maximum shear modulus (tsf) Shear strain formula variables Average shear strain Volumetric strain after 15 cycles Number of cycles Volumetric strain for number of cycles Nc (%) Thickness of soil layer (in) Settlement of soil layer (in) 0.527Cumulative settlemetns: :: Vertical & Lateral displ.acements estimation for saturated sands :: Depth (ft) γlim (%) ev (%) dz (ft) Sv-1D (in) (N1)60cs Fα γmax (%) FSliq LDI (ft) 8.50 30 0.00 0.00 2.000 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.000 0.00 Abbreviations 0.000Cumulative settlements: γlim: Fα/N: γmax: ev:: Sv-1D: LDI: Limiting shear strain (%) Maximun shear strain factor Maximum shear strain (%) Post liquefaction volumetric strain (%) Estimated vertical settlement (in) Estimated lateral displacement (ft) 0.00 Project File: \\ad.earthsys.com\shares\Archive\Fremont\PUBLIC\FREMONT FILE FOLDERS\Individual Folders\Phillip\Projects\2021\575 Los Trancos\dry sand anaylsis.lsvs Page: 10LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 255 Packet Page 685 of 792 References ⦁ Ronald D. Andrus, Hossein Hayati, Nisha P. Mohanan, 2009. Correcting Liquefaction Resistance for Aged Sands Using Measured to Estimated Velocity Ratio, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 135, No. 6, June 1 ⦁ Boulanger, R.W. and Idriss, I. M., 2014. CPT AND SPT BASED LIQUEFACTION TRIGGERING PROCEDURES. DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS ⦁ Dipl.-Ing. Heinz J. Priebe, Vibro Replacement to Prevent Earthquake Induced Liquefaction, Proceedings of the Geotechnique- Colloquium at Darmstadt, Germany, on March 19th, 1998 (also published in Ground Engineering, September 1998), Technical paper 12-57E ⦁ Robertson, P.K. and Cabal, K.L., 2007,Guide to Cone Penetration Testing for Geotechnical Engineering. Available at no cost at http://www.geologismiki.gr/ ⦁ Youd, T.L., Idriss, I.M., Andrus, R.D., Arango, I., Castro, G., Christian, J.T., Dobry, R., Finn, W.D.L., Harder, L.F., Hynes, M.E., Ishihara, K., Koester, J., Liao, S., Marcuson III, W.F., Martin, G.R., Mitchell, J.K., Moriwaki, Y., Power, M.S., Robertson, P.K., Seed, R., and Stokoe, K.H., Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, October, pp 817-833 ⦁ Zhang, G., Robertson. P.K., Brachman, R., 2002, Estimating Liquefaction Induced Ground Settlements from the CPT, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39: pp 1168-1180 ⦁ Zhang, G., Robertson. P.K., Brachman, R., 2004, Estimating Liquefaction Induced Lateral Displacements using the SPT and CPT, ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 8, 861-871 ⦁ Pradel, D., 1998, Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy Soils, ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 124, No. 4, 364-368 ⦁ R. Kayen, R. E. S. Moss, E. M. Thompson, R. B. Seed, K. O. Cetin, A. Der Kiureghian, Y. Tanaka, K. Tokimatsu, 2013. Shear- Wave Velocity–Based Probabilistic and Deterministic Assessment of Seismic Soil Liquefaction Potential, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 139, No. 3, March 1 LiqSVs 2.0.1.9 - SPT & Vs Liquefaction Assessment Software ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 256 Packet Page 686 of 792 Appendix D Roadway Construction Noise Model and Vibration Noise Calculations ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 257 Packet Page 687 of 792 Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date:######## Case Description:575 Los Trancos Road ---- Receptor #1 ---- Baselines (dBA) DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family - NorthResidential 65 60 55 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%)(dBA)(dBA)(feet)(dBA) Backhoe No 40 77.6 230 0 Compactor (ground)No 20 83.2 230 0 Tractor No 40 84 230 0 Dozer No 40 81.7 230 0 Dump Truck No 40 76.5 230 0 Excavator No 40 80.7 230 0 Grader No 40 85 230 0 Front End Loader No 40 79.1 230 0 All Other Equipment > 5 HPNo 50 85 230 0 Results Calculated (dBA)Noise Limits (dBA) Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Backhoe 64.3 60.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Compactor (ground)70 63 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 70.7 66.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 68.4 64.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dump Truck 63.2 59.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 67.5 63.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 71.7 67.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Front End Loader 65.9 61.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Other Equipment > 5 HP 71.7 68.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 71.7 74.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ---- Receptor #2 ---- Baselines (dBA) DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family - WestResidential 65 60 55 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 258 Packet Page 688 of 792 Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%)(dBA)(dBA)(feet)(dBA) Backhoe No 40 77.6 250 0 Compactor (ground)No 20 83.2 250 0 Tractor No 40 84 250 0 Dozer No 40 81.7 250 0 Dump Truck No 40 76.5 250 0 Excavator No 40 80.7 250 0 Grader No 40 85 250 0 Front End Loader No 40 79.1 250 0 All Other Equipment > 5 HPNo 50 85 250 0 Results Calculated (dBA)Noise Limits (dBA) Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Backhoe 63.6 59.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Compactor (ground)69.3 62.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 70 66 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 67.7 63.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dump Truck 62.5 58.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 66.7 62.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 71 67 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Front End Loader 65.1 61.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Other Equipment > 5 HP 71 68 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 71 73.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 259 Packet Page 689 of 792 Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 260 Packet Page 690 of 792 Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 261 Packet Page 691 of 792 Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date:######## Case Description:575 Los Trancos Road - Grading ---- Receptor #1 ---- Baselines (dBA) DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family - NorthResidential 65 60 55 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%)(dBA)(dBA)(feet)(dBA) Backhoe No 40 77.6 230 0 Compactor (ground)No 20 83.2 230 0 Dozer No 40 81.7 230 0 Excavator No 40 80.7 230 0 Grader No 40 85 230 0 Front End Loader No 40 79.1 230 0 All Other Equipment > 5 HPNo 50 85 230 0 Results Calculated (dBA)Noise Limits (dBA) Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Backhoe 64.3 60.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Compactor (ground)70 63 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 68.4 64.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 67.5 63.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 71.7 67.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Front End Loader 65.9 61.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Other Equipment > 5 HP 71.7 68.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 71.7 73.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ---- Receptor #2 ---- Baselines (dBA) DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family - WestResidential 65 60 55 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%)(dBA)(dBA)(feet)(dBA) Backhoe No 40 77.6 250 0 Compactor (ground)No 20 83.2 250 0 ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 262 Packet Page 692 of 792 Dozer No 40 81.7 250 0 Excavator No 40 80.7 250 0 Grader No 40 85 250 0 Front End Loader No 40 79.1 250 0 All Other Equipment > 5 HPNo 50 85 250 0 Results Calculated (dBA)Noise Limits (dBA) Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Backhoe 63.6 59.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Compactor (ground)69.3 62.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 67.7 63.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 66.7 62.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 71 67 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Front End Loader 65.1 61.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Other Equipment > 5 HP 71 68 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 71 72.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 263 Packet Page 693 of 792 Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 264 Packet Page 694 of 792 Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 265 Packet Page 695 of 792 Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date:######## Case Description:575 Los Trancos Road - Building Construction ---- Receptor #1 ---- Baselines (dBA) DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family - NorthResidential 65 60 55 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%)(dBA)(dBA)(feet)(dBA) Man Lift No 20 74.7 230 0 Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 230 0 Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 230 0 Compactor (ground)No 20 83.2 230 0 Compressor (air)No 40 77.7 230 0 Crane No 16 80.6 230 0 Dump Truck No 40 76.5 230 0 Generator No 50 80.6 230 0 Pumps No 50 80.9 230 0 All Other Equipment > 5 HPNo 50 85 230 0 Results Calculated (dBA)Noise Limits (dBA) Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Man Lift 61.4 54.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Mixer Truck 65.5 61.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Saw 76.3 69.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Compactor (ground)70 63 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Compressor (air)64.4 60.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Crane 67.3 59.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dump Truck 63.2 59.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Generator 67.4 64.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Pumps 67.7 64.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Other Equipment > 5 HP 71.7 68.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 76.3 74.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ---- Receptor #2 ---- Baselines (dBA) DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family - WestResidential 65 60 55 ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 266 Packet Page 696 of 792 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%)(dBA)(dBA)(feet)(dBA) Man Lift No 20 74.7 250 0 Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 250 0 Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 250 0 Compactor (ground)No 20 83.2 250 0 Compressor (air)No 40 77.7 250 0 Crane No 16 80.6 250 0 Dump Truck No 40 76.5 250 0 Generator No 50 80.6 250 0 Pumps No 50 80.9 250 0 All Other Equipment > 5 HPNo 50 85 250 0 Results Calculated (dBA)Noise Limits (dBA) Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Man Lift 60.7 53.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Mixer Truck 64.8 60.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Saw 75.6 68.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Compactor (ground)69.3 62.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Compressor (air)63.7 59.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Crane 66.6 58.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dump Truck 62.5 58.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Generator 66.7 63.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Pumps 67 64 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Other Equipment > 5 HP 71 68 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 75.6 73.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 267 Packet Page 697 of 792 Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 268 Packet Page 698 of 792 Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 269 Packet Page 699 of 792 Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date:######## Case Description:575 Los Trancos Road - Paving ---- Receptor #1 ---- Baselines (dBA) DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family - NorthResidential 65 60 55 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%)(dBA)(dBA)(feet)(dBA) Backhoe No 40 77.6 230 0 Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 230 0 Compactor (ground)No 20 83.2 230 0 Tractor No 40 84 230 0 Grader No 40 85 230 0 Front End Loader No 40 79.1 230 0 Paver No 50 77.2 230 0 Roller No 20 80 230 0 All Other Equipment > 5 HPNo 50 85 230 0 Results Calculated (dBA)Noise Limits (dBA) Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Backhoe 64.3 60.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Saw 76.3 69.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Compactor (ground)70 63 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 70.7 66.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 71.7 67.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Front End Loader 65.9 61.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Paver 64 61 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Roller 66.7 59.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Other Equipment > 5 HP 71.7 68.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 76.3 75.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ---- Receptor #2 ---- Baselines (dBA) DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family - WestResidential 65 60 55 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 270 Packet Page 700 of 792 Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%)(dBA)(dBA)(feet)(dBA) Backhoe No 40 77.6 250 0 Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 250 0 Compactor (ground)No 20 83.2 250 0 Tractor No 40 84 250 0 Grader No 40 85 250 0 Front End Loader No 40 79.1 250 0 Paver No 50 77.2 250 0 Roller No 20 80 250 0 All Other Equipment > 5 HPNo 50 85 250 0 Results Calculated (dBA)Noise Limits (dBA) Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Backhoe 63.6 59.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Saw 75.6 68.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Compactor (ground)69.3 62.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 70 66 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 71 67 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Front End Loader 65.1 61.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Paver 63.2 60.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Roller 66 59 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Other Equipment > 5 HP 71 68 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 75.6 74.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 271 Packet Page 701 of 792 Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 272 Packet Page 702 of 792 Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 273 Packet Page 703 of 792 Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date:######## Case Description:575 Los Trancos Road - Architectural Coating ---- Receptor #1 ---- Baselines (dBA) DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family - NorthResidential 65 60 55 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%)(dBA)(dBA)(feet)(dBA) Compressor (air)No 40 77.7 230 0 Results Calculated (dBA)Noise Limits (dBA) Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Compressor (air)64.4 60.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 64.4 60.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ---- Receptor #2 ---- Baselines (dBA) DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family - WestResidential 65 60 55 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%)(dBA)(dBA)(feet)(dBA) Compressor (air)No 40 77.7 250 0 Results Calculated (dBA)Noise Limits (dBA) Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Compressor (air)63.7 59.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 63.7 59.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 274 Packet Page 704 of 792 Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 275 Packet Page 705 of 792 0.21 94 0.050 25 0.089 87 0.022 25 0.089 87 0.022 25 0.089 87 0.022 25 0.076 83 0.014 25 0.035 79 0.009 25 0.003 58 0.001 25 35 0.1450 91 0.035 35 0.0615 84 0.015 35 0.0615 84 0.015 35 0.0615 84 0.015 35 0.0525 80 0.010 35 0.0242 76 0.006 35 0.0021 55 0.001 0.200 PPV 72.0 VdB 0.0080 RMS 26 250 133 12 120 64 12 120 64 12 120 64 10 79 42 5 52 28 1 6 3 Last Updated: 4/11/2019 The reference distance is measured from the nearest anticipated point of construction equipment to the nearest structure. Small bulldozer Reference Level Inputs Equipment PPVref (in/sec) Lvref (VdB) RMSref (in/sec) Reference Distance Vibratory Roller Hoe Ram Hoe Ram Large bulldozer Caisson drilling Loaded trucks Jack hammer Caisson drilling Loaded trucks Distance (feet) PPVx (in/sec) Equipment Lvx (VdB) RMSx (in/sec) Vibratory Roller Hoe Ram Large bulldozer Notes Groundborne Noise and Vibration Modeling Source California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013. Transportation and Construction Vibratory Roller Vibration Level at Receiver Jack hammer Small bulldozer Large bulldozer Caisson drilling Loaded trucks Jack hammer Small bulldozer Vibration Contours Equipment Distance to (feet) ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 276 Packet Page 706 of 792 0.21 94 0.050 25 0.089 87 0.022 25 0.089 87 0.022 25 0.089 87 0.022 25 0.076 83 0.014 25 0.035 79 0.009 25 0.003 58 0.001 25 50 0.0980 87 0.023 50 0.0415 80 0.010 50 0.0415 80 0.010 50 0.0415 80 0.010 50 0.0355 76 0.007 50 0.0163 72 0.004 50 0.0014 51 0.000 0.200 PPV 72.0 VdB 0.0080 RMS 26 250 133 12 120 64 12 120 64 12 120 64 10 79 42 5 52 28 1 6 3 Last Updated: 4/11/2019 The reference distance is measured from the nearest anticipated point of construction equipment to the nearest structure. Small bulldozer Reference Level Inputs Equipment PPVref (in/sec) Lvref (VdB) RMSref (in/sec) Reference Distance Vibratory Roller Hoe Ram Hoe Ram Large bulldozer Caisson drilling Loaded trucks Jack hammer Caisson drilling Loaded trucks Distance (feet) PPVx (in/sec) Equipment Lvx (VdB) RMSx (in/sec) Vibratory Roller Hoe Ram Large bulldozer Notes Groundborne Noise and Vibration Modeling Source California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013. Transportation and Construction Vibratory Roller Vibration Level at Receiver Jack hammer Small bulldozer Large bulldozer Caisson drilling Loaded trucks Jack hammer Small bulldozer Vibration Contours Equipment Distance to (feet) ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 277 Packet Page 707 of 792 Appendix E California Water Service and West Bay Sanitary District Will Serve Letter ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 278 Packet Page 708 of 792 &nbsp;ITEM 13Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;Item&nbsp; 13:&nbsp;Page&nbsp;279Packet Page 709 of 792&nbsp; WEST BAY SANITARY DISTRICT 500 Laurel Street, Menlo Park, CA 94025 Telephone: (650) 321-0384 Fax (650) 321-4265 WILL SERVE LETTER APN : 182-46-012 August 17, 2021 City of Palo Alto Building Department 285 Hamilton Ave # 1 Palo Alto, CA 94301 RE: 575 LOS TRANCOS RD SANTA CLARA COUNTY PROPERTY OWNER : APN : 182-46-012 Dear City of Palo Alto Building Department: This letter will serve as notice that the above-referenced address is within the West Bay Sanitary District’s jurisdiction, and is entitled to receive all available services from the District, pursuant to compliance with the District’s Code of General Regulations. Should you have any questions please feel free to call the administration office at the District at (650) 321-0384. The property owners or their contractor may also feel free to contact our administration office with any questions. Very truly yours, WEST BAY SANITARY DISTRICT Todd Reese Office Manager ITEM 13 Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices Item 13: Page 280 Packet Page 710 of 792 &nbsp;ITEM 13Attachment E 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Final IS-MND with Appendices&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;Item&nbsp; 13:&nbsp;Page&nbsp;281Packet Page 711 of 792&nbsp; MITIGATION MONITORING + REPORTING PROGRAM City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 1 PROJECT NAME 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project APPLICATION NUMBER 21PLN-00196 APPROVED BY Emily Foley, City of Palo Alto APPLICANT/OWNER Innovative Homes LLC John Suppes 412 Olive Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94306 john@clarum.com The Final Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) for the 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project identifies the mitigation measures that must be implemented to reduce the impacts associated with the project. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was amended in 1989 to add Section 21081.6, which requires a public agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program for assessing and ensuring compliance with any required mitigation measures applied to proposed development. As stated in section 21081.6(a)(1) of the Public Resources Code: ... the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. Section 21081.6 also provides general guidelines for implementing mitigation monitoring programs and indicates that specific reporting and/or monitoring requirements, to be enforced during project implementation, shall be defined as part of adopting an IS-MND. The mitigation monitoring table lists those mitigation measures that would be included as conditions of approval for the project. To ensure that the mitigation measures are properly implemented, a monitoring program has been devised which identifies the timing and responsibility for monitoring each measure. ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 282 Packet Page 712 of 792 MITIGATION MONITORING + REPORTING PROGRAM City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 2 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for Implementation Timing of Compliance Oversight of Implementation AIR QUALITY AQ-1 BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation. The property owner or their designee shall implement the following measures during project construction to reduce dust fall- out emissions:  All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, and graded areas) shall be watered two times per day.  All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered or maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard.  All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.  Enclose, cover, water daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.)  All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.  Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways.  Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure CCR Title 13, Section 2485). Clear signage shall be Project Applicant/verified in the field by the Development Services Department Building Division Prior to issuance of grading permit and periodically during construction City of Palo Alto Development Services Department Building Division ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 283 Packet Page 713 of 792 City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 3 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for Implementation Timing of Compliance Oversight of Implementation provided for construction workers at all access points.  All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator.  Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the City of Palo Alto or construction contractor regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The air district’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BIO-1 Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP). Prior to initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization) all personnel associated with project construction shall attend a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training, conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in recognizing special-status resources that may occur in the construction area. The specifics of this program shall include identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area. A qualified biologist shall prepare a fact sheet conveying this information for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with construction. