Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2010-06-07 City Council Agenda Packet
1 06/07/10 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. A binder containing supporting materials is available in the Council Chambers on the Friday preceding the meeting. Special Meeting Council Chambers June 7, 2010 6:00 PM ROLL CALL CLOSED SESSION Public Comments: Members of the public may speak to the Closed Session item(s); three minutes per speaker. THE FOLLOWING CLOSED SESSION WILL BE HELD WITH THE CITY LABOR NEGOTIATORS 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his designees pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (James Keene, Pamela Antil, Lalo Perez, Joe Saccio, Russ Carlsen, Sandra Blanch, Marcie Scott, Darrell Murray) Employee Organization: Local 521 Service Employees International Union Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his designees pursuant to Merit Rules and Regulations (James Keene, Pamela Antil, Lalo Perez, Russ Carlsen, Sandra Blanch, Marcie Scott, Darrell Murray, Joe Saccio) Employee Organization: Local 521, Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - SEIU Hourly Unit Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) 2 06/07/10 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his designees pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (James Keene, Pamela Antil, Dennis Burns, Lalo Perez, Joe Saccio, Russ Carlsen, Sandra Blanch, Marcie Scott, Darrell Murray) Employee Organization: Palo Alto Peace Officers’ Association Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his designees pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (James Keene, Pamela Antil, Dennis Burns, Lalo Perez, Joe Saccio, Russ Carlsen, Sandra Blanch, Marcie Scott, Darrell Murray) Employee Organization: Palo Alto Police Managers’ Association (Sworn) Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) 7:30 p.m. or as soon as possible thereafter STUDY SESSION 2. Public Safety Building Feasibility Study of Facility Alternatives ATTACHMENT CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Members of the public may speak to any item not on the agenda; three minutes per speaker. Council reserves the right to limit the duration or Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 10, 2010 May 12, 2010 3 06/07/10 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. CONSENT CALENDAR Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by two Council Members. 3. 2nd Reading: Adoption of Ordinance to Amend the Contract Between the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees Retirement System (CALPERS) and the City of Palo Alto to Implement California Government Code Section 20475 (2.0% @ 60 Full Formula) Providing a Second Tier of Different Level of Benefits for New Miscellaneous Employees (First reading May 17, 2010 – Passed 7-0 Price, Yeh absent) 4. Adoption of an Ordinance Repealing Chapter 16.09 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.09 (Sewer Use Ordinance) Establishing Regulations to Reduce Discharges of Pollutants to the Sanitary Sewer and Storm Drainage Systems CMR 252:10 and ATTACHMENTS 5. Approval of a Letter Opposing the Amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement for the Administration of the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Program related to Governance of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority CMR 266:10 and ATTACHMENTS 6. Approval of Amendment No.1 to the Option Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto History Museum for the Roth Building, 300 Homer Avenue Providing for a One-Year Extension of the Option Term CMR 234:10 and ATTACHMENTS 7. Approval of a Contract With Spencon Construction, Inc. in the Amount of $297,825 for the 2010 Street Maintenance Program Alma Street Concrete Restoration Capital Improvement Program Project (CIP) PE-86070 4 06/07/10 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. CMR 256:10 and ATTACHMENTS 8. 2nd Reading: Adoption of Park Improvement Ordinance for a New Greenhouse and Shed Located in the Baylands at 2500 Embarcadero Road. (First reading May 10, 2010 – Passed 9-0) AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW: Applications and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their remarks and put up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken. OTHER AGENDA ITEMS: Public comments or testimony on agenda items other than Oral Communications shall be limited to a maximum of three minutes per speaker. ACTION ITEMS Include: Public Hearings, Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters 9. Public Hearing: Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project-Meeting to Receive Comments on the Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), Including Comments Focused on the Project Description, Land Use, Population & Housing, and Public Services Chapters of the DEIR CMR 260:10 and ATTACHMENTS 10. Approval of Recommendation From the High Speed Rail Committee to Endorse Peninsula Cities Consortium Revised Core Message and to Approve City Manager’s Proposed High Speed Rail Staffing and