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer indicating they have attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to them. The forms from all trainings shall be available to the City upon request to document compliance. Project Applicant/ verified in the field by the Development Services Department Building Division Prior to initiation of construction activities City of Palo Alto Development Services Department Building Division ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 284 Packet Page 714 of 792 City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 4 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for Implementation Timing of Compliance Oversight of Implementation BIO-2 Special-Status Plant Species Botanical Surveys. A qualified biologist shall conduct a protocol level botanical survey, including a site visit during the blooming period of the target species in March through July. If the CRPR 1 rank plant is found, the plants shall be avoided by installing protective fencing and warning construction personnel of their presence through the WEAP training. If special-status plants species cannot be avoided, impacts shall be mitigated at a minimum ratio of 1:1 (number of acres or individuals restored to number of acres or individuals impacted). A restoration plan shall be prepared and submitted to the City for review and approval and to CDFW for review. The restoration plan shall include, at a minimum, the type and area of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; goals and objectives of the mitigation project; a monitoring plan including performance standards and success criteria; and maintenance activities to occur during monitoring. The applicant shall implement the measures prior to commencement of ground disturbance, tree removal or construction. Project Applicant/ verified by the Development Services Department Building Division Prior to initiation of construction activities; during restoration if required City of Palo Alto Development Services Department BIO-3 Best Management Practices for Protection of Steelhead and Aquatic Habitat. No vegetation removal, ground disturbance or construction shall occur within the creek or the 20-foot creek setback zone, which shall be demarcated with high visibility orange construction fencing to ensure avoidance of impacts to the aquatic habitat. Best management practices (BMPs) shall be developed and implemented during all grading and construction activities to prevent erosion and sedimentation into the creek and to prevent the spill of contaminants in or around the creek. The following BMPs shall be included and implemented on-site during construction to prevent any indirect impacts to aquatic habitat, as well as jurisdictional waters and wetlands:  Vehicles and equipment shall be checked at least daily for leaks and maintained in good working Project Applicant/ verified in the field by the Development Services Department Building Division Prior to initiation of construction activities and periodically during construction City of Palo Alto Development Services Department Building Division ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 285 Packet Page 715 of 792 City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 5 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for Implementation Timing of Compliance Oversight of Implementation order. Spill kits shall be available on-site at all times and a spill response plan shall be developed and implemented.  Sediment and erosion control measures (e.g., sand or gravel bags, hay bales, check dams) shall be implemented and maintained throughout the project site to prevent the entry of sediment and/or pollutants into any waterways or jurisdictional areas. No monofilament plastic may be used for erosion control materials. BIO-4 Preconstruction Surveys for California Giant Salamander, Santa Cruz Black Salamander, Western Pond Turtle, California Red-Legged Frog, and San Francisco Garter Snake. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours of the initiation of project activities. If California Giant Salamander, Santa Cruz Black Salamander, and/or Western Pond Turtle are observed the animal shall be allowed to leave the site on its own. If California Red- Legged Frog, and/or San Francisco garter snake is found, USFWS shall be notified immediately to determine the correct course of action and the proposed project shall not begin until approved by USFWS. Prior to ground disturbance, a temporary wildlife exclusion barrier shall be installed along the limits of disturbance. A qualified biologist shall inspect the area prior to barrier installation. The barrier shall be designed to prevent the target species from entering the project area and will remain in place until all development activities have been completed. This barrier shall be inspected daily by a qualified biologist and maintained and repaired as necessary to ensure that it is functional and is not a hazard to the target species on the outer side of the barrier. A qualified biologist shall be present during all grading and initial ground disturbing activities. Vegetation disturbance shall be the minimum necessary to achieve Project Applicant/ verified by the Development Services Department Prior to initiation of construction activities; during grading and initial ground disturbing activities; during construction if required City of Palo Alto Development Services Department ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 286 Packet Page 716 of 792 City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 6 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for Implementation Timing of Compliance Oversight of Implementation the goals of the project. Immediately prior to initial ground disturbance and vegetation removal, a qualified biologist shall conduct a visual clearance survey. Vegetation shall be cut to 6 inches in height using hand tools (including string trimmers or chainsaw for brush). Once the ground is visible, a second visual survey for target species shall be conducted by the biologist prior to additional ground disturbance. Should California Giant Salamander, Santa Cruz Black Salamander, or Western Pond Turtle be observed within the project site, construction shall be halted in the vicinity until either the animal exits the site on its own or until a qualified biologist relocates the animal to suitable habitat in the immediate vicinity. Should California Red- Legged Frog, and/or San Francisco garter snake be observed within the project site, the USFWS shall be notified immediately and construction shall be halted until either the animal exits the site on its own or until a qualified biologist with the appropriate USFWS Recovery Permit relocates the animal. No work shall occur during a rain event over 0.25.” If a rain event occurs, a qualified biologist shall inspect the site again prior to resuming work. All holes and trenches shall be covered at the end of the day or ramped to avoid entrapment BIO-5 Focused Surveys for Special-Status Bat Species and Roosting Bat Protection Plan. Prior to tree removal, a qualified biologist shall conduct a focused survey of all trees to be removed or impacted by construction activities to determine whether active roosts of special- status bats are present on site. If tree removal is planned for the fall, it is recommended the survey be conducted in September to ensure tree removal would have adequate time to occur during seasonal periods of bat activity, as described below. If tree removal is planned for the spring, it is recommended the survey be conducted during the earliest possible time in March, to Project Applicant/ verified by the Development Services Department Prior to tree removal and during tree removal if bats found City of Palo Alto Development Services Department ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 287 Packet Page 717 of 792 City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 7 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for Implementation Timing of Compliance Oversight of Implementation allow for suitable conditions for both the detection of bats and subsequent tree removal. Trees containing suitable potential bat roost habitat features shall be clearly marked or identified. If day roosts are found to be potentially present, the biologist shall prepare a site-specific roosting bat protection plan to be implemented by the contractor following the City of Palo Alto’s approval. The plan shall incorporate the following guidance as appropriate:  To the extent possible, trees identified as suitable roosting habitat shall be removed during seasonal periods of bat activity, including the following, but not during maternity season: o Between September 1 and about October 15, or before evening temperatures fall below 45 degrees Fahrenheit and/or more than 0.5 inch of rainfall within 24 hours occurs. o Between March 1 and April 15, or after evening temperatures rise above 45 degrees Fahrenheit and/or no more than 0.5 inch of rainfall within 24 hours occurs.  If a tree must be removed during the maternity/breeding season and is identified as potentially containing a colonial maternity roost, then a qualified biologist shall conduct acoustic emergence surveys or implement other appropriate methods to further evaluate if the roost is an active maternity roost. Under the biologist’s guidance, the contractor shall implement measures similar to or better than the following: o If it is determined that the roost is not an active maternity roost, then the roost may be removed in accordance with the other requirements of this recommendation. o If it is found that an active maternity roost of a colonial roosting species is present, the ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 288 Packet Page 718 of 792 City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 8 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for Implementation Timing of Compliance Oversight of Implementation roost shall not be disturbed during the breeding season (April 15 to August 31).  Potential colonial hibernation roosts may only be removed during seasonal periods of bat activity. Potential non-colonial roosts that cannot be avoided shall be removed on warm days in late morning to afternoon when any bats present are likely to be warm and able to fly. Appropriate methods shall be used to minimize the potential harm to bats during tree removal. Such methods may include using a two-step tree removal process. This method is conducted over two consecutive days and works by creating noise and vibration by cutting non-habitat branches and limbs from habitat trees using chainsaws only (no excavators or other heavy machinery) on day one. The noise and vibration disturbance, together with the visible alteration of the tree, is very effective in causing bats that emerge nightly to feed to not return to the roost that night. The remainder of the tree is removed on day two. BIO-6 Preconstruction Surveys for San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre- construction survey for woodrats no more than 14 days prior to construction. Nests within 50 feet of project activity that would not be directly impacted by project activity shall be demarcated with a 10-foot avoidance buffer and left intact. If a nest(s) that cannot be avoided are found during the pre-construction survey, an approved biologist shall dismantle the nest and relocate it to suitable habitat outside the work area no more than 50 feet away with the goal of ensuring the individuals are allowed to leave the work area(s) unharmed before on site activities begin. Nest relocation shall occur within 48 hours of construction activities to ensure that nests are not reestablished. Project Applicant/ verified by the Development Services Department No more than 14 days prior to initiation of construction activities City of Palo Alto Development Services Department BIO-7 Preconstruction Surveys for Nesting Birds. A general pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted Project Applicant/ verified by the Within 14 days prior to the City of Palo Alto Development ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 289 Packet Page 719 of 792 City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 9 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for Implementation Timing of Compliance Oversight of Implementation by a qualified biologist within 14 days prior to the initiation of construction activities. If construction is stopped for more than 14 days during the nesting season, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted prior to the re-start of construction activities. Surveys shall include the disturbance area plus a 50-foot buffer for passerine species, and a 500-foot buffer for raptors. If active nests are located, an appropriate avoidance buffer shall be established within which no work activity would be allowed that would impact these nests. The avoidance buffer shall be established by the qualified biologist on a case-by-case basis based on the species and site conditions. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all construction personnel and equipment until juveniles have fledged and/or the nest is inactive. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is complete, and the nest is no longer active prior to removal of the buffer. If work within a buffer area cannot be avoided, then a qualified biologist shall be present to monitor all project activities that occur within the buffer. The biological monitor shall evaluate the nesting avian species for signs of disturbance and shall have the ability to stop work. Development Services Department initiation of construction activities Services Department BIO-8 Protection of Retained Trees. The project applicant shall adhere to recommendations as described in the arborist report prepared by Kielty Arborist Services (Kielty Arborist Services 2021) regarding protection of retained trees. Recommendations include landscape buffers, tree pruning, root cutting, trenching and excavation, irrigation, grading, and inspections. Project Applicant/ verified by the Development Services Department Prior to issuance of grading permit and during site preparation City of Palo Alto Development Services Department CULTURAL RESOURCES CR-1 Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP). Prior to project ground disturbance, all construction personnel and contractors responsible for overseeing and operating ground-disturbing activities shall be Project Applicant/ verified by the Development Prior to ground disturbance City of Palo Alto Development ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 290 Packet Page 720 of 792 City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 10 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for Implementation Timing of Compliance Oversight of Implementation required to receive cultural awareness and sensitivity training. The purpose of this training is to educate construction personnel regarding the legal obligations of the project, the types of archaeological deposits that may be encountered during construction, and the appropriate procedures required in the event of a discovery of archaeological resources, paleontological resources, or human remains. The WEAP shall also provide cultural sensitivity training to ensure respectful and appropriate behaviors in the vicinity of archaeological deposits and human remains. The WEAP shall be implemented by a qualified archaeologist that meets or exceeds the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in archaeology. Services Department Services Department CR-2 Archaeological and Native American Monitoring. A qualified archaeologist shall conduct archaeological monitoring for all project-related ground disturbing activities. Archaeological monitoring shall be performed under the direction of an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (National Park Service 1983). Locally affiliated Native American tribes shall be given the opportunity to conduct Native American monitoring. In the event that Native American monitoring occurs, a locally affiliated tribal member shall monitor all project- related ground disturbing activities. The monitor(s) will have the authority to halt and redirect work should any archaeological resources be identified during monitoring. If archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate area must halt and the find evaluated for listing in the CRHR. Archaeological monitoring may be reduced to spot- checking or eliminated at the discretion of the monitors, in consultation with the lead agency, as warranted by conditions such as encountering bedrock, sediments being excavated are fill, or negative findings during the first 60 percent of rough grading. If monitoring is reduced to spot-checking, spot-checking shall occur Project Applicant/ verified by the Development Services Department During ground disturbing activities City of Palo Alto Development Services Department ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 291 Packet Page 721 of 792 City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 11 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for Implementation Timing of Compliance Oversight of Implementation when ground-disturbance moves to a new location within the project area and when ground disturbance will extend to depths not previously reached (unless those depths are within bedrock). CR-3 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural or Tribal Cultural Resources. In the event that archaeological resources are unexpectedly encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate area shall be halted and an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archeology (National Park Service 1983) shall be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the find is Native American in origin, then a Native American representative shall also be contacted to participate in the evaluation of the find. The qualified archaeologist, and, if applicable, the Native American representative, shall examine the find and make appropriate recommendations regarding additional work necessary to evaluate the significance of the find and the appropriate treatment of the resource. All cultural resources identified shall be evaluated for CRHR eligibility and local listing. Additional work may be necessary to evaluate the resource for inclusion in the CRHR or local listing. Recommendations could include, but are not limited to, invasive or non-invasive testing, sampling, laboratory analysis, preservation in place, or data recovery. A report of findings documenting any data recovered during monitoring shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist and submitted to the Director of Planning. If the discovery is determined to be Native American in nature, the on-site Native American monitor, if applicable, shall be consulted to determine the appropriate treatment of the resource. In the event that no Native American monitor is contracted, locally affiliated Native American tribes shall be invited to consult regarding the appropriate treatment of any Native American resources identified during project construction. Project Applicant/ verified by the Development Services Department During ground disturbing activities City of Palo Alto Development Services Department ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 292 Packet Page 722 of 792 City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 12 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for Implementation Timing of Compliance Oversight of Implementation GEOLOGY/SOILS GEO-1 Geotechnical Design Considerations. The project plans submitted for building permit approval shall incorporate the design recommendations outlined in the Geotechnical Study prepared by Earth Systems on April 9, 2021, or any other design feature or measure shown to equivalently reduce impacts associated with geology and soils to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. These include recommendations under the categories of:  General site preparation  Compaction  Fill  Mat slab foundations  Post-tensioned slab foundations  Interior slab-on-grade construction  Exterior flatwork  Swimming pool  Utility trench backfills  Management of site drainage and finish improvements  Geotechnical observation and testing Refer to the Geotechnical Study for full detail recommendations for each of the abovementioned categories. Project Applicant/ verified by the Development Services Department Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit City of Palo Alto Development Services Department GEO-2 Discovery of Previously Unidentified Paleontological Resources. In the event a fossil is uncovered during Project construction, all work shall cease until a certified paleontologist can investigate the finds and make appropriate recommendations. Any artifacts uncovered shall be recorded and removed for storage at a location to be determined by the monitor. Project Applicant/ verified by the Development Services Department During construction activities City of Palo Alto Development Services Department ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 293 Packet Page 723 of 792 City of Palo Alto  Mitigation Monitoring + Reporting Program Page | 13 ITEM 13 Attachment F 575 Los Trancos MMRP Item 13: Page 294 Packet Page 724 of 792 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT IS-MND 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project PREPARED BY PREPARED WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF REPORT DATE City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 Contact: Emily Foley, AICP, Associate Planner Rincon Consultants, Inc. 449 15th Street, Suite 303 Oakland, California 94612 January 2023 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 295 Packet Page 725 of 792 TABLE OF CONTENTS CITY OF PALO ALTO Page | i TABLE OF CONTENTS RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT IS-MND ............................................................................ 1 Letter 1 ............................................................................................................................................. 2 Letter 2 ........................................................................................................................................... 28 Letter 3 ........................................................................................................................................... 43 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 296 Packet Page 726 of 792 575 LOS TRANCOS ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT ii | Page RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT IS-MND This page intentionally left blank. ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 297 Packet Page 727 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT IS-MND This document includes comments received during the circulation of the Draft Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) prepared for the 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project (Project). The Draft IS-MND was circulated for a 30-day public review period that began on August 17, 2022 and ended on September 16, 2022. The City of Palo Alto received three comment letters on the Draft IS-MND. The commenters and the page number on which each commenter’s letter appears are listed below. Letter No. and Commenter Page No. 1 Jane F. Mark, AICP, Planning Manager, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 2 2 Shani Kleinhaus, Ph.D., Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society, and Gladwyn D’Souza, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter 28 3 Steve Henry 43 1 The comment letters and responses follow. The comment letters have been numbered sequentially and each separate issue raised by the commenter, if more than one, has been assigned a number. The responses to each comment identify first the number of the comment letter, and then the number assigned to each issue (Response 1.1, for example, indicates that the response is for the first issue raised in comment Letter 1). In certain instances, the text of the Final IS-MND has been modified in response to comments received or to clarify information. Corrections or additional text are reflected in the text of the Final IS-MND. In no case did any of the changes made identify new significant impacts or new, avoidable significant effects compared to the impacts identified in the Draft IS-MND. Because none of the revisions to the IS-MND are “substantial” as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5(b) and the information added merely clarifies and amplifies the information previously provided in the analysis, recirculation of the IS-MND is not required. ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 298 Packet Page 728 of 792 September 19, 2022 City of Palo Alto Planning and Development Services Department City Hall 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto, CA 94301 SENT VIA E-MAIL TO: emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org and jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org Subject: 21PLN-00196, 575 Los Trancos Road (APN 18246012) Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Dear Ms. Foley, On behalf of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (Midpen), we respectfully submit the following comments regarding the Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND) for the proposed residential development at 575 Los Trancos Road in the City of Palo Alto. As the owner of an adjacent parcel (APNs 079-080-050, -080, and -090), Midpen appreciates the opportunity to comment on this development and the time extension to submit our agency’s comments to September 19th at 5 pm. Comprised of over 65,000 acres of acquired and protected open space on the San Francisco Peninsula, Midpen is one of the largest regional open space districts in California. Our mission is to acquire and preserve a regional greenbelt of open space land in perpetuity, protect and restore the natural environment, and provide opportunities for ecologically sensitive public enjoyment and education. While much of Midpen’s open space lands are along the ridge of the Santa Cruz Mountains, Midpen owns and manages Windy Hill Open Space Preserve (Preserve), including the Hawthorns Area, which is located in the Town of Portola Valley and is located within a ¼ mile to the project site. Based on the project’s proximity to the Hawthorns Area, we would like to share specific concerns regarding Biological Resources (BIO) that should be considered as part of the environmental analysis for the ISMND as well as for the design and approval of the project. Biological Resources Riparian Habitat Based on the project plans, it appears the development is adhering to the City’s Stream Corridor Ordinance’s minimum creek setback of 20-ft from Los Trancos Creek. To improve the Letter 1 2 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 299 Packet Page 729 of 792 clarity of the project plans and environmental review and to show the proposed structure’s proximity to the creek, please provide a figure that includes the proposed building’s footprint as shown on Figure 2 with the creek and property lines as shown on Figure 5. According to the ISMND, “No vegetation removal, ground disturbance or construction shall occur within the creek or the 20-foot creek setback zone.” Los Trancos Creek supports critical habitat for steelhead, central California coast (CCC) distinct population segment (steelhead) (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) and other aquatic species, where building the structure within close proximity to the creek could result in significant impacts to the aquatic species. In addition, the Project may need to modify riparian vegetation that are critical to supporting these aquatic species in order to maintain adequate defensible space for the newly constructed structures (which is usually requested to be 30-100 feet surrounding each structure). As such, the homeowner would need to encroach upon the creek setback area to remove additional vegetation to provide adequate defensible space in the future. This long-term management action would result in the need to remove/trim riparian vegetation. Additional permitting approval would be needed from regulatory agencies who may not be supportive of or approve vegetation modification for these purposes to ensure adequate protection of the creek and associated riparian vegetation. These actions would result in additional impacts on the riparian corridor, steelhead critical habitat and other aquatic species, which the ISMND has not fully analyzed and addressed in the BIO mitigation measures. In addition, please confirm that the City of Palo Alto Fire Department has reviewed the project plans to ensure that adequate defensible space can be provided for the new home and accessory structure located with only a 20-foot setback from the creek without impacting the riparian vegetation. Wildlife Species and Habitat The proposed swimming pool’s placement in close proximity to the creek could result in the entrapment of semiaquatic species such as California Giant Salamander, Santa Cruz Black Salamander, Western Pond Turtle, California Red Legged Frog (CRLF), and San Francisco Garter Snake (SFGS) that may travel across the landscape. These potential additional impacts of entrapment and drowning which could result in the taking of these species should be analyzed and addressed in the BIO mitigation measures with consideration to include wildlife barriers and/or escape ramps installed to prevent entrapment. The proposed Project is located in mountain lion habitat and wildlife corridor. The footprint of the new structure appears to be at least a 300-foot long (or greater) north to south barrier to wildlife passage parallel to Los Trancos Creek. This Project could cause wildlife such as deer and mountain lion to circumnavigate the structure in order to travel between open space areas located to the east and west of the proposed project resulting in additional fragmentation of the local habitat. The potential impacts to wildlife movement and fragmentation should be analyzed and addressed in the BIO mitigation measures. 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 3 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 300 Packet Page 730 of 792 Phytophthora / Sudden Oak Death The area surrounding the proposed project has been heavily impacted by Phytophthora-caused plant diseases, including Sudden Oak Death (SOD), which was detected within close proximity to the project site in 20191. SOD has been responsible for the death of over one million oak and tanoak trees in California alone. Mortality rates are greater than 50 percent in some areas and continue to increase. Due to the known presence of SOD within the vicinity of the Preserve and the project site, attention is needed to protect the genetic integrity of native oak trees and reduce the potential risk of spreading SOD and related Phytophthora pathogens. Should the project move forward, Midpen requests that the City incorporate appropriate protocols as part of the Conditions of Approval for the Resource Management Permit to minimize the spread of Phytophthora spp., including disinfecting tools and removing soil from heavy equipment before entering and when leaving the project site. At a minimum, replacement trees should be noninvasive (according to the California Invasive Plant Council), native and ideally native oaks. For replacement oak trees, Midpen requests that the project applicant use acorns sourced from within the watershed rather than nursery stock. Trees grown in nurseries have been known to carry Phytophthora spp. and spread the pathogen where planted. Notably, current research suggests that larger healthy trees in SOD infested areas may carry a genetic resistance to the pathogen. Midpen would be pleased to issue a free permit for acorn collection at Windy Hill, Thornewood, or Teague Hill Open Space Open Space Preserves. For additional resources, please see the four attached best management practice documents for conducting vegetation work in areas with potential Phytophthora infection. Midpen did not receive project notification for review of the ISMND, such that we request Jane Mark, Planning Manager (jmark@openspace.org), be added to the City’s future notifications for 575 Los Trancos Road project and other development projects located within the vicinity of the Hawthorns Area of Windy Hill Open Space Preserve. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this development and the time extension of the public comment period to September 19th at 5 pm. Should you have any questions about this letter, please contact me at (650) 625-6563 or via email. 1 Vollmar Natural Lands Consulting (2019). Botanical Resources Survey Report: Hawthorns Property, Windy Hill Open Space Preserve. 1.5 1.6 4 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 301 Packet Page 731 of 792 Sincerely, Jane F. Mark, AICP Planning Manager Attachment 1: Guidelines to Minimize Phytophthora Contamination Attachment 2: Midpen Phytophthora Sterilization Guidelines Attachment 3: Sudden Oak Death Precautions and Acorn Planting Protocols Attachment 4: Guidelines to Minimize Phytophthora Pathogens in Restoration Nurseries CC: Ana Ruiz, General Manager Susanna Chan, Assistant General Manager 5 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 302 Packet Page 732 of 792 Working Group for Phytophthoras in Native Habitats October 2016 Guidelines to Minimize Phytophthora Contamination in Restoration Projects These guidelines aim to avoid contamination of restoration sites with exotic pathogenic Phytophthora species or other plant pathogens during planting and related activities. Contents Definitions ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………… 1 I. Guidelines for General Construction ……………..……………………………………………….…………………. 2 II. Guidelines for Planting at Field Sites ………………………………………………………………….……………… 2 Appendix A. Procedures for sanitizing tools, surfaces, and footwear…………………………………..………………… 5 B. Clean water specifications ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 6 Definitions: •Holding facility or nursery: A facility where nursery stock is maintained for a short to extended period of time prior to planting. Plant maintenance activities may include irrigation, fertilization or light pruning, as necessary. Nurseries involved in most other activities, including propagation or repotting are considered production nurseries. •Job site: The job site includes areas for planting, soil stockpiling, parking, and access roads within and leading to the site. •Nursery stock: All types of nursery grown plants. •Planting area: Area being planted for habitat restoration, erosion control, or other purposes. •Planting site: An individual planting basin or other spot, typically no larger than one square yard, where an individual plant or several grouped plants will be installed. •Sanitize: Clean and treat with a sanitizing agent or via a lethal heat exposure to kill plant pathogens present as external contamination. •Sanitizing agent: Materials such as bleach (sodium hypochlorite solutions), alcohol, quaternary ammonium compounds, and peroxides that can directly kill exposed propagules of Phytophthora or other plant pathogens when used properly. Most sanitizing agents can also kill a wide variety of bacteria and deactivate many viruses. Note that most materials referred to as fungicides are applied to plants to suppress disease but may not kill the pathogens and are not sanitizing agents. 6 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 303 Packet Page 733 of 792 Working Group for Phytophthoras in Native Habitats October 2016 I. Construction projects In an effort to minimize the spread of plant pathogens the exterior and interior of all equipment and tools must be clean and free of debris, soil and mud (including tires, treads, wheel wells and undercarriage) prior to arrival at a new job site. General guidance – suggested standard operating procedures: a. Vehicles need to stay on established roads unless infeasible. b.In general, vehicles and equipment need to be maintained clean – interior and exterior free of mud, debris and soil especially during the wet season. c.In general, work shoes need to be kept clean- inspect shoe soles and knock mud, debris and soil off treads before moving to a new job site. d.To minimize the potential for spreading potentially contaminated soil and time required for decontamination, if possible, avoid vehicle traffic and field work when soils are wet enough to stick readily to shoes, tools, equipment and tires. II.Planting at Field Sites Overview: Three general routes for the spread of Phytophthora and other soilborne plant pathogens are addressed in these guidelines. These routes are (1) contamination of planting material, including clean nursery stock, and other materials installed at the site, (2) inadvertent introduction of pathogens to a job site from other outside sources (e.g., via contaminated equipment), and (3) potential movement of undetected contamination within the planting area. These guidelines assume that all nursery stock was originally grown under phytosanitary conditions and tested as remaining free from disease in the nursery (refer to nursery guidelines). These guidelines address how to protect the planting area from subsequent contamination during the delivery, storage onsite, and installation of planting stock and materials. 1.Prevent contamination of clean nursery stock or other clean plant materials Planting stock shall be protected from potential contamination from the point that it leaves the production nursery or collection site until planting. Note that nursery stock has a high risk of infection by Phytophthora species if exposed to these pathogens. Excluding these pathogens provides the only viable option for maintaining outplanted nursery stock free of Phytophthora. 1.1. Maintaining nursery stock in a holding facility When holding stock for an extended period (after delivery from production nursery and before planting), the following practices need to be followed to prevent contamination of the nursery stock with Phytophthora. 1.1.1. Delivered nursery plants that will be held before planting shall be transferred to cleaned and sanitized raised benches and maintained as described in “Guidelines to Minimize Phytophthora Pathogens for holding (non-production) nurseries at restoration sites, Section 3.” 7 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 304 Packet Page 734 of 792 Working Group for Phytophthoras in Native Habitats October 2016 1.2. Handling and transporting nursery plants at the job site 1.2.1. Nursery plants shall be transported on or in vehicles or equipment that have been cleaned before loading the stock. Truck beds, racks, or other surfaces need to be swept, blown with compressed air and/or power washed as needed so they are visibly free of soil and plant detritus. More information on sanitizing surfaces are described in the Appendix. 1.2.2. Keep plants in sanitized vehicles or on sanitized carts, trailers, etc. until delivered to their planting sites. (More information may be found in sections 1.3.3. and 1.3.4.) 1.2.3 At the job site, plants shall be handled to prevent contamination until delivered to each planting site. Nursery stock shall not be placed on the soil or other potentially contaminated surfaces until they are placed at their specific planting sites. 1.2.4 If it is necessary to offload plants at the job site, plants may be placed on clean waterproof plastic tarps or other clean, sanitized surfaces. If tarps are used for holding plants, one surface needs to be dedicated for contact with nursery stock and will be cleaned and sanitized to maintain phytosanitary conditions. 1.3. Other planting site inputs 1.3.1 Washing, soaking, or irrigation of plant material shall be conducted using clean water sources as specified in the Appendix below. Untreated surface waters should not be used for these purposes. 1.3.2. On-site or off-site collection of plant materials, including seed and cuttings for direct planting, shall be conducted in a phytosanitary manner (see guidelines for collection practices at www.calphytos.org). 1.3.3. Prior to delivery to the planting areas, mulch, compost, soil amendments, inoculants, and other organic products need to be examined and determined to be low-risk for pathogen introduction. Acceptable materials are those that are free of contamination by plant pathogens based on their composition or manufacturing conditions, or that have been exposed to an effective heat treatment to eliminate pathogens. Such materials must be handled and stored in a manner that prevents contamination. At the job site, delivered materials shall be handled to prevent contamination until delivered to each planting site in the same manner specified for nursery stock in section 1.2 above. 1.3.4. All other materials to be installed at the site shall be of new or sanitized material that has not been stored in contact with soil, untreated surface waters, or other potentially contaminated materials. This includes irrigation supplies (such as pipe, fittings, valves, drip line, emitters, etc.), erosion control fabrics, fencing, stakes, posts, and other planting site inputs. 2. Cleaning and sanitation required before entering planting area to prevent introducing contamination from other locations Phytophthora contamination can be present in agricultural and landscaped areas, in commercial nursery stock, and in some infested native or restored habitat areas. Contamination can be spread via soil, plant material and debris, and water from infested areas. Arriving at the site with clean vehicles, equipment, tools, footwear, and clothing helps prevent unintentional contamination of the planting site from outside sources. 8 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 305 Packet Page 735 of 792 Working Group for Phytophthoras in Native Habitats October 2016 2.1. Vehicles, equipment, and tools 2.1.1. Equipment, vehicles and large tools must be free of soil and debris on tires, wheel wells, vehicle undercarriages, and other surfaces before arriving at the planting area. A high pressure washer and/or compressed air may be used to ensure that soil and debris are completely removed. Vehicles that only travel and park on paved roads do not require external cleaning. 2.1.2. The interior of equipment (cabs, etc.) should be free of mud, soil, gravel and other potentially contaminated material. Interiors should be vacuumed, washed, and/or treated with sanitizing agents as needed to eliminate pathogen propagules that could be transferred to the planting area. 2.1.3. Small tools and other small equipment (including hoses, quick couplers, hose nozzles, and irrigation wands) need to be washed to be free of soil or other contamination and sanitized (see Appendix). 2.1.4. Hoses shall be new or previously used only for clean water sources (see Appendix). 2.2. Footwear and clothing 2.2.1. Soles and uppers of footwear need to be visibly free of debris and soil before arriving at the planting area. (See the Appendix for more details.) 2.2.2. At the start of work at each new job site, worker clothing shall be free of all mud, soil or detritus. If clothing is not freshly laundered, all debris and adhered soil should be removed by brushing with a stiff brush. 2.2.3. Gloves and non-porous knee pads must be new (if disposable) or laundered/sanitized at the start of each work day, and/or clean coveralls must be worn. Non-disposable gloves should be made of or coated with material, such as nitrile, that can be sanitized. 3. Prevent potential spread of contamination within planting areas Phytophthora can also be spread within plantings areas if some portions of the site are contaminated. However, it is not possible to identify every portion of a planting area that may contain Phytophthora. Because Phytophthora contamination is not visible, working practices should minimize the movement of soil within the planting area to reduce the likelihood of pathogen spread. Note that areas with higher risk of Phytophthora infestation include areas adjacent to planted landscaping, areas previously planted with Phytophthora-infected stock, areas with existing or recently removed woody vegetation, disturbed wetlands, and areas directly along watercourses. Areas with low risk of contamination typically include upland sites with only grassy vegetation or sites where surface soils have been removed. 3.1. Worker training and site access 3.1.1. Before entering the job site, field workers need to receive training that includes information on Phytophthora pathogens and how to prevent the spread of these and other soilborne organisms by following approved phytosanitary procedures. Workers should also be informed about any site-specific phytosanitary practices before work commences. 9 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 306 Packet Page 736 of 792 Working Group for Phytophthoras in Native Habitats October 2016 3.1.2. Do not bring more vehicles into the planting area than necessary and keep vehicles on surfaced or graveled roads whenever possible to minimize potential for soil movement. 3.1.3. Travel off roads or on unsurfaced roads should be avoided when soil and road surfaces are wet enough that soil will stick to vehicle tires and undercarriages. 3.1.4. To allow for adequate decontamination of equipment, tools, gloves, and shoes, avoid planting under overly wet conditions or when soil is saturated. 3.2. Minimize unnecessary movement of soil and plant material within the planting area, especially from higher to lower risk areas 3.2.1 Brush off soil from tools and gloves when moving between successive planting sites to prevent repeated collection and deposition of soil across multiple sites. 3.2.2. Avoid contaminating clothing with soil during planting operations. Brush off soil accumulations before moving from one planting site to the next. Use nonporous knee pads that are cleaned between planting sites if kneeling is necessary. 3.2.3 When possible, plant nursery stock from a given block in the same local area rather than spreading it widely. If a problem is associated with a given block of plants, it will be easier to detect and deal with it if the plants are spatially grouped. 3.2.4. Phase work to minimize movement between areas with high and low risk of contamination. Where possible, complete work in low risk areas before moving to higher risk areas. Alternatively, assign personnel to working in either high or low risk areas exclusively to reduce the need for decontamination. 3.2.5. Clean soil and plant debris from large equipment and sanitize hand tools, buckets, gloves, and footwear when moving from higher risk to lower risk areas or when moving between widely separated portions of the planting area. 3.2.6. All non-plant materials to be installed at the site (irrigation equipment, erosion control fabric, fencing, etc.) shall be handled to prevent movement of soil within the site, especially movement from higher risk to lower risk areas. Materials should be kept free of soil contamination by maintaining them in clean vehicles or carts, trailers, etc., or stockpiling in elevated dry areas on clean tarps until used. 4. Clean water specifications Objective: use only uncontaminated, appropriately-treated water for irrigation. 4.1.1. Water used for irrigating plants needs to be uncontaminated. See Appendix for specifications. Appendix A. Procedures for sanitizing tools, surfaces, and footwear Surfaces and tools should be clean and sanitized before use. Tools and working surfaces (e.g., plant carts) should be smooth and nonporous to facilitate cleaning and sanitation. Wood handles on tools should be sealed with a waterproof coating to make them easier to sanitize. 10 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 307 Packet Page 737 of 792 Working Group for Phytophthoras in Native Habitats October 2016 Before sanitizing items, remove all soil and organic material (roots, sap, etc.) from their surfaces. If necessary, use a detergent solution and brush to scrub off surface contaminants. The sanitizing agent may also be used as a cleaning solution. Screwdrivers or similar implements may be needed to clean soil out of crevices or shoe treads. Brushes and other implements used to help remove soil must be visibly clean and sanitized after use. After surface soil and contamination are removed, treat the surface with one of the following sanitizing agents, allowing the appropriate contact time before rinsing. If surfaces are clean and dry, wet surfaces thoroughly and allow for the appropriate contact time listed. If the sanitizer has been used to help clean the surface, use fresh sanitizer to rinse off any dirty solution and then allow the required contact time. If treated surfaces are wetted with water, the sanitizing solution will become diluted. Apply enough sanitizer to completely displace the water film and then allow the required contact time. Sanitizing agents may be applied with spray bottles to thoroughly wet the surface. Observe all appropriate safety precautions to prevent contact with eyes or skin when using these solutions. -70-90% ethyl or isopropyl alcohol - spray to thoroughly wet the surface and allow to air dry before use -freshly diluted bleach solution (0.525% sodium hypochlorite, Table 1) for a minimum of 1 minute (due to corrosivity, not advised for steel or other materials damaged by bleach) -quaternary ammonium disinfectant - use according to manufacturer recommendations, making sure that the label indicates that the product is suitable for your use situation and has activity against Phytophthora when used as directed. Solution should be freshly made or tested to ensure target concentration. Table 1. Dilutions of commonly available bleach products needed to obtain approximately 0.525% sodium hypochlorite concentrations (5000 ppm available chlorine). Percent sodium hypochlorite in bleach Parts bleach Parts water Diluted bleach percent sodium hypochlorite 5.25% 1 9 0.525% 6.0% 1 10.4 0.526% 8.25% 1 14.6 0.529% 8.3% 1 14.8 0.525% For example, adding 100 ml of 5.25% bleach to 900 ml of water will make 1000 ml of 0.525% NaOCl solution. If using 8.3% bleach, add 100 ml of bleach to 1480 ml of water to make 1580 ml of 0.525% NaOCl. B. Clean water specifications Surface waters, including untreated water from streams or ponds and nursery runoff, can be sources of Phytophthora contamination. Only uncontaminated water or water that has been effectively treated to remove or kill Phytophthora should be used for rinsing or irrigating plant material. 5.1. Water used for irrigation shall be from treated municipal water supplies or wells and delivered through intact pipes with backflow prevention devices. Tertiary-treated municipal recycled water is acceptable. 11 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 308 Packet Page 738 of 792 Working Group for Phytophthoras in Native Habitats October 2016 5.2. If well water is used, wellheads shall be protected from contamination by surface water sources. 5.3 Untreated surface waters and recycled nursery runoff shall not be used, and plants shall not be held where potential contamination from such sources is possible via splash, runoff, or inundation. 5.4. Irrigation equipment must be kept free of contamination that could be transferred to irrigation water or plants. All hoses, wands, and nozzles, and hand irrigation equipment must either be new or sanitized before use. Drip irrigation and other sprinkler parts should be new or sanitized. Hose ends, wands, or nozzles that become contaminated with soil or mud during use should be cleaned and sanitized before being used further. 12 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 309 Packet Page 739 of 792 Guidelines for Minimizing Phytophthora Contamination at Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Preserves The goal of these guidelines is to minimize the contamination of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) preserves with Phytophthora, a soil pathogen that kills plants. Once a site is contaminated, this soil pathogen can spread farther into wildland areas and can be difficult to eradicate. Prevention is the lowest cost and easiest method to manage contamination. The best way to prevent the spread of this disease is to not move soil from one location to another by cleaning tools, equipment, and footwear. Part of the District’s mission is to protect and restore the natural environment. Within the last few years, planted restoration sites have unintentionally exposed preserves to soil pathogens brought in by nursery plants that were later found to be contaminated. Testing of former restoration sites on District preserves is now underway to determine which sites are contaminated and the necessary remedial actions. Who should use these guidelines? These guidelines are intended for use by field staff and Natural Resource (NR) staff who pose the highest chance of spreading soil Phytophthora via equipment and footwear. Several methods are provided on how and when to decontaminate tools and equipment depending on the site conditions (contaminated versus clean site) and staff activities (planting, other). Guidelines for contractors, consultants, volunteers and preserve visitors are under development. Consult NR staff (Amanda Mills, amills@openspace.org or x558, or Coty Sifuentes-Winter, csifuentes@openspace.org or x560) on which guidelines are best for your project. When to use these guidelines? Use these guidelines for any activity that contacts soil, water or plants on a known Phytophthora- contaminated site, on a formerly planted site, on a site with rare plants, or when preparing or planting a new restoration site. 13 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 310 Packet Page 740 of 792 Table of Contents 1. Overview ...................................................................................3 1.1 What is Phytophthora? ................................................................... 3 1.2 General Steps: ................................................................................. 3 1.3 Proper Disinfectants ....................................................................... 4 2. Cleaning at the Field Office .........................................................5 2.1 Remove Soil from Equipment and Footwear .................................. 5 2.2 Disinfect Tools With Bleach ............................................................ 5 2.3 Disinfect Wheeled Equipment/ Vehicles ......................................... 6 3. Cleaning at Field Site .................................................................6 3.1 Cleaning at Start of Field Day .......................................................... 7 3.2 Cleaning at End of Field Day ........................................................... 8 4. FAQ ............................................................................................8 5. Sources ......................................................................................9 6. Future Methods .........................................................................9 14 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 311 Packet Page 741 of 792 1. Overview Remember to Arrive Clean and Leave Clean. The best way to prevent the spread of Phytophthora is to leave soil at its original location in the field. Equipment and footwear should be clean and sanitized before entering a site, especially for planting events where extra precautionary steps will be taken. Before leaving a site, especially at contaminated sites, it’s crucial to clean and sanitize footwear and equipment. Definitions: Clean - remove soil and organic debris from tools and footwear Sanitize - Use disinfecting agent such as alcohol or chlorine bleach. Phytosanitary- control of plant pests and diseases especially in agricultural crops 1.1 What is Phytophthora? 1.1.1 Phytophthora (Fie-tof-thora) is a group of water molds that infect plants. There are many species, mostly notably P. ramorm (Sudden Oak Death), P. infestans (potato blight/ Irish potato famine) and P. tentaculata (nursery root rot). 1.1.2 Symptoms are similar to drought, making diagnosis difficult without testing. 1.1.3 Symptoms include leaf spots, branch die-back, cankers, trunk bleeding and death of whole plant. 1.1.4 Hosts include many native and nursery plants including oaks, bay laurel, madrones, sticky monkeyflower. 1.1.5 Brought to California through imported camellia and rhododendron nursery plants. 1.1.6 Mainly spreads from contaminated nursery stock, pots and soil. Can spread by foot traffic from contaminated footwear. 1.2 General Steps: 1.2.1 What - Items to be cleaned: Anything that comes into contact with soil, water or plants. This includes tools (shovels, hand trowels, hori-horis, rakes, tree cages, plant protection tubes etc.), footwear, equipment, wheeled equipment and vehicles. 1.2.2 When - Prior to the project day, field staff will be notified what items need to be cleaned and by which method. In general, tools and equipment should be cleaned at the field office before bringing them to the field site, and soil should be removed from footwear beforehand and more thoroughly cleaned at the entrance to the field site. 1.2.3 Transportation - Cleaned equipment should be transported in a truckbed from which all soil has been washed out, or cleaned equipment can be wrapped in a clean tarp before placed in a dirty truck. 15 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 312 Packet Page 742 of 792 1.3 Proper Disinfectants All recommended disinfectants are considered pesticides. Personal protective equipment required by the State of California for anyone using disinfectants is eye protection with wrap- around and brow protection and 14 mil chemical resistant gloves. You can use smaller mil gloves if handling chemicals for 15 minutes or less. 1.3.1 The disinfectants listed in Table 1 are recommended by standard phytosanitary guidelines. 1.3.2 Other disinfecting agents or methods, such as Lysol or heat treatments, must be reviewed and approved by NR staff before use. 1.3.3 Disinfectants are most effective when surfaces are clean of soil and user follows label instructions. Disinfecting Agent Active ingredient Contact time Product shelf life Proper Disposal Health Risk Personal Protective Equipment Granular Chlorine Bleach (Leslies Chlor Brite, EZ Chlor) Sodium dichloroisocyanurate dihydrate 2 min Long if undiluted Neutralizer (Vita-D- Chlor) High Eyewear, gloves; do not inhale Liquid Bleach (Clorox)* Sodium chloride 2 min 3-5 months TBD High Eyewear, gloves; do not inhale Rubbing Alcohol Ethanol or Isopropyl Alcohol 1 min Long TBD Med Eyewear, gloves; flammable Quaternary ammonium compounds (Quat 128 or Physan 20) Dodecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride 10 min Long if undiluted TBD Med Eyewear, gloves; toxic to fish Table 1: List of approved disinfecting agents. Always follow chemical label instructions. *Liquid bleaches are generally not recommended as a disinfectant because they lose potency in storage. 16 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 313 Packet Page 743 of 792 2. Cleaning at the Field Office Clean equipment, tools and footwear at the field office before arriving to the project site. This is the easiest way to prevent soil contamination. For those occasions where equipment and footwear must be cleaned at a field site, see Cleaning at Field Site (page 7). 2.1 Remove Soil from Equipment and Footwear 2.1.1 At the field office, scrape, brush, and wash off any soil or organic material. Take care to remove soil trapped in treads or cracks. 2.1.2 Pathogens can survive inside soil clods even after soaking because disinfectants may not completely penetrate large or clayey masses. Therefore, it is important to remove large clods of soil before soaking or otherwise treating with disinfectants. 2.2 Disinfect Tools With Bleach Several disinfecting agents are available for treating Phytophthoras (Table 1). When many tools need treatment, use granular chlorine bleach at the field office. Spraying with rubbing alcohol is more appropriate for spot treatment at remote field locations. NEVER MIX DIFFERENT DISINFECTING AGENTS. ALWAYS FOLLOW LABEL DIRECTIONS. FOLLOW REQUIREMENTS FOR PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT WHEN USING DISINFECTING AGENTS. List of Equipment for Disinfecting Tools:  Disinfectant – most frequently, we expect to be using granular chlorine bleach such as EZ Chlor or Leslie’s Chlor Brite when cleaning multiple tools at the field office. Carefully follow the directions below when using any [?] of the bleach disinfectants.  Vita-D-Chlor (chlorine neutralizer) - This neutralizing product is only required if you used chlorine bleach as a disinfectant.  Waterproof container - A large [minimum size?] plastic trashcan or waterproof pop-up garden trimming container in which to mix the water-based disinfectant and soak the tools.  Hard bristled scrub brushes and paint scrapers - Grill brushes with scrapper attachment are handy tools to loosen soil from both flat surfaces and narrow cracks.  Personal Protective Equipment Close-toed shoes, apron or coveralls, protective eyewear, 14 mil chemical resistant gloves (not leather or cloth).  Clean water source - should not be cloudy or with a lot of organic material in it. Pressure washers or nozzles are helpful to remove soil quickly and get into small cracks. 2.2.1 Before using the disinfectant, remove soil as described in above section. 17 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 314 Packet Page 744 of 792 2.2.2 Fill waterproof container with 10 gallons of water. Use label instructions to add the right amount of disinfecting agent. For granular bleach, use one teaspoon in 10 gallons to get the desired 0.525% dilution. 2.2.3 Dunk tools in solution for required soaking time (see Table 1). For granular bleach, this is 2-minutes. Just getting tools wet does not mean they will be disinfected. Think of it as chemical cooking. 2.2.4 If you used chlorine bleach as a disinfectant, it needs to be neutralized after soaking. This ‘rinse cycle” will deactivate the bleach so it does not corrode metal and so that it is safer to dispose of the soak water. Equipment sprayed with alcohol does not require this neutralization step. 2.2.5 In addition to tools, remember to disinfect the sanitation kit, gloves, tarps, or other miscellaneous items that have come into contact with soil. 2.2.6 Let tools dry. The hose lay is great for drying tarps. 2.3 Disinfect Wheeled Equipment/ Vehicles Anything with wheels, including wheel barrels, ATV’s, motorized carts that will be used at the field site needs to be cleaned and this is best done at the field office before the project. Vehicles that stay at the staging area do not have to be cleaned and sanitized. However, it is good phytosanitary practice to remove soil from wheels every time you leave a site. 2.3.1 Scrub down tires either by hand scrubbing or using a pressure spray wash. 2.3.2 Sanitize using disinfecting spray such as bleach (must be made weekly) or rubbing alcohol. 3. Cleaning at Field Site Remember to Arrive Clean and Leave Clean. If equipment was cleaned and treated with a disinfectant at the field office and delivered in a clean truck, then on-site cleaning of equipment will only be required when leaving at the end of a work day. We recommend that everyone be encouraged to thoroughly clean their footwear of soil before arrival at the site, and then footwear be treated with alcohol upon arrival. Volunteers may not always be aware of this recommendation and may arrive with boots that need to be cleaned of foreign soil at the field site. Scraping all soil off equipment and footwear is required before leaving site, and sanitation of all footwear is usually recommended when leaving a site, especially for known contaminated sites. Rubbing alcohol is usually the preferred disinfectant in the field. Bleach products can be used in the field, but it is harder to mix and dispose of them properly in the field. See details below. 18 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 315 Packet Page 745 of 792 3.1 Cleaning at Start of Field Day Tools: Portable sanitation kits include the following items in a bin: 2 tarps, boot brush with scraper, 2 spray bottles of 70% isopropyl alcohol, 2 long-handled brushes, 2 paint scrapers, and instructions. On muddy days, also bring a basin and 2 jugs of water. Alcohol 70% Ethyl alcohol (Ethanol) or 90% Isopropyl alcohol is fine. Called rubbing alcohol at drug stores. Spray bottle - we take the nozzles from chemical resistant spray bottles and screw them directly into the rubbing alcohol bottle. Sometimes the stem needs to be trimmed. This allows you to have a spray bottle that is properly labeled with rubbing alcohol information and precautions. 3.1.1 Any equipment or footwear not cleaned and sanitized at the field office must be cleaned and sanitized before entering the site. Off-site soil should be considered contaminated. 3.1.2 Using the items in the portable sanitation kit, set up a staging area where equipment and footwear will be cleaned and sanitized. A paved parking lot or surface near the entrance to the work site is preferred. 3.1.3 Lay out 2 tarps, one labeled ‘dirty’ and one labeled ‘clean’. Remove any off-site soil from footwear and equipment onto the ‘dirty’ tarp. Try not to use water. If water is used, DO NOT dump potentially contaminated water onto on-site soil. Water can be dumped onto non-permeable pavement such as a road or parking lot in a low traffic area. This will UV-sterilize the dirty water (24 hr daylight cycle) as long as no clumps exist. Potentially contaminated soil in the ‘dirty’ tarp should be bagged in a trash bag and thrown away. DO NOT dispose of off-site soil at the new site. 3.1.4 Use the ‘clean’ tarp to sanitize soil-free footwear and equipment. Standing on the tarp, spray cleaned footwear and tools with 70% isopropyl alcohol, thoroughly wetting the surface. If the surface of your footwear or tools is already wet, spray extra alcohol to displace the water and allow the alcohol to soak the surface. Spray the footwear from the top down to avoid contamination. 3.1.5 Allow alcohol to evaporate (approx. 1 min) before starting work. You can stand on the tarp until your shoes are dry. 3.1.6 Footbath Alternative - we are investigating sanitizing mats where sanitizing only requires stepping on the mat. Gemplers.com, sanistride.com, and nelsonjameson.com sell both sponge mats and footbath mats for disinfecting shoes. Either chlorine bleach or non- evaporating disinfectants are used in these footbaths and the solution is changed weekly or as needed. Chemical strips are available to test if disinfectants are still effective. Caution should be taken if footbaths and solutions are transported to avoid spills. 3.1.7 Bleach alternative in the field. We are currently recommending that the bleach alternative be used at the field office and alcohol be used in the field. Bleach may be a better alternative in the field under some circumstances (large amounts of tools that must be disinfected in field), but will require special processes for safety and to properly dispose of the chlorine treatment water. Consult with the NR Department to determine best methods under these conditions. 19 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 316 Packet Page 746 of 792 3.2 Cleaning at End of Field Day Tools: Portable sanitation kits include the following items in a bin: 2 tarps, boot brush withscraper, 2 spray bottles of 70% isopropyl alcohol, 2 long-handled brushes, 2 paint scrapers, and instructions. On muddy days, also bring a basin & 2 jugs of water. 3.2.1 Sanitation of equipment and shoes is important for known or suspected contaminated sites. More leniency can be given for ‘clean’ sites. 3.2.2 Remove all soil and organic material from footwear and equipment. Leave soil onsite. Use the boot scraper, paint scraper and a stiff brush to remove any soil and plant material on both the top and bottom of footwear and from tools including the digging ends and handles. Make sure to clean out crevices. On muddy days, fill the basin with water to assist in rinsing off excess soil once the majority of debris has been removed. 3.2.3 Water helps in removing dried clods of soil. This water can be dumped on-site only if the soil originates from on-site. 3.2.4 Standing on the ‘clean’ tarp, spray cleaned footwear and tools with 70% isopropyl alcohol, thoroughly wetting the surface and allowing it to dry (approx. 1 min). If the surface of your footwear or tools is already wet, spray extra alcohol to displace the water and allow the alcohol to soak the surface. 3.2.5 Before leaving the site, shake soil off the scrapers, brushes and tarp. 3.2.6 At the field office, thoroughly clean the portable sanitation kit by washing out, spraying with alcohol and drying the container and all contents before storage. The portable sanitation kit must be clean before moving to a new site. 4. FAQ Q. What do we do with left over soil? A. Depends on the soil. Soil from off-site should be disposed of in a trash bag and thrown away-- there’s no knowing if off-site soil is contaminated or not. On site soil can be disposed of on-site back where it came from. Q. What do we do with dirty water? A. Pouring on pavement or another non-porous surface should disperse the contaminated soil enough to UV (sun) sterilize the water. If using bleach, use neutralizer and the water can be considered clean and safe enough to pour out anywhere. Don’t pollute! Other disinfectants need proper disposal that isn’t safe for dumping on the ground. Contact Natural Resources Department (Amanda Mills/Coty Sifuentes-Winter) or EH&S for safe disposal procedures. Q. How do we use the tarps? A. Two tarps, two purposes. Dirty tarp: use as a containment area to clean off soil clogs, especially offsite soil, for later disposal. Clean tarp: provides users a clean surface to sterilize (with alcohol or other sanitation liquid) shoes and equipment not cleaned at the Field offices. Q. When will we need to sanitize or use the kits? 20 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 317 Packet Page 747 of 792 A. 1. Contaminated sites (list TBD) 2. Planting events-NR staff lead 3. When NR Staff recommend sanitation. Most of these will be NR staff lead, otherwise a leading crew member will advise on Phytosanitary BMP. Q. Can we use hot water to sterilize? A. Hot water can be used only if equipment bathes in 120-125° water for 30 minutes in order to be effective at killing both surface contaminants and internal infections. Q. What about large equipment and Ranger lead projects? A. TBD. Field staff will be trained on phytosanitary measures. For field crew lead projects, a crew member should be in charge of facilitating phytosanitary compliance. Q. Why does this take so much time? A. It’s best to prevent rather than respond to contamination by Phytophthora. Once a natural area has been exposed to this soil disease, it can slowly spread and kill other plants. It is very difficult and expensive to kill all the pathogens in the soil of a natural area. 5. Sources CalPhytos.org. “Guidelines to minimize Phytophthora Pathogens in Restoration Nurseries”. Suddenoakdeath.org. http://www.suddenoakdeath.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/04/Restoration.Nsy_.Guidelines.final_.092216.pdf Kurowki, Chet. “Control Pathogen Spread through use of Disinfectants”. Calseed.org. http://www.calseed.org/documents/Disinfectants%2004-22-14a.pdf Cornell University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee “Cleaning and sanitizing equipment used in the transport of animals.” https://ras.research.cornell.edu/care/documents/ACUPs/ACUP532.pdf http://agriculture.mo.gov/animals/pdf/animalag_guide4.pdf 6. Future Methods Let us know how these guidelines worked for your project! We may adjust guidelines based on feedback. 21 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 318 Packet Page 748 of 792 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Sudden Oak Death Precautions and Acorn Planting Protocol 1. Sudden Oak Death (SOD) Precautions a. Prior to the start of construction work, the Construction Superintendent shall inform construction personnel that they are working in a potential SOD-infested area, the implications of the disease, and the need to prevent further disease spread. Non-English speaking personnel shall be provided the appropriate written or verbal translations. b. To the extent practical, avoid locating equipment and material near host plants and trees, especially if showing disease symptoms. c. Route equipment away from host plants and trees, especially if showing disease symptoms. d. Any cutting or chipping of on-site plant material shall be restricted to the project area and the debris shall remain in the project area. e. After completing any cutting or chipping of on-site plant material, ensure that the equipment is free from host debris by first removing any visible plant material that clings to the equipment and follow with the cutting or chipping of non-host material. f. Before any equipment or vehicles leave the preserve, the contractor shall inspect the equipment and vehicles for host plant debris (leaves, twigs, and branches). Host plant debris must be removed from equipment and vehicles prior to their departure. g. If conditions at the work site are muddy due to dust suppression activities or summer rains, remove or wash off accumulations of soil, mud, and organic debris from shoes, boots, vehicles, and heavy equipment prior to exiting the preserve. If an equipment power wash station is used, its location must first be approved by the District Representative. 2. Acorn Planting Protocols a. Prior to planting, the contractor will remove debris within a 2-3 foot diameter of the planting basin and hollow out a planting hole fist deep and wide in loose soil. Place 3 seeds on their side in the hole, cover with soil to grade and firmly pat down. Contractor shall install Tubex Shrubshelters (2.5’ height) centered on the planted seeds. Contractor shall insure that each installed Tubex Scrubshelter is in good condition and securely attached to wooden stakes with the bottom edge covered by soil. Contractor shall install a mulch layer or certified weed free stray 3 to 5-inches deep in an area of 3-foot diameter around each tree shelter. Contractor will provide and water each basin with one (1) gallon of water. b. After the first Spring, keep only the most vigorous seedling in each basin. If space is an issue, plant trees closer together. c. At year 5, thin trees to 2:1 ratio. d. At year 10, thin trees to 1:1 ratio. Midpen will gladly issue a free permit to collect acorns for use from either Coal Creek or Los Trancos Open Space Preserves to a qualified contractor. 22 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 319 Packet Page 749 of 792 Guidelines to Minimize Phytophthora Pathogens in Restoration Nurseries 6 2. Clean planting materials Objective: Start with propagative material that is free from infection or external contamination by Phytophthora species as well as other possible pathogens. Suggested practices: 2.1. To avoid introducing Phytophthora into seed collection areas, make sure your equipment, vehicle, and footwear are clean. Clean and sanitize your footwear and tools between locations. 2.2. Where possible, collect seeds and cuttings as high above the ground as possible, preferably at least 3 ft above the soil surface. 2.3. Whenever possible, seed/fruit should not be collected directly from the ground. Seed can be knocked onto clean tarps placed on the ground or collected using seed traps. If seed is otherwise unavailable, exceptions may be considered based on the following criteria: 1). Vegetation is robustly healthy, the site is not known to be and not likely to be contaminated; 2). Seed has recently dropped on dry ground or leaf litter. Seeds that may be contaminated with soil via water splashed from the soil should be appropriately treated before storage or use (see section 9. Sanitizing materials and treatments). Ground-collected seed will be kept separate from other collected material during seed processing and planting and should be prioritized for testing throughout propagation. 2.4. Seeds, cuttings, and other plant propagules should not be collected from the vicinity of past restoration plantings or other areas where Phytophthora infestations are known, suspected, or likely. In the unusual situations where this is not possible (e.g., for rare populations), seed or tip cuttings may be collected if collected at a distance of 1 m or more above the ground. Material propagated from such sources should be kept segregated from plant material propagated from pathogen-free areas. 2.5. Protocols for seed collection from species that are low growing (with height stature less than 1 m above the ground) should minimize the risk of potential Phytophthora contamination. In general, seed that matures after the rainy season has ended has a low risk of being contaminated if collected before fall rains begin. 2.6. Collect seeds, cuttings, or other propagules only from plants and fruit that appear healthy. Do not collect or store seeds or other propagules with apparent disease symptoms such as decay, atypical discoloration, or fungal fruiting bodies. 2.7. If possible, avoid collecting seeds or other propagules during wet or muddy conditions to minimize potential for contaminating propagules or spreading contaminated soil. 2.8. Collect propagules with clean hands/gloves and equipment (pruning shears, etc.) and place them in new bags/envelopes and new or clean containers. Sanitize gloves, hands, and tools immediately if they come in contact with soil. Sanitize cutting tools frequently. 2.9. Conduct all processing of seeds or cuttings in a clean work area with clean equipment and clean hands or gloves. Discard or sanitize any seed or propagule that is dropped on the ground or comes in contact with contaminated surfaces or materials. 23 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 320 Packet Page 750 of 792 Guidelines to Minimize Phytophthora Pathogens in Restoration Nurseries 7 2.10. Clean seed as soon as possible after collection to remove any debris before storage or stratification. Inspect stored seeds or other propagules regularly and discard materials that develop symptoms in storage. 2.11. Where compatible with seed storage and germination requirements, treat seed using heat or appropriate disinfecting chemicals to eliminate seed-borne pathogens or external contamination. Seed treatment may be omitted for species where it is impractical or the risk of seed-borne or contaminating pathogens is negligible. 2.12. Do not bring potentially infected or contaminated plant material into clean production areas of the nursery. Properly collected seed and tip cuttings (described above) will normally be free of Phytophthora. 2.13. Plant propagules that have been in contact with the soil (divisions, tubers, rhizomes, bulbs, etc.) have an elevated risk of being infected or contaminated with Phytophthora or other soilborne pathogens. Plant stock originating from such propagules should be segregated from planting material started from cleaner sources, such as seed or cuttings and from other vegetatively propagated material from different localities. The goal is to avoid introducing pathogens, including pathogens that may be endemic to a given site, to new areas or native plant populations via plants that become infected in the nursery. 2.14. Plant propagules from the soil (divisions, tubers, rhizomes, bulbs, etc.) should be thoroughly cleaned to remove soil and inspected. Discard propagules that show evidence of decay. Surface contamination can be removed with treatments such as diluted bleach dips, but surface treatments will not eliminate internal infections. Internal infections can only be eliminated by heat treatments, but not all plant propagules will tolerate temperatures needed to kill Phytophthora infections. 24 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 321 Packet Page 751 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration Letter 1 COMMENTER: Jane F. Mark, AICP, Planning Manager, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District DATE: September 19, 2022 Response 1.1 The commenter requests a new figure in the IS-MND that shows the proposed building’s footprint in relation to the creek and property lines. This figure has been added to the Final IS-MND as Figure 6 in Section 4, Biological Resources. Response 1.2 The commenter suggests that modifying riparian vegetation may be required to create adequate defensible space for fire protection, and that such modification may require encroachment into the creek setback. The commenter states an opinion that the impacts of such vegetation removal or trimming were not adequately studied in the Draft IS-MND and that mitigation is required. The project is currently designed to avoid all direct impacts within the creek setback zone and avoid and minimize activities within the jurisdictional riparian habitat including removal of riparian canopy. Defensible space requirements pursuant to the 2019 California Residential Code and Chapter 15 of the PAMC do not necessitate that all vegetation be cleared within 30 feet of the residence; therefore, avoidance of impacts within the setback zone and the jurisdictional riparian habitat as proposed is feasible. The IS-MND describes permitting and mitigation requirements in the case that some trimming within the jurisdictional riparian habitat is required. These impacts would be the minimum necessary to provide required clearance between the proposed structure and potentially two to three riparian trees. There is minimal brush or undergrowth present above top of bank and it does not necessarily require removal in order to provide a clear area for fire suppression operations. The vegetation that may require trimming is back from the top of bank and reduction would not increase light transmittal to the creek corridor, increase water temperatures, or decrease shaded riverine habitat for the listed fish or other aquatic species. The riparian corridor edge adjacent to the house is situated away from the top of bank and would remain wider than in other spots along the corridor and would not impede wildlife movement or existing wildlife corridors along the creek. Furthermore, CDFW is a CEQA trustee agency; the City provided an opportunity for state agencies to comment on the IS-MND through the State Clearinghouse’s Notice of Completion process; no comments from state agencies were received. No changes to the IS-MND are warranted. Response 1.3 The commenter states an opinion that the proposed swimming pool could result in the entrapment of semiaquatic species that could travel from the creek to the pool, and that these impacts were not adequately addressed in the Draft IS-MND. The commenter suggests mitigation such as wildlife barriers and/or escape ramps. Swimming pools can be an attractive nuisance for wildlife. Pursuant to PAMC Section 16.18.160, the pool is required to be enclosed by fencing with no more than a 2-inch gap between grade and the 25 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 322 Packet Page 752 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration bottom of fencing, which would be a barrier to turtles, frogs and salamanders entering the pool area. The City would require adherence to PAMC Section 16.18.160 prior to issuance of building permits. Implementation of these requirements would adequately deter wildlife from entering the pool area and significant impacts would be avoided. No changes to the IS-MND are warranted. Response 1.4 The commenter suggests that the proposed building could present a barrier to wildlife passage parallel to Los Trancos Creek, which could result in habitat fragmentation for species such as deer and mountain lion. The commenter states an opinion that these impacts were not adequately studied in the Draft IS-MND and that mitigation is required. The project is designed to avoid impacts to the riparian corridor, which includes fencing of the creek setback zone required by Mitigation Measure BIO-3. The proposed placement of the structure is within an existing clearing on the property. The City would require adherence to PAMC Section 18.40.140(B)(3) requiring shielding of the creek from lighting. Implementation of these requirements would limit intrusion into the riparian corridor and impacts to the movement of both terrestrial and aquatic wildlife, established corridors, or nursery sites within the corridor would be less than significant. The following discussion of wildlife movement, migratory corridors, and nursery sites has been added in Section 4, Biological Resources, of the Final IS-MND, under checklist item d: The project site is mapped within CDFW’s California Essential Habitat Connectivity areas as somewhat permeable to wildlife passage. However, the project site is outside of mapped Landscape Blocks for the California Bay Area Linkage Network, indicating that it is not identified as highly permeable or high-quality habitat. Within the larger landscape, the project site is surrounded by highly permeable landscape providing terrestrial species more attractive alternatives for movement around the project site. Many large terrestrial wildlife species such as the candidate threatened mountain lion (Puma concolor) and most small species such as rodents and herpetofauna avoid openings and use the cover provided by the riparian corridor. The project is designed to avoid impacts to the riparian corridor, and Mitigation Measure BIO-3 requires fencing of the creek setback zone. The proposed placement of the structure is within an existing clearing on the property. The City would require adherence to PAMC Section 18.40.140(B)(3) requiring shielding of the creek from lighting. Implementation of these requirements would limit intrusion into the riparian corridor and impacts to the movement of both terrestrial and aquatic wildlife, established corridors, or nursery sites would be less than significant. No additional changes to the IS-MND are warranted. Response 1.5 The commenter requests that the City incorporate appropriate protocols as part of the Conditions of Approval for the Resource Management Permit to minimize the spread of Phytophthora-caused plant diseases, including Sudden Oak Death. The commenter provides suggestions for such measures and attaches “Guidelines to Minimize Phytophthora Contamination in Restoration Projects.” 26 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 323 Packet Page 753 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration This comment is not related to the potential impacts of the proposed project or the analysis and conclusions of the IS-MND, and therefore no changes to the IS-MND are warranted. It will be forwarded to the City’s decision makers for their consideration. Response 1.6 The commenter requests that they be added to the City’s future notifications for the proposed project and other development projects located within the vicinity of the Hawthorns Area of Windy Hill Open Space Preserve. This comment is noted and will be considered by City staff. 27 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 324 Packet Page 754 of 792 September 19, 2022 Emily Foley, Emily.Foley@cityofpaloalto.org Jodie Gerhardt, Jodie.Gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org Planning and Development Services Department City of Palo Alto Re: 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Dear Ms. Foley and Ms. Gerhardt, The Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society (SCVAS) and the Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter (SCLPC) are environmental organizations that work to protect natural resources and promote the enjoyment of nature. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the IS/MND for the 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project. Project description The project site is an undeveloped open space, dominated by oak woodland, riparian woodland, and a meadow of non-native grasses. The proposed project includes the construction of a 7,245-square-foot single family residence, a 734-square-foot attached garage, an 895-square-foot accessory dwelling unit (ADU), a swimming pool, access roads, and amenities in the flat, western portion of a 5.38-acre parcel. Our concerns SCVAS and SCLPC only learned of this project after it was recommended for approval by the Planning and Transportation Commission on August 31. After reviewing the IS/MND and the staff report, we conclude that the project has the potential to impose significant, unavoidable and permanent impacts on the environment. In this letter, we provide substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that the project as proposed, will cause significant and unavoidable impacts, especially but not exclusively to biological resources. Los Trancos Creek is one of the few remaining salmonid streams in the Peninsula and the South Bay. As acknowledged in the Biological Report and the IS/MND, it is designated Critical Habitat for steelhead trout. The creek and its riparian corridor also provide a wildlife connectivity linkage to most of our common and rare wildlife species, including mountain lions. The property is located between important open space areas in Palo Alto (Foothills Park) and Portola Valley (Hawthorns property of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space). Development here has the potential to impact fish and to disrupt movement through a key wildlife riparian ecosystem and wildlife corridor. We maintain that a “fair argument” exists Letter 2 2.1 2.2 28 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 325 Packet Page 755 of 792 September 19, 2022 Page 2 that the Project will significantly impact the environment (League for Protection of Oakland’s Historic Resources v. City of Oakland (1997) 52 Cal. App.4th 896, 904.). A public agency must prepare an EIR whenever substantial evidence supports a fair argument that a proposed project “may have a significant effect on the environment” (Protect Niles v. City of Fremont (2018) 25 Cal.App5th 1129, 1138-1139.). This low threshold for the preparation of an EIR, and a “preference for resolving doubts in favor of environmental review” is met here (Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 322, 332.). The city has discretion over the project and should require that the project be re-designed at a minimum of 55 feet from the top of the bank of Los Trancos creek (in line with the neighboring home) or a wider setback, ideally 150 feet. If this wider buffer/setback is not feasible, the city must prepare an EIR to fully analyze and mitigate the impacts and to consider alternatives to the proposed size of the project and its location on the parcel. Alternatives for a smaller footprint, or potentially loss of a few trees, are likely to reduce the impacts on the riparian ecosystem of Los Trancos Creek and must be considered. Given California’s prolonged drought and regional aridification, a project with no swimming pool should also be considered to allow more space for relocation of the home further from the creek and for saving water. 1. Mapping of the project The maps that are provided in the IS/MND are not detailed enough for the public to discern the location on the parcel where the development is proposed or how the delineation of 20 feet from top-of-the-bank was determined. Therefore, the public, regulators, and decision makers lack the ability to fully evaluate the project’s impacts or to make fully informed decisions. Please recirculate the CEQA document and provide a map that clearly delineates the project elements, including structures, roads, and amenities, on the property. Please show the 20-foot setback from the top-of-the-bank. Please include Los Trancos Creek and public amenities such as roads and trails, and provide the map as an overlay on a satellite photo of the property. This should help ascertain that the project’s slope stability protection area extends to a point “20 feet landward from the top of bank or to a point measured at a ratio of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) landward from the toe of bank, whichever is greater” (Palo Alto Stream Protection Ordinance).1 A map of the areas to be excavated (following the recommendations of the Geotechnical Engineering Study) should be provided. A clear zoning map for this location is needed, to show the designation of this parcel and that of land surrounding it. 2. Biological resources The Biological resources section of the IS/MND does not adequately describe the species that may be affected by the project. Chapter 14 of the Stanford Community Plan 2018 General Use Permit Biological report provides a better picture of the many species in the San Francisquito/Los Trancos watershed 1 https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0-0-0-80331 2.3 2.4 2.5 29 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 326 Packet Page 756 of 792 September 19, 2022 Page 3 (Section 3.1.1).2 All the species mentioned in this report, and the mitigation measures proposed to reduce impacts, should be considered comprehensively in a CEQA document for this project. 3. Wider riparian buffers are needed The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board’s “Local Government Riparian Buffers in the San Francisco Bay Area” report 3 establishes, “The riparian zone is an ecotone, or transition zone, between aquatic and terrestrial habitats. Because riparian zones contain both aquatic and terrestrial plant and animal species they have unusually high species diversity. Riparian zones are also important migratory corridors. A continuous buffer provides migratory and wildlife corridors, which are of particular value in protecting amphibians and waterfowl populations, as well as fish spawning and nursery areas. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California has lost 90 percent or more of its wetlands, which includes riparian communities. This is despite the fact that according to government biologists, riparian communities in the Western states, such as California, provide habitat for up to 80 percent of western wildlife species.” Clearly, riparian ecosystems and buffers are critically important to animal movement, as well as to maintaining water quality in streams. The science is well established and is the reason why agencies regulate construction near streams, and why many agencies impose significant buffers, especially in open space areas. The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board’s “Local Government Riparian Buffers in the San Francisco Bay Area” report states, “Riparian zones perform many ecological functions important to enhancing water quality, water quantity, biodiversity, habitat connectivity, and flood capacity. The stream channel itself conveys runoff, supports aquatic plants and animals, provides groundwater recharge, and supplies water to trees and plants that typically thrive in the riparian zone.” The report cites several studies that show the importance of adequate riparian corridor building setbacks. “Buffer Distances Estimates of effective buffer distances for sediment and nutrient filtration vary, but most of the scientific studies suggest distances between 50 and 100 feet for this purpose (Jones & Stokes 2002). Although any buffer distance from the top of the bank is helpful for maintaining channel stability, a minimum 33-foot riparian buffer is required for contributing to a significant reduction in sediment levels.” The “buffer distances in the region vary greatly, and it is likely that many were not chosen based upon specific buffer thresholds designed to satisfy water quality considerations. A scientifically based approach can help quantify buffer-induced benefits to water quality, thereby allowing the Board to more easily quantify TMDL reduction amounts when communicating with the region cities.” Reducing total maximum daily loads (TMDL) is critical for salmonid bearing streams including Los Trancos Creek. This is why Santa Clara County and the Santa Clara Habitat Agency, based on extensive research, require a buffer of 150 feet from waterways in locations and situations similar to this project siting. The Santa Clara County General Plan Policy R-RC 37 states, “Lands near creeks, streams, and freshwater marshes shall be considered to be in a protected buffer area consisting of…150 feet from the top bank on both sides where the creek or stream is predominantly in its natural state” to protect creeks and 3 https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/publications_forms/documents/bufferreport1204.pdf 2 https://stgenpln.blob.core.windows.net/document/SU_2018GUP_App_Tab14_Biological.pdf 2.6 30 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 327 Packet Page 757 of 792 September 19, 2022 Page 4 riparian areas from “adverse impacts of adjacent development, including impacts upon habitat, from sedimentation, biochemical, thermal and aesthetic impacts.” To avoid significant unmitigable impacts, Stanford’s Community Plan Policy RC-7, which addresses buffer zones along creeks, contains a cross reference to Santa Clara County General Plan policy R-RC 37. Palo Alto’s outdated Stream Protection Ordinance requires a minimal setback of 20 feet, which is why the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Policy N3.3 Program N3.3.1 seeks to update this ordinance, expressing a desire for a 150-ft buffer in locations west of Foothill Expressway: Program N3.3.1 Update the Stream Corridor Protection Ordinance to explore 150 feet as the desired stream setback along natural creeks in open space and rural areas west of Foothill Expressway. This 150-foot setback would prohibit the siting of buildings and other structures, impervious surfaces, outdoor activity areas and ornamental landscaped areas within 150 feet of the top of a creek bank. Allow passive or intermittent outdoor activities and pedestrian, equestrian and bicycle pathways along natural creeks where there are adequate setbacks to protect the natural riparian environment. Within the setback area, provide a border of native riparian vegetation at least 30 feet along the creek bank. The update to the Stream Protection Ordinance should establish: Design recommendations for development or redevelopment of sites within the setback, consistent with basic creek habitat objectives and significant net improvements in the condition of the creek. Conditions under which single-family property and existing development are exempt from the 150-foot setback. Appropriate setbacks and creek conservation measures for undeveloped parcels. The intent of the Comprehensive Plan is clear. It seeks to create adequate, protective setbacks and design recommendations along creeks west of Foothills Expressway. While a 150-foot setback is cited as appropriate for new development west of Foothill Expressway, the program notes that single-family residential development can be exempt from this larger setback. Although the program states that narrower setbacks can be allowed, it does not state that minimal setbacks of 20 feet is ever appropriate or recommended. We maintain that "can be" is not the same as "shall be” and is not determinative. Instead, "can be" indicates discretion, and a 20-foot setback is inappropriate in this location, and will cause significant, unavoidable and permanent harm to Los Trancos creek and the San Francisquito creek watershed. Staff proposes that the property is “relatively narrow” (page 6 of the Staff Report, PTC) stating, “the widest part of the house (measured between the creek and the street), the property is approximately 226 ft wide” and “The first 90 feet (approximately) measured from the street property line is dedicated to tree protection. An 150 ft creek setback would render this property undevelopable or result in a need to remove existing mature protected trees.” We do not see 226 feet or even 136 feet (226-90=136) as too narrow to accommodate a home. The City has the discretion and should require a smaller footprint of the development, a change in the design to allow wider setback, or allow the removal of a few trees to safeguard the integrity of the creek’s riparian corridor. 2.7 2.8 31 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 328 Packet Page 758 of 792 September 19, 2022 Page 5 In addition, this property is zoned Streamside Open Space (SOS). Palo Alto’s zoning code provides, “This designation is intended to preserve and enhance corridors of riparian vegetation along streams. Hiking, biking and riding trails may be developed in the streamside open space. The corridor will generally vary in width up to 200 feet on either side of the center line of the creek.” The Staff Report says, “This designation does not discuss residential use, in the way that the Open Space/Controlled Development (OS/CD designation) designation does. The OS/CD designation allows 1-2 dwelling units per acre.”4 The SOS designation seems to allow no residential development. The proposed development is not consistent with preserving and enhancing corridors of riparian vegetation along streams as intended by the SOS designation. Lastly, The Palo Alto Stream Protection ordinance specifies development at,“20 feet landward from the top of bank or to a point measured at a ratio of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) landward from the toe of bank, whichever is greater”. The Geotechnical Engineering Study (Appendix C) states that the house is located “80 feet from Los Trancos creek” and bases its recommendations on that measurement. Is the creek channel or the center line of the creek at a distance of 60 feet away from the top of the bank? If the creek channel is located 60 feet away from the top of the bank, then the setback required by the Palo Alto Stream Protection ordinance is 120 feet. 4. Consultation with NOAA Fisheries and CDFW is needed 4.1. Steelhead and other fish Los Trancos Creek runs along the project site. Since water is available most of the year, the creek is home to Los Trancos Creek is home to fish such as California roach, Sacramento sucker, threespine stickleback, prickly sculpin and rainbow trout (resident). The creek is designated Critical Habitat for steelhead trout. “Critical habitat” is defined as the specific areas that are essential to the conservation of a federally listed species, and that may require special management consideration or protection. Critical habitat is determined using the best available scientific information about the physical and biological needs of the species. These needs, which are referred to as “primary constituent elements,” include space for individual and population growth and for normal behavior; food, water, light, air, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological needs; cover or shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, and rearing of offspring; and habitat that is protected from disturbance or is representative of the historical geographic and ecological distribution of a species. The IS/MND proposed that a 20-foot creek setback suffices to protect the species from disturbance yet state, “implementation of the proposed project may result in direct or indirect impacts to steelhead at all life stages.” The Biological Assessment states, “The results and conclusions presented herein represent our best professional judgment but do not represent determinations of the NMFS and CDFW as these agencies 4 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/planning-and- transportation-commission/2022/ptc-08.31.2022-575-los-trancos.pdf 2.9 2.10 2.11 32 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 329 Packet Page 759 of 792 September 19, 2022 Page 6 have ultimate jurisdiction over the steelhead through administration and enforcement of the FESA and CESA, respectively.” Palo Alto should require consultation with NMFS and CDFW and ensure that all the requirements for steelhead habitat are not impacted significantly. In addition to direct impacts due to the diminutive buffer of 20 feet, impacts of access roads, parking, and light should be addressed and mitigated. For example, outdoor lighting (especially lighting with correlated color temperature of over 2400 Kelvin), can impact local aquatic insects directly and through the reduction of insects and food availability to the fish.5 Components from tire dust can kill salmon fry.6 4.2. Mountain Lion The mountain lion has recently been designated as a state candidate for listing under the threatened and endangered species list. 7 The Central Coast North population of mountain lions contains the project area. Connectivity is crucial for expanding genetic diversity in this population, and a great amount of effort is invested in restoring movement corridors for this species. Creek corridors are important for migration in this species, especially as migration routes are threatened by development and climate change.8 Studies of nocturnal patterns of movement suggest mountain lions tend to avoid areas with human disturbance including residential developments that introduce noise and activities as well as light at night. 4.3. The San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat This species is endemic to the San Francisco Bay area and is listed as a Species of Special Concern in California. The proposed mitigation – dismantling and translocation of middens – has not been shown to be effective at protecting the woodrats. 9 There is no evidence that woodrats use dismantled relocated middens and the survival of translocated woodrats is unknown. Please review and propose effective mitigation measures. Please use the mitigations offered in the Stanford Community Plan. 5. The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan The project is inconsistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. As discussed above, the diminutive setback requirements of the project do not provide sufficient protection to Los Trancos Creek, and, thus, the project is inconsistent with: ●Goal N-3: Conservation of both natural and channelized creeks and riparian areas as open space amenities, natural habitat areas and elements of community design. 9 http://wildlifeprofessional.org/western/tws_abstract_detail.php?abstractID=2424&k=I/a/NHKlFi8qQ 8 https://www.washington.edu/news/2019/02/12/assessing-riverside-corridors-the-escape-routes-for-animals- under-climate-change-in-the-northwest/ 7 https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Mammals/Mountain-Lion#562331240-are-mountains-lions-listed-as-a- threatened-or-endangered-species 6 https://www.science.org/content/article/common-tire-chemical-implicated-mysterious-deaths-risk-salmon 5 https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2688-8319.12053 2.12 2.13 2.14 33 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 330 Packet Page 760 of 792 September 19, 2022 Page 7 ●Policy N-3.4: Recognize that riparian corridors are valued environmental resources whose integrity provides vital habitat for fish, birds, plants and other wildlife, and carefully monitor and preserve these corridors. ●Policy N-3.1: All creeks are valuable resources for natural habitats, connectivity, community design, and flood control, and need different conservation and enhancement strategies. Recognize the different characteristics along creeks in Palo Alto, including natural creek segments in the city’s open space and rural areas, primarily west of Foothill Expressway; creek segments in developed areas that retain some natural characteristics; and creek segments that have been channelized. Pursue opportunities to enhance riparian setbacks along urban and rural creeks as properties are improved or redeveloped. In addition, it is likely to have a significant, unavoidable impact on wildlife movement. ●Policy N-1.5: Preserve and protect the Bay, marshlands, salt ponds, sloughs, creeks, and other natural water or wetland areas as open space, functioning habitats, and elements of a larger, interconnected wildlife corridor, consistent with the Baylands Master Plan, as periodically amended, which is incorporated here by reference ●Policy N-1.6: Preserve and protect the foothills and hillside areas, recognizing their unique value as natural ecosystems and interconnected wildlife corridors. The project is located in an area that is important to wildlife connectivity between open spaces areas, including Palo Alto’s Foothills Park and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Hawthorns Open Space. Los Trancos Creek, its tributaries and its function in the San Francisquito creek watershed, require special attention to wildlife connectivity. The IS/MND does not discuss, analyze or substantiate its finding of no significant impact. Due to the diminutive setback from Los Trancos Creek, we believe that the introduction of human activity during the day and lighting (including outdoor lighting) at night have the potential to interfere substantially with the movement of every native resident and migratory fish and wildlife species that occur in the region, and potentially impede the use of native fish and bat nursery sites. The 20-foot setback also means that outdoor lighting cannot achieve the ambition of Program N3.3.3: For all creeks, update the Stream Corridor Protection Ordinance to minimize impacts on wildlife by “Requiring careful design of lighting surrounding natural riparian corridors to maximize the distance between nighttime lighting and riparian corridors and direct lighting away from the riparian corridor.” A wider setback should help achieve this goal. 6. Bird friendly design Bird populations are declining in North America.10 While there are multiple drivers to this decline, collision with glass is considered one of the primary causes of migratory bird mortality. In North 10 https://www.science.org/content/article/three-billion-north-american-birds-have-vanished-1970-%20surveys- show 2.15 2.16 2.17 34 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 331 Packet Page 761 of 792 September 19, 2022 Page 8 America, it is estimated that hundreds of millions of birds die each year as a result of striking glass walls, doors and windows.11 This is a cumulative, significant impact. Bird collisions with glazed surfaces are especially critical in riparian corridors, and many jurisdictions have regulations in place to reduce and mitigate this hazard within 300-ft of riparian corridors and/or open space.12 The American Bird Conservancy (ABC) website is a great resource to learn about the devastating impacts of bird collisions and to find solutions to incorporate into architectural designs. Recently, ABC updated their website with new recommendations for Bird Friendly Building Design 13 and a clarifying document that establishes what qualifies as Bird Friendly Glass. ABC provides primary elements of bird safe building design. These elements are especially critical near habitat areas such as water bodies and open space. ●Minimize use of glass ●Placing glass behind screening ●Using glass with inherent properties that reduce collisions, such as fritting. In addition, ABC provides a Products and Solutions Database14 to evaluate bird safety glazing treatments. Palo Alto requires bird friendly design for commercial buildings, but not for homes. Bird collisions, however, occur primarily (99%) at homes and low rise buildings. 15 The proposed project is likely to contribute to cumulative impact on birds and should be required to apply bird safety measures. 7. Fire risks The house is located in a fire-prone area. Most wildfires are caused by human activities. 16 Combined with climate change and housing growth in the wildland-urban interface, fires have become larger and more destructive. We believe that analysis provided in the IS/MND is insufficient, and additional additional analysis and mitigations are needed to ensure that the environment is safe during construction and habituation of the proposed residence. Insurance Commissioner of California Ricardo Lara’s report last year 17 called for policies that would stop construction in hazardous areas. Insurers are dropping policies in wildfire areas 18 shifting the burden to 18 https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/west/2020/12/04/592788.htm 17 http://www.insurance.ca.gov/01-consumers/180-climate-change/upload/Draft-Climate-Insurance- Recommendations.pdf 16 https://www.colorado.edu/asmagazine/2020/09/22/humans-ignite-almost-every-wildfire-threatens-homes 15 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259562592_Bird-building_collisions_in_the_United_States_ Estimates_of_annual_mortality_and_species_vulnerability 14 https://abcbirds.org/glass-collisions/products-database/ 13 https://abcbirds.org/glass-collisions/model-ordinance/and https://abcbirds.org/glass collisions/resources/ 12 https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/community-development/planning/non-residential-mixed- use-development/bird-safe-and-dark-sky 11 https://academic.oup.com/condor/article/116/1/8/5153098 and https://bioone.org/journals/the-condor/volume-116/issue-1/CONDOR-13-090.1/Birdbuilding-collisions-in-the-United-States--Estimates-of-annual/10.1650/CONDOR-13-090.1.full 2.18 35 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 332 Packet Page 762 of 792 September 19, 2022 Page 9 taxpayers via the state through court orders.19 New housing built in the path of wildfires increases liability for the state. The City should evaluate the concern that new residences in this area will increase the risk of wildfire in the Palo Alto foothills area. According to the IS/MND, the nearest Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) is located approximately 1 mile northwest of the project site near Portola Valley (Cal Fire 2022). This is not a significant distance away from the hazard severity zone given wind driven fires in California 20 and in the western United States, where climate change has doubled the amount of land damaged by wildfires between 1985 and 2015. 21 NASA’s report, “The Effects of Climate Change,” states, "The potential future effects of global climate change include more frequent wildfires, longer periods of drought in some regions, and an increase in the duration and intensity of tropical storms." Indeed, it is expected that the amount of properties burned in CA will grow according to a study by the First Street Foundation when "about 40% of the state have at least “moderate” risk of burning in a wildfire some time in the next 30 years”.22 Thank you for granting us an extension for commenting, and please do not hesitate to contact us if you have questions. Respectfully, Shani Kleinhaus, Ph.D. Environmental Advocate Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society Gladwyn D’Souza Conservation Committee Chair Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter 22 https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/fires/article261495002.html 21 https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/ 20 https://firesafemarin.org/prepare-yourself/red-flag-warnings/diablo-winds/ 19 https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/california-s-insurer-of- last-resort-faces-fire-coverage-challenges-after-ruling-65646785 36 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 333 Packet Page 763 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration Letter 2 COMMENTER: Shani Kleinhaus, Ph.D., Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society, and Gladwyn D’Souza, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter DATE: September 19, 2022 Response 2.1 The commenters claim that the proposed project would result in significant, unavoidable, and permanent impacts on the environment, especially but not exclusively to biological resources. This comment serves as an introduction to the following specific comments; please see responses 2.3 through 2.18 for responses to the commenters’ specific comments in this regard. Response 2.2 The commenters state that the Los Trancos Creek is one of the few remaining salmonid streams in the Peninsula and the South Bay is designated Critical Habitat for steelhead trout, and creek provides wildlife connectivity linkage to most common and rare wildlife species, including mountain lions. The commenters also state that the proposed project is located between two open space areas in Palo Alto (Foothills Park) and Portola Valley (Hawthorns property of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space), and that proposed development has the potential to impact fish and disrupt movement through a key wildlife riparian ecosystem and wildlife corridor. The commenters claim that a “fair argument” exists that the proposed project would significantly impact the environment. This comment discusses the project context and serves as an introduction to specific comments to follow. Please see response to Comment 1.4 above and responses 2.3 through 2.18 below. As demonstrated in the responses and in the IS-MND, the proposed project would not result in significant and unavoidable impacts and an environmental impact report (EIR) is not required. Response 2.3 The commenters request that the City of Palo Alto require the proposed project to be re-designed at a minimum of 55 feet from the top of the bank of Los Trancos creek, and state an opinion that if a wider buffer/setback is not feasible, an EIR should be prepared. The commenters express an opinion that alternatives for a smaller footprint, or loss of a few trees, would likely reduce impacts on the Los Trancos Creek riparian ecosystem. The commenters also express the opinion that the swimming pool should be omitted to allow for more space for the relocation of the proposed residence farther from the creek and to save water. The Initial Study acknowledges that there could be potentially significant impacts; however, the project is generally designed to avoid impacts to riparian habitat and the Los Trancos Creek corridor, and the IS-MND includes mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Please also see response to Comment 1.4 above. There would be no significant unavoidable or unmitigable impacts, and an EIR is not required. The commenters’ suggestions regarding the design of the project are noted and will be forwarded to the City’s decision makers. 37 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 334 Packet Page 764 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration Response 2.4 The commenters claim that maps provided in the IS-MND are not detailed enough and request the addition of a map that clearly delineates project elements including structures, roads, and amenities on the property; a map of the areas to be excavated; and a zoning map for the project location. Please see Response 1.1 and the new figure that was added to the Final IS-MND showing key features as requested in the comment. No excavation is proposed within the creek buffer. A zoning map is not required in order to assess the project’s potential impacts on the environment; please see Section 11, Land Use and Planning, of the IS-MND for a discussion of the zoning designation of the subject property and impacts related to land use and zoning designations, regulations and policies. Response 2.5 The commenters state an opinion that the Biological Resources section of the IS-MND does not adequately describe species affected by the project. The commenters claim that all of the species and mitigation measures mentioned in Chapter 14 of the Stanford Community Plan 2018 General Use Permit Biological Report (GUP BR) should be comprehensively considered in this IS-MND. The GUP BR covers the entire Stanford campus and an area of open space to the south of campus that is larger than the campus itself. The Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) (Appendix A of the IS-MND) prepared for the IS reviewed resources occurring within a 9-quad area centered on the project site, as required by CEQA Guidelines. The BRA and IS-MND are not required to address all species or all habitats within the region or watershed, only the habitats present and those species that have a reasonable potential to occur at the project site. The GUP BR plan area has more habitats present and thus the potential to support many more species than the project site, and as a result directly addresses more resources than are appropriate for the proposed project. The measures in the GUP BR are not required to address project impacts and no changes to the IS-MND are warranted. Response 2.6 The commenters request wider riparian buffers, citing Santa Clara County and the Santa Clara Habitat Agency, which require a buffer of 150 feet from waterways in locations and situations similar to the proposed project. While wider riparian setbacks may be ideal, that does not mean that narrower setbacks automatically result in significant unmitigable impacts. The project would be constructed in compliance with the Stream Corridor Protection Ordinance, PAMC Section 18.40.140. Additionally, the proposed project is generally designed to avoid impacts to existing riparian habitat and the Los Trancos Creek corridor and the IS-MND provides avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures that would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. See also responses to comments 1.2 and 1.4 above. Response 2.7 The commenters state that Palo Alto’s Stream Protection Ordinance requires a minimal setback of 20 feet, and the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Policy N3.3 Program N3.3.1 seeks to update this ordinance by implementing a desire for a 150-foot buffer in locations west of Foothill Expressway. 38 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 335 Packet Page 765 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration The commenters claim that the 20-foot setback is inappropriate and would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to Los Trancos Creek and the San Francisquito creek watershed. Please see response to Comment 2.6 above. Response 2.8 The commenters disagree with the City’s determination that the property is “relatively narrow.” The commenters suggest that the City should require a smaller footprint of development, a change in design to allow for a wider setback, or allow for the removal of trees to protect the creek’s riparian corridor. Please see responses 2.3 and 2.6. Response 2.9 The commenters state an opinion that the property’s zoning designation does not allow residential development and that the proposed project is not consistent with preserving and enhancing corridors of riparian vegetation along streams as intended by the SOS designation. The proposed project site has a Comprehensive Plan land use designation of Streamside Open Space (SOS) and a zoning designation of Open Space (OS) inside a “streamside review area” as defined in Section 18.40.140 (Stream Corridor Protection) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC). The SOS land use designation does not specifically allow for or preclude residential development. However, the OS zoning designation permits single-family dwellings pursuant to Section 18.28.040 of the PAMC. The City of Palo also has full discretion to determine whether residential development is allowed on the site. Response 2.10 The commenters state that according to the Geotechnical Engineering Study, the proposed structure is located “80 feet from Los Trancos Creek” and bases its recommendations on that measurement. The commenters question whether the creek channel or the center line of the creek is at a distance of 60 feet from the top of the bank and claim that if the channel is located 60 feet from top of bank, then the setback required by the Palo Alto Stream Protection Ordinance should be 120 feet. Section 18.40.140(b)(3)(a) of the PAMC (Stream Corridor Protection) states that “the slope stability protection area shall extend to a point 20 feet landward from the top of bank or to a point measured at a ratio of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) landward from the toe of bank, whichever is greater.” This refers to a 2:1 horizontal setback to bank width. The Geotechnical Engineering Study states that the bank is 10 feet high. Therefore, a 2:1 horizontal (setback) to vertical (bank height) is 20 feet. This is measured from the toe of bank rather than the 20 feet from top of bank. No changes to the IS-MND are warranted. Response 2.11 The commenters request that the city require consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) to ensure that impacts to steelhead habitat are mitigated. The commenters also suggest that direct impacts from the 20 feet 39 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 336 Packet Page 766 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration buffer, as well as impacts from access roads, parking, and lighting should be addressed and mitigated. The project would be in compliance with the Stream Corridor Protection Ordinance, PAMC Section 18.40.140. Additionally, the project is generally designed to avoid direct impacts to aquatic habitat and the riparian corridor including Critical Habitat and potentially jurisdictional areas. Indirect impacts would be avoided through implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3. The City would require adherence to PAMC Section 18.40.140(B)(3) requiring shielding of the creek from lighting. Implementation of these requirements would limit intrusion into the riparian corridor and impacts to steelhead habitat would be avoided. Finally, the City provided an opportunity for state agencies to comment on the IS-MND through the State Clearinghouse’s Notice of Completion process; no comments from state agencies were received. No changes to the IS-MND are warranted. Response 2.12 The commenter states an opinion that the project vicinity contains the Central Coast North population of mountain lions, that creek corridors are important for the migration of these species, and that mountain lions tend to avoid areas with human disturbance including residential developments that introduce noise and activities as well as light at night. Please see responses to comments 1.4 and 2.6 above. Response 2.13 The commenter states an opinion that the proposed mitigation regarding San Francisco dusky- footed woodrats in the IS-MND would be ineffective at protecting the woodrats. The commenters request the usage of mitigation measures in the Stanford Community Plan. The mitigation measures in the IS-MND are substantially the same as proposed in the Stanford Community Plan Response 2.14 The commenters claim that the project is inconsistent with Goal N-3, policies N-3.1, N-3.4, N-1.5, and N-1.6 of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan because setback requirements of the project do not provide sufficient protection to Los Trancos Creek. The commenters suggest that the project would have a significant and unavoidable impact on wildlife movement. As discussed above under responses 1.4 and 2.6, the project would comply with setback requirements pursuant to Section 18.40.140(b)(3)(a) of the PAMC and require adherence to PAMC Section 18.40.140(B)(3) requiring shielding of the creek from lighting. Additionally, as discussed in Section 4, Biological Resources, of the IS-MND, the project is designed to generally avoid impacts to the riparian corridor, and Mitigation Measure BIO-3 requires fencing of the creek setback zone. Implementation of these requirements would limit intrusion into the riparian corridor and potential impacts to the movement of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife and established wildlife corridors would be less than significant and consistent with the goals and policies mentioned in the comment letter. No changes to the IS-MND are warranted. 40 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 337 Packet Page 767 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration Response 2.15 The commenters express that Los Trancos Creek and its tributaries and function in the San Francisquito Creek watershed require special attention to wildlife connectivity. The commenters state an opinion that the IS-MND does not discuss, analyze, or substantiate the conclusion that impacts would not be significant. A discussion of wildlife movement, migratory corridors, and nursery sites has been added in Section 4, Biological Resources, of the IS-MND, under checklist item d. See Response 1.4. No additional changes to the IS-MND are warranted. Response 2.16 The commenters state an opinion that the introduction of human activity during the day and lighting (including outdoor) at night could potentially substantially interfere with the movement of every native resident and migratory fish and wildlife species in the region and impede the use of native fish and bat nursery sites. Additionally, the commenter suggests that outdoor lighting would not be consistent with Program N3.3.3 of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan due to the 20-foot setback. A discussion of lighting has been added in Section 4, Biological Resources, under checklist item a, as follows: New lighting introduced on the project site could have an adverse effect on animal species in the creek corridor if not properly limited and controlled. PAMC Section 18.40.140(B)(3) requires that “Nighttime lighting shall be directed away from the riparian corridor of a stream” and that “The distance between nighttime lighting and the riparian corridor of a stream should be maximized.” A lighting plan submitted by the applicant shows shielding on exterior safety lighting and shades to limit interior lighting spillover toward the creek. The City would require adherence to PAMC Section 18.40.140(B)(3) during final review of project lighting prior to issuance of building permits. Implementation of these requirements would limit light intrusion into the creek corridor and associated impacts would be avoided. A discussion of wildlife movement, migratory corridors, and nursery sites has been added under checklist item d. See Response 1.4. No additional changes to the IS-MND are warranted. Response 2.17 The commenters claim that bird collision with glass is a cumulative, significant impact, and that the proposed project would contribute to this cumulative impact on birds and should be required to apply bird safety measures. Bird collisions with glass and light traps are a leading cause of migratory bird mortality. Project approvals would require adherence to PAMC Section 18.40.140(B)(3) requiring shielding of the creek from lighting and Section 18.40.250 requiring exterior lighting to be low intensity and designed to focus light downward, avoiding excessive illumination above the light fixture. The proposed project is also located outside of the riparian movement corridor. In considering past, present, and probable future projects in the City of Palo Alto, with implementation of the above requirements the project’s incremental effect is not considered cumulatively considerable. However, the commenters’ recommendation to apply bird-safe design measures will be forwarded to the City’s decision makers. No changes to the IS-MND are warranted. 41 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 338 Packet Page 768 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration Response 2.18 The commenters state that the proposed project is located in a fire-prone area and opine that additional analysis and mitigation measures are needed to ensure safety during construction and operation of the project. The commenters claim that the one-mile distance to the nearest Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) is not a significant distance given wind driven fires in California. Wildfire significance thresholds as outlined under CEQA Appendix G require analysis of projects “located in or near a state responsibility area or land classified as very high fire hazard severity zones.” As discussed in Section 20, Wildfire, of the IS-MND, the project site is not located in a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) or State Responsibility Area (SRA) Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ). Although the project would be located somewhat near (one mile) a VHFHSZ, as discussed in Section 20, Wildfire, the proposed project would be required to comply with Policy S-2.14 of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan which would require fire protection design in new development and ensure adequate emergency access for the PAFD. This includes requiring fire sprinkler protection in all structures and installing a National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 13-D fire sprinkler system throughout the house, including closets and bathrooms. The project would also be required to comply with wildland urban interface (WUI) requirements pursuant to the 2019 California Residential Code and Chapter 15 of the PAMC which include requirements for vegetation management; roofing; vents; exterior walls; eaves; exterior porch ceilings, floor projections, underfloor protection, underside of appendages; windows, skylights and doors; garages; decking; and accessory structures, and would also be located in proximity to three fire hydrants. Additionally, the proposed project would be consistent with truck turning radius requirements from the Palo Alto Fire Department, which would not impact emergency plans. Given compliance with existing State and local regulations, the project would ensure safety during both construction and operation and would have less than significant impacts on wildfire. 42 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 339 Packet Page 769 of 792 From Steve Henry 805 Los Trancos Rd Palo Alto, CA 94028 To Emily Foley, AICP Planner City of Palo Alto Development and Planning Services Emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org Date August 25, 2022 RE Proposed new home 575 Los Trancos Rd Palo alto John and Dee Ann Suppes have met with me regarding the design of their proposed new home adjacent to us. We reviewed there plans and feel the home will blend in well to environment and landscape. They also took care to provide additional screening separating our homes. We support their new home project and welcome them to the neighborhood. Sincerely, Steve Henry 43 Letter 3 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 340 Packet Page 770 of 792 City of Palo Alto 575 Los Trancos Road Residential Project Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration Letter 3 COMMENTER: Steve Henry DATE: August 25, 2022 Response 1.1 The commenter states support for the project. This comment is noted but does not pertain to the analysis or conclusions of the Draft IS-MND. 44 ITEM 13 Attachment G Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND Item 13: Page 341 Packet Page 771 of 792 1 5 1 7 City Council STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: ACTION ITEM Lead Department: Public Works Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 Title Review and Provide Direction on Wage and Benefits Requirements for Inclusion in a New Janitorial Services Request for Proposal (RFP) Recommendation Staff recommends that Council review and provide direction on the wage and benefits requirements for the new Janitorial Services Request for Proposal (RFP). Executive Summary Staff is seeking Council direction on wage and benefit requirements for inclusion in a new janitorial services RFP that will solicit proposals to service City facilities. To assist Council in the discussion, options are presented for further input. Wage and benefit requirement options: Option 1 City-Determined Wages/Benefits: Total wage and benefits of $20.84 (estimated) Option 2 PUC Prevailing Wage/Benefits: Total wage and benefits of $29.98 Option 3 PUC + Union Wage/Benefits: Total wage and benefits of $29.98 or higher Adding two additional janitorial job classifications for a total of seven classifications with higher pay requirements for more demanding or highly skilled work Councilmember Burt and Vice Mayor Stone, through a Colleagues Memo, have recommended that a new janitorial contractor be required to provide PUC prevailing wages and benefits at a minimum and require employees be covered by a collective bargaining agreement. ITEM 14 Staff Report Item 14: Page 1 Packet Page 772 of 792 1 5 1 7 This item was originally agendized for Council’s November 14, 2022 meeting but was continued. To avoid a gap in janitorial services, Council approved an amendment to extend the current contract by six months. The new contract expiration date is August 31, 2023. Council direction on RFP wage and benefit requirements is critical to proceeding with the RFP. Following the RFP process, staff will bring forward a new contract for Council consideration in spring 2023. Background The City’s current janitorial services contract expires on August 31, 2023. The contract was for a five-year term beginning in 2017, with six-month extensions approved by Council in June 2022[1] and December 2022[2]. Past janitorial contractors struggled to meet the City’s contract performance standards. As part of the 2017 procurement, staff placed greater emphasis on meeting performance solutions and adequate staffing levels. As part of the 2017 RFP requirements and evaluation process, staff recognized that emphasis on characteristics such as paying a higher wage and provision of health care and paid time off benefits would support the goals of a more reliable and higher performing work force. The current contractor proposed the highest employee hourly wage, provided paid time off, and health and welfare benefits to their employees. Wages and benefits were included in the contract terms given their importance in determination of the successful bidder. The improvement from previous contractors has been dramatic. The contract custodial staffing has been well-managed by the current contractor, with a significantly improved employee retention rate. Staff receives infrequent to no complaints of service levels, a significant improvement from the daily complaints of missed or poor services experienced with prior service providers. Discussion An RFP to solicit responses for janitorial services has been drafted and is ready for issuance pending refinements as directed by the City Council as part of this item. The RFP retains key changes from the 2017 RFP model to eliminate past contractor performance issues and focus on quality and consistency of services by: requiring a minimum level of staffing, requiring a minimum level of management, and requiring a minimum cost for material and supplies to help contractors bid the job more accurately. In addition to the continuation of 2017 RFP requirements, the current draft RFP specifies two new requirements: 1. Baseline wage and benefit requirements for the contract: This provides a degree of transparency in the proposers’ cost structure, clarity of objectives, and hopefully ensures meeting goals of high retention rates as currently have been experienced. ITEM 14 Staff Report Item 14: Page 2 Packet Page 773 of 792 1 5 1 7 2. Defines two proposed additional janitorial job classifications for a total of seven classifications: This provides higher wage requirements for more demanding or highly skilled work (see Table 1 below). Wage requirements, referenced as ‘City-determined Wages’ in Table 1, are essentially a continuation of the wages required by the current contract. For example, the current contract hourly wage for the Custodian classification is $17.39, while the hourly wage contemplated for the RFP is $17.50. This figure could be adjusted higher based on CPI. This remains in compliance with the City’s minimum wage effective January 1, 2023 of $17.25 per hour. Staff has also considered requiring proposers to include alternative pricing based on the California Public Utilities Code (PUC) prevailing wage for Janitor/Cleaner work in Santa Clara County (Attachment A). While the PUC prevailing wage requirements do not legally apply to the City’s janitorial services, they can be used to define a standard for wages and benefits for this work in Santa Clara County, albeit only for the single job classification of Janitor/Cleaner. Concurrently, Councilmember Burt and Vice Mayor Stone have submitted a Colleagues Memo on this topic. The Colleagues Memo recommends that the new janitorial contractor be required to provide PUC prevailing wages and benefits at a minimum and have employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement. Table 1 provides a comparison of hourly wage options for the new janitorial RFP. The PUC prevailing wage is only defined for “Janitor/Cleaner”, so it would apply to all of the custodian classifications that have been defined by the City. If Council directs that wages and benefits be based on the PUC prevailing wage, staff could also develop wage requirements for the classifications other than Custodian, using the PUC prevailing wage for Custodian as a basis. The hourly wage for Union janitorial employees where the wage must be equal to or greater than the PUC prevailing wage is not known, as it would be dependent on specific collective bargaining agreements. Consistent with the current contract, staff expects to include a proposed wage requirement of 3% annual wage increases over the five-year term, or to require increases in alignment with the PUC prevailing wage. ITEM 14 Staff Report Item 14: Page 3 Packet Page 774 of 792 1 5 1 7 Table 1: Comparison of Janitorial Worker Hourly Wage Options Applicable in May 2023 Classification City-determined Wages* PUC Prevailing Wage PUC + Union Wage Custodian $17.50 $20.00 $20.00 or higher Parking Garage Custodian $19.50 $20.00 $20.00 or higher Parks Custodian $19.50 $20.00 $20.00 or higher Utility Custodian $21.50 $20.00 $20.00 or higher Lead Custodian $22.50 $20.00 $20.00 or higher Police Department Custodian $25.50 $20.00 $20.00 or higher Supervisor $30.50 n/a unknown *Classifications and wages developed by staff for the current draft RFP. In addition to minimum hourly wages, the City’s current contract and the PUC prevailing wage require benefits such as time off and healthcare plans. Table 2 compares the total wages and benefits, expressed as an hourly total, for the three potential RFP options. Similar to the hourly wages comparison in Table 1, the wages and benefits for the for Union janitorial employees where wages and benefits must be equal to or greater than the PUC prevailing wage is not known, as they would be dependent on specific collective bargaining agreements. Table 2: Comparison of Janitorial Worker Custodian Classification Wages and Benefits Expressed on an Hourly Wage Basis Applicable in May 2023 May-23 City-determined Wages/Benefits PUC Prevailing Wage/Benefits PUC + Union Wage/Benefits Hourly Staff Cost Wage $17.50 $20.00 $20.00 or higher Sick & Vacation Benefits $0.34 $0.81 $0.81 or higher 1-week PTO 5-10 days vacation, 3 days sick 5-10 days vacation, 3 days sick or more ITEM 14 Staff Report Item 14: Page 4 Packet Page 775 of 792 1 5 1 7 Holiday $0 $0.46 $0.46 or higher no paid holidays 4 holidays 4 holidays or more Health & Welfare $3.00*$8.25 $8.25 or higher Only after 24 months of service After 24 months of service or earlier Pension $0 $0.30 $0.30 or higher 401k optional Leadership & Education $0 $0.09 $0.09 or higher other training Other Payment $0 $0.07 $0.07 or higher Industry Investigation Fund Total Wage & Benefits $20.84 $29.98 $29.98 or higher % Increase from “City- determined Wages/Benefits”n/a 44%44% or higher * Estimated based on Health & Welfare benefits provided under current contract. As demonstrated in Table 2, transitioning to PUC prevailing wages results in an estimated 44 percent increase in labor costs for the janitorial service provider. Transitioning to PUC prevailing wages as a minimum with Union representation results in an estimated minimum 44 percent increase, dependent on the terms of the collective bargaining agreement. It is possible for staff to proceed with the RFP requesting alternative pricing for more than one level of required wage and benefits. However, should Council direct the RFP to require a collective bargaining agreement, staff would recommend this be stated as a proposal requirement as individual proposers would likely either meet this requirement or not. ITEM 14 Staff Report Item 14: Page 5 Packet Page 776 of 792 1 5 1 7 Timeline The current contract expires on August 31, 2023. Once staff receives Council direction on RFP wage and benefit requirements, staff will proceed with the RFP process, and will bring a new contract to Council for consideration in spring 2023. Resource Impact Funding for the current contract extended through August 31, 2023 (approximately $2.5 million annually) was appropriated as part of the Fiscal Year 2023 Adopted Budget, with funding for July and August 2023 subject to the Council’s appropriation of Fiscal Year 2024 funding. Based on input from Council regarding the wage and benefits requirements for the RFP, additional funding is expected to be needed and will be requested for appropriation when staff returns to Council to recommend contract award. Adjustments to the funding for this contract will also be recommended for alignment with the approved contract as part of the annual budget process for subsequent fiscal years, subject to the Council’s appropriation of funding. Council may also question the comparison of the costs described above with an alternative of providing janitorial services with City employees. A preliminary review indicates that an in-house alternative would cost at least 40 percent higher than the highest cost alternative shown here. Policy Implications The City does not have a practice of including discretionary wage and benefit requirements in its solicitations for services. Council direction for this janitorial contract RFP may lead to the conclusion that other services should have similar requirements. Stakeholder Engagement Staff is seeking direction from Council on wage and benefits requirements for the new RFP, and will conduct industry outreach based on direction received. Environmental Review No environmental review is required. ITEM 14 Staff Report Item 14: Page 6 Packet Page 777 of 792 1 5 1 7 [1] City Council Staff Report June 2022 ID# 14161 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/public- works/facilities/sr-14161-amendment-to-extend-term-with-swa-services-group-inc_1.pdf [2] City Council Staff Report December 2022 ID#14820 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas- minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/2022/id.-14820-approval-of-amendment-no.-3-with-swa- services-group-inc.-swa.pdf ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Prevailing Wage Sheet Report #: ITEM 14 Staff Report Item 14: Page 7 Packet Page 778 of 792 3 3 5 Attachment A GENERAL PREVAILING WAGE DETERMINATION MADE BY THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE, SECTIONS 465, 466 AND 467 Determination: STC-2021-1 Reference: 22-1877-2 Issue Date of Determination: December 22, 2021 Supersedes Det: STC- 2019-1 Expiration Date of Determination: April 30, 2024*. Effective until superseded by a new determination issued by the Director of Industrial Relations. Contact the Office of the Director – Research Unit at (415) 703-4774 for the new rates after ten days from the expiration date if no subsequent determination is issued. Locality: Santa Clara County Craft: Janitor/Cleaner Wage Rates:Classification Basic Straight-Time Hourly Rate Janitor/Cleaner Expires 4/30/2022 $18.25 Effective 5/1/2022 $19.25 Effective 5/1/2023 $20.00 Employer Payments: (Public Utilities Code Section 465) Health & Welfare:$8.25 per hour after 24 months of service. Paid Holidays:Five (5) holidays per year or $0.35 per hour after 60 days of service. Effective 5/1/2022 Five (5) holidays per year or $0.37 per hour after 60 days of service. Effective 1/1/2023 Six (6) holidays per year or $0.44 per hour after 60 days of service. Effective 5/1/2023 Six (6) holidays per year or $0.46 per hour after 60 days of service. Effective 1/1/2024 Seven (7) holidays per year or $0.54 per hour after 60 days of service. Pension:$0.15 per hour after 90 days of service. Effective 5/1/2023 $0.30 per hour after 90 days of service. Paid Vacation:Five (5) days after 1 year of service or $0.35 per hour Ten (10) days after 3 years of service or $0.70 per hour Fifteen (15) days after 12 years of service or $1.05 per hour. Effective 5/1/2022 Five (5) days after 1 year of service or $0.37 per hour Ten (10) days after 3 years of service or $0.74 per hour Fifteen (15) days after 12 years of service or $1.11 per hour. Effective 5/1/2023 Five (5) days after 1 year of service or $0.38 per hour Ten (10) days after 3 years of service or $0.77 per hour Fifteen (15) days after 10 years of service or $1.15 per hour. Paid Sick Leave:Three (3) days or $0.21 per hour. Effective 5/1/2022 Three (3) days or $0.22 per hour. Effective 5/1/2023 Three (3) days or $0.23 per hour. ITEM 14 Attachment A - Prevailing Wage Sheet Item 14: Page 8 Packet Page 779 of 792 3 3 5 Training:$0.075 per hour. Effective 5/1/2022 $0.08 per hour. Effective 5/1/2023 $0.085 per hour. Other Payment: $0.05 per hour to Industry Investigation Fund. Effective 5/1/2022 $0.06 per hour to Industry Investigation Fund. Effective 5/1/2023 $0.07 per hour to Industry Investigation Fund. Bereavement Leave: Three (3) days paid leave and covers immediate family members (mother, father, spouse, son, daughter, brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, granddaughter, and registered domestic partner). Recognized Holidays: New Year’s Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. If a holiday falls on a Sunday, it shall be observed on the following Monday. If a holiday falls on a Saturday, it shall be observed either on Friday or Saturday as determined by the employer. Effective 2023, add Memorial Day. Effective 2024, add President’s Day. Straight-time Hours: Eight (8) hours per day. A week’s work shall consist of five (5) consecutive days. Overtime Rate: All work performed in excess of 8 hours per day and on the 6th day shall be paid at one and one- half times (1½) the basic hourly rate. All work performed on the 7th day shall be paid double (2x) the straight-time hourly rate. Work on a holiday shall be paid at one and one-half (1½) times the basic hourly rate in addition to the regular day’s pay. Travel and Subsistence: Employees required to furnish own vehicle between locations shall be reimbursed at the rate of the standard IRS mileage rate. ITEM 14 Attachment A - Prevailing Wage Sheet Item 14: Page 9 Packet Page 780 of 792 CITY COUNCIL COLLEAGUE’S MEMO Sponsor(s): Greer Stone, Patrick Burt Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Responsible Contracting Standards Colleague's Memo (Stone & Burt) BACKGROUND On March 21, 2022, speakers at the City Council meeting raised concerns over labor conditions and wages associated with the City’s third-party contract for janitorial services provided to the City of Palo Alto. On July 14, 2022, the San Jose Spotlight released an article detailing allegations of wage theft made by seven janitors that clean City facilities. left unaddressed, the City faces the potential risk for labor disruption, interruption of services, and turnover of its essential workforce. In addition, the city has a moral obligation to assure that the rights are protected of workers performing contracted services to the city. Background and Discussion: In 2017, the City awarded its current janitorial services contract. As part of the bidding process, City staff recommended the adoption of evaluation criteria to address issues with turnover and low-quality performance. On March 21, 2022, speakers at the City Council meeting raised concerns over labor conditions and wages associated with the contract. These concerns included failure to pay contract wages, failure to provide a clear “Paid Time Off” or vacation policy, failure to provide necessary materials to perform job duties, failure to reimburse expenses and mileage, failure to provide safety training or personal protective equipment, and failure to provide sufficient staffing.[1] On September 15, 2022, Congresswoman Anna Eshoo wrote to Mayor Burt, recognizing “the prevalence of reported exploitation in the janitorial industry, employers must be vigilant to ensure that janitors are treated fairly.” Additionally, Congresswoman Eshoo encouraged the city to “take into consideration the labor practices of any janitorial contractor with which it engages.”[2] The City also received a letter on June 15, 2022, from State Senator Josh Becker, encouraging an investigation into allegations of wage theft, because “property service industries tend to have track records of high turnover, poor quality of service, and wage theft. ITEM 14 Colleagues Memo Item 14: Page 10 Packet Page 781 of 792 These issues are particularly prevalent in the janitorial industry where exploitation, sexual harassment, and violations of wage and hour laws are commonplace.”[3] Assemblymember Berman also urged Palo Alto to “adopt a higher level of standards for these subcontracted services.”[4] On July 14, 2022, the San Jose Spotlight released an article detailing the allegations of wage theft made by seven janitors that clean City facilities. The article cited a report by the Maintenance Cooperation and Trust Fund, a janitorial industry watchdog organization, which describes the predominantly female Hispanic janitorial workforce as “especially vulnerable” dealing with “greater hardships than many other types of low-wage”[5] workers. The article also made reference to a situation in 2019 at the City of Fremont, which faced a two day labor stoppage after janitors had a dispute over medical benefits. The article also referenced how Mountain View recently adopted stricter standards to protect their subcontracted janitorial workforce.[6] On January 28, 2020, the City of Mountain View adopted a motion that required its Janitorial Services RFP to include that the awarded vendor be a firm whose employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement, janitors receive wages no less than the prevailing wage as listed under the California Public Utilities Code, and that the State Labor Code’s worker retention period be extended from 60 to 90 days.[7] Recommendation: As a City, we have an interest in ensuring we have uninterrupted operations, high quality services, and that contracted workers performing services for the city are treated fairly. We recommend the City Council direct staff to address the issues facing the City’s subcontracted janitors by developing a policy that would heighten standards where needed within the Janitorial Services RFP for the City Council to adopt for the upcoming and future such RFPs. This policy should establish standards similar to those adopted by the City of Mountain View per below: “That the successful proposer be a firm whose employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement prior to the effective date of contract and that any individual performing janitorial services for the City be paid no less than the prevailing wage and benefits established for janitorial services pursuant to the California Public Utilities Code and set by the Department of Industrial Relations. That the higher wage rates and/or benefits will be paid should the collective bargaining agreement’s wages and benefits and the prevailing wage and benefits differ. That the State Labor Code’s worker retention period be extended from 60 to 90 days.” Resource Implications: Independent of this Colleagues Memo, staff has been evaluating options related to wage requirements for the upcoming janitorial services Request for Proposals (RFP). Given the time sensitivity of this issue in order to initiate a new contract for services, staff will present their analysis to the City Council at the same time this Colleagues Memo is considered. ITEM 14 Colleagues Memo Item 14: Page 11 Packet Page 782 of 792 [1] City of Palo Alto, “Council Consent Agenda Responses,” June 20, 2022. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/council- questions/20220620cqccs.pdf [2] Congresswoman Anna Eshoo Letter, September 15, 2022. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1U5fZAzM3u5tLZf- rZFpZZBofUJ8BynO0/view?usp=sharing [3] Senator Josh Becker letter, June 15, 2022. https://drive.google.com/file/d/14ZFpJNfSYmwT3Wznba3fTJzIC82vmgDc/view?usp=sharing [4] Assemblymember Marc Berman letter, July 20, 2022. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GeYSYxkrLungCxWg- voHK3bHEuaHtmvL/view?usp=sharing [5] “Janitors: The Pandemic’s Unseen Essential Workers,” Maintenance Cooperation Trust Fund, April 2021 [6] Ruth Silver Taube, “Palo Alto janitorial workers shed light on wage theft,” San Jose Spotlight, July 14, 2022. https://sanjosespotlight.com/silver-taube-palo-alto-janitorial-workers-shed-light-on-wage-theft/ [7] City of Mountain View, “Meeting Minutes - Final,” January 28, 2020. ITEM 14 Colleagues Memo Item 14: Page 12 Packet Page 783 of 792 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Manager Report Type: INFORMATIONAL REPORT Lead Department: Administrative Services Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE City of Palo Alto's Energy Risk Management Report for the Second Half of Fiscal Year 2022 (July 1, 2021-June 30, 2022) RECOMMENDATION This is an informational report and no City Council action is required. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff continues to purchase electricity and gas in compliance with the City’s Energy Risk Management Policies, Guidelines, and Procedures. This report is based on market prices and load and supply data as of June 30, 2022, the end of the annual report of Fiscal Year (FY) 2022. The projected cost of the City’s fixed-price electricity purchases is $3.81 million lower than the market value of that electricity as of June 30, 2022 for the 12-month period beginning July 1, 2022. In the annual report of FY 2022 (July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022) the City’s credit exposure to fixed price contracts is minimal. The projected Electric Supply Operations Reserve is above the FY 2022 minimum guideline reserve level and the projected gas reserve is also above the FY 2022 guideline reserve level range. There were no exceptions to the Energy Risk Management Policies, Guidelines, or Procedures during the annual report of FY 2022. BACKGROUND The purpose of this report is to inform the Council about the status of the City’s energy portfolio and transactions executed with energy suppliers for FY 2022. The City’s Energy Risk Management Policy requires that staff report on a semi-annual basis to Council on: 1) the City’s energy portfolio; 2) the City’s credit and market risk profile; 3) portfolio performance; and 4) other key market and risk information. This report covers both semi-annual reports for FY 2022. The City’s Energy Risk Management Policy describes the management organization, authority, and processes to monitor, measure, and control market risks. “Market risks” include price and counterparty credit risk. These are risks that the City is exposed to on a regular basis in procuring electric supplies, and to a lesser extent for gas supplies which are purchased at ITEM 15 Staff Report Item 15: Page 1 Packet Page 784 of 792 market rates via a monthly index price. The City’s Energy Risk Management staff are located in the Treasury Division of the Administrative Services Department. Their role is to monitor and mitigate these risks. This annual report of FY 2022 Energy Risk Management report contains information on the following: •Electric Supplies •Hydroelectricity •Fixed-Price Forward Electricity Purchases •Gas Supplies •Credit Risk •Electric Forward Mark-to-Market Values •Electric and Gas Supply Operations Reserves Adequacy •Exceptions to Energy Risk Management Policies, Guidelines, or Procedures ANALYSIS Electric Supplies In order to serve the City’s electric supply demands, the City obtains electricity from: hydroelectric resources (from Western and Calaveras Hydroelectric Projects); long-term renewable energy contracts (from landfill gas converted to electricity, wind, and solar projects); wholesale purchases which are carried out via fixed-priced forward market purchase contracts; and the electric spot market. Figure 1 below illustrates the projected sources and expected purchases of electricity supplies by month for the 36 months from July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2025, in megawatt-hours (MWh). The negative bars represent sales of excess power on the wholesale market. ITEM 15 Staff Report Item 15: Page 2 Packet Page 785 of 792 Hydroelectricity The cost of hydroelectricity received from Western over the 12-month period ending June 30, 2022 is more than the market value of electricity by $1.0 million. Hydroelectric power from Calaveras was expected to cost $2.7 million (as of June 30, 2022) more than the market value of electricity. Note that Calaveras provides benefits not reflected in the mark-to-market (MTM, defined in the following section) calculation, including, for example, ancillary services (e.g., the ability to regulate energy output when the electric grid needs change), and that much of the above-market costs are related to debt service on the cost of constructing the dam. This debt is due to be retired in 2032, and retirement will substantially improve the value of the project relative to the market price of electricity. Fixed-Price Forward Electricity Purchases The City, as of June 30, 2022, has purchased and sold fixed-priced supplies of electricity for the next 12 months totaling 31,200 MWh with an average price of $43.72 per MWh and totaling 54,080 with an average price of $39.23 , respectively. The City contracted for these purchases with three of its approved counterparties: SENA (Shell Energy North America), Électricité de France (EDF), and NextEra Energy Resources. The 12-month MTM value of the City’s forward transactions for wholesale power was $3.81 million at the end of the annual report of FY 2022. A positive MTM means that the sales price for these transactions was lower than the market value as of June 30, 2022. The City tracks the mark to market value of its forward contracts to measure the value that would be lost due to a counterparty failing to deliver on its contractual commitments, forcing the City to purchase replacement electricity in the market. The exposure -40,000 -20,000 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 Jul-22 Sep-22 Nov-22 Jan-23 Mar-23 May-23 Jul-23 Sep-23 Nov-23 Jan-24 Mar-24 May-24 Jul-24 Sep-24 Nov-24 Jan-25 Mar-25 May-25 Megawatt Hours Figure 1 -Electric Balance Wind Wholesale Western Solar Landfill Calaveras Total Load ITEM 15 Staff Report Item 15: Page 3 Packet Page 786 of 792 listed above is well within risk management guidelines and presents little risk to the City’s financial outlook. The figures below represent the electric forward volumes (Figure 2) and MTM positions (Figure 3) for each electric supplier by month of delivery for all forward fixed-price electricity contracts over the 12-month period ending June 30, 2023. -30,000 -20,000 -10,000 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 07/01/22 08/01/22 09/01/22 10/01/22 11/01/22 12/01/22 01/01/23 02/01/23 03/01/23 04/01/23 05/01/23 06/01/23 Megawatt Hours Figure 2 -Electric Forward Volumes ending as of 06/30/23 EDF SENA NextEra Energy Resources (2,000,000) (1,500,000) (1,000,000) (500,000) - 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 Jul-22 Aug-22 Sep-22 Oct-22 Nov-22 Dec-22 Jan-23 Feb-23 Mar-23 Apr-23 May-23 Jun-23 MTM Dollar Amount Figure 3 -Electric Mark-to-Market Values ending as of 06/30/23 EDF SENA NextEra Energy Resources ITEM 15 Staff Report Item 15: Page 4 Packet Page 787 of 792 Gas Supplies In order to serve the City’s natural gas needs, the City purchases gas on the monthly and daily spot markets. The City purchases all of its forecasted gas needs for the month ahead at a price based on the published monthly spot market index price for that month. Within the month, the City’s gas operator buys and sells gas to match the City’s daily needs if the actual daily usage is different from the forecasted daily usage. Those daily transactions are made at an average price based on the published daily spot market index. These costs are passed through directly to customers using a monthly rate adjustment mechanism, leaving the City with little or no price risk or counterparty risk exposure for the gas utility. Credit Risk Staff monitors and reports on counterparty credit risk based on the major credit rating agencies (S&P and Moody’s) scores, Ameresco has a 1.79% Expected Default Frequency (EDF) which is higher than the recommended EDF level of 0.08%. Staff is continuing to monitor Ameresco’s EDF and will continue to report to City Council in this semi-annual report. Table 1 below shows the EDF values for the City’s renewable energy counterparties. Table 2 below shows the EDF values and credit exposure for the City’s electric suppliers. There is virtually no credit exposure to the City’s gas suppliers since the supplies are purchased on a short-term basis. Table 1 - Renewable Counterparties Credit Ratings and EDFs as of 06/30/22 Table 2 - Credit Exposure and Expected Default Frequency of Electric Suppliers as of 06/30/22 Current Expected Default Frequency Moody's (EDF) Implied Rating Ameresco 1.79%B3 0.03%A2 Source: CreditEdge website Renewable Counterparty Avangrid (fomerly Iberdrola) Electric Counterparty Cost of Transaction Market Value of Transaction Current Expected Default Frequency Moody's (EDF) Implied Rating NextEra 3,671,537$ 318,564$ 0.026%Aa3 SENA 507,600 273,660 0.524%Baa1 EDF (1,312,800)(1,531,066)n/a n/a Totals 2,866,337$ (938,841)$ (872)(3,352,973)$ (3,805,178)$ (2,098)$ Cost vs. Market (MTM) Value S & P C r e Expected Loss (MTM x Expected Default Frequency) (233,940)AA-(1,226) (218,266)- A- ITEM 15 Staff Report Item 15: Page 5 Packet Page 788 of 792 Electric Forward Mark-to-Market Values It is important to note that, for contracts with renewable energy companies, Council waived the investment grade credit rating requirement of Section 2.30.340(d) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, which applies to energy companies that do business with the City. In addition, the City does not pay for renewable energy until it is received, thereby reducing risk. An EDF of 0.08% or below indicate supplier’s current expected default frequency falls within the investment grade range. An EDF above 0.08% indicates the supplier may have financial issues that require monitoring. Electric and Gas Supply Operations Reserves Adequacy As shown in Table 3 below, the Electric Supply Operations reserve’s audited balance as of June 30, 2022 is $30.1 million, which is $12.1 million above the minimum reserve guideline level. The audited Gas Operations reserve balance is $12.1 million, which is $5.6 million above the minimum reserve guideline level. Table 3 - Electric Supply Operations and Gas Operations Reserve Levels for FY 2022 Exceptions to Energy Risk Management Policies, Guidelines, or Procedures There were no exceptions to the Energy Risk Management Policies, Guidelines, or Procedures to report during the annual report of FY 2022. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT This is an information report so will have no resource impact. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Staff works internally with the Utilities Department to prepare this report. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This informational report does not require Council action and therefore is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).CEQA Guidelines Section 15378). This report is for informational purposes only with no action required by the Council Fund Audited Reserve for Operations Balance as of 06/30/2021 ($ Millions) Changes to the Reserves for Operations ($ Millions) Audited Reserve for Operations Balance as of 06/30/22 ($ Millions) Minimum Guideline Reserve Level ($ Millions) Maximum Guideline Reserve Level ($ Millions) Electric $29.9 $0.2 $30.1 $18.0 $36.0 Gas $12.0 $0.1 $12.1 $6.5 $13.0 FY 2022 ITEM 15 Staff Report Item 15: Page 6 Packet Page 789 of 792 ATTACHMENTS None APPROVED BY: Kiely Nose, Administrative Services Director Report #: 2301-0758 ITEM 15 Staff Report Item 15: Page 7 Packet Page 790 of 792 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT From: City Clerk Report Type: SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY Lead Department: City Clerk Meeting Date: January 23, 2023 TITLE Proclamation for Lunar New Year ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Proclamation APPROVED BY: Lesley Milton Report #: 2301-0815 ITEM AA1 Staff Report Item AA1: Page 1 Packet Page 791 of 792 Proclamation __________________________ Lydia Kou Mayor LUNAR NEW YEAR 2023 WHEREAS, today we commemorate Lunar New Year and join families in California, Asia, and around the world in welcoming, for those following the Chinese zodiac, or similar zodiacs in other cultures, the Year of the Rabbit on January 22, and for the Vietnamese zodiac, the Year of the Cat; and WHEREAS, Lunar New Year, predominantly celebrated by millions of Asian and Pacific Islander (API) Californians of Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Filipino, Malaysian, Singaporean, and Vietnamese descent, is a time of joy and renewal; and WHEREAS, on this special day, families celebrate and prepare for the arrival of a new year of good health and prosperity. As we look forward to a joyous new year, we proudly reflect on the contributions of API Californians who literally built California – from America’s first transcontinental railroad to the farms and small businesses foundational to our state’s economy; and WHEREAS, locally in Palo Alto, Mr. Thomas Foon Chew, owner and innovative businessman for canning processing innovations preserving fruits and vegetables at the Bayside Cannery in Mayfield/Palo Alto also known to locals as the “Fry’s” building. Mr. Chew was also known for hiring workers from different ethnicities, providing housing and hot lunches for his Chinese laborers. In addition, we celebrate and acknowledge Pacific Islanders for decades providing quality and much-needed home care to many members in our community; and WHEREAS, we also recognize that discriminatory laws, xenophobic policies, misogyny, and mistreatment suffered by API Californians are a blight on our state’s history. We must also continue to call out and stand against the anti-Asian rhetoric and violence that increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. As Californians, we must reject past and present prejudice and embrace inclusion. Today, let us join our API friends and neighbors in celebration. As the door to the Year of the Rabbit/Cat opens, we wish good fortune, health and happiness to all those who celebrate. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Lydia Kou, Mayor of the City of Palo Alto on behalf of the entire City Council do hereby recognize and celebrate the Lunar New Year 2023, encourage California schools to take time to educate our students about the traditions of Lunar New Year and the past and present contributions of the API community in our state. PRESENTED: January 23, 2023 ITEM AA1 Proclamation Lunar New Year 2023 Item AA1: Page 2 Packet Page 792 of 792