Appropriating $90,000 from the Council’s 2010 Contingency Fund CMR 267:10 and ATTACHMENTS COUNCIL MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) ADJOURNMENT 5 06/07/10 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services, or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact 650-329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. are for comparison purposes only and are not valid for financing purposes until a preliminary design has been completed, similar to the work previously performed on the Park Boulevard public safety building site. Civic Center Site and Building Analysis All the Civic Center options provide for adequate space needs with some operational issues as described below. The Civic Center options aim to provide the functional, structural and code requirements of a new facility including meeting the essential facilities standards as required by the Essential Services Building Seismic Safety Act of 1986. Following are the three Civic Center options analyzed in the study. The study also examines descriptions of the cost of a new public safety building described as Option D. For comparison, Option D evaluates a new building comparable to the design previously examined in the Park Boulevard EIR with costs reduced to match the current construction climate. The study examined the cost of bringing the entire police building up to essential service standards including the unfinished 2nd floor (mezzanine) in connection with other rehabilitation work needed to address space needs. This work includes structural upgrades to the foundation and shear walls and additional structural bracing. Option A: OptionB: Option C (1-6): OptionD: Essential services building within the existing police wing of the Civic Center building with new off-site building(s) for an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and 911 dispatch facility. This option includes improvements of the 2n floor (mezzanine) and the entire A-level under the civic center tower. In addition, the Police Department is exploring options of contracting the 911 dispatch center function with other cities. Essential services building with all functions on-site within the existing Civic Center. This option includes the police wing improvements of the 2nd floor (mezzanine), expansion into the entire Council Chambers and the entire A-level under the Civic Center tower. Essential services building within the existing police wing of the Civic Center building similar to Option A with 1 or 2 story expansion at Civic Center, Forest Avenue or Downtown Library sites. New essential services building at an off-site location. Options A, Band C include taking the space currently occupied by City Hall's central filing, print shop/mail room and cafeteria on Level A. Operational Issues Designing a public safety building requires careful review of its operations in relation to program layout to ensure operational efficiencies. Police Department staff worked with the consultants to determine adjacency and work flow patterns given the constraints of the project site. The Police Department has concerns about the functionality of the Civic Center building options as compared to a new building. Attachment C discusses the operational issues and concerns identified by the Police Department. Additional operational issues may be identified if further design is undertaken. 2 ATTACHMENT A SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ISSUES Option A Option B Option Cl Option C2 Option C3 Option C4 Option C5 Option C6 OptionD Cost (2010 $) $39.4 M $38.6M $39M $38.9M $38.2M $39.7 M $37.9 M $37.1 M $48.4 M Construction 17 months 20 months 17 months 17 months 17 months 17 months 17 months 17 months 12 months Duration City -Central -Central -Central -Central -Central -Central -Central -Central Filing Department Filing Filing Filing Filing Filing Filing Filing -Print Shop Relocation -Print Shop -Print Shop -Print Shop . -Print Shop -Print Shop -Print Shop -Print Shop -MailRoom -Mail Room -MailRoom -MailRoom -MailRoom -Mail Room -MailRoom -MailRoom -LunchRoom -Lunch -Lunch -Lunch -Lunch -Lunch -Lunch -Lunch at Level A Room at Room at Room at Room at Room at Room at Room at Level A Level A Level A Level A Level A Level A Level A -Council Chambers Significant -Need land -Relocate -Set-back -Close -Close -Downtown -Downtown -Downtown -Need land Issues forEOC / Council and FAR Forest Ave Forest Ave Library site Library site Library site -Need parking I Dispatch Chambers variances -Set-back -Set-back -Set-back -Set-back -Set-back and structure -Parking -Parking required and FAR and FAR variance and FAR FAR variances I Circulation Circulation . -Parking variances variances required variances required -Temporary -Temporary Circulation required required -Loss of required -Loss of relocation of relocation of -Temporary -Parking -Parking Mature Trees -Loss of Mature Trees Police Dept. Police Dept. relocation of Circulation Circulation (including Mature Trees (including Police Dept. -Temporary -Temporary Oaks) (including Oaks) relocation of. relocation of -Parking Oaks) Parking Police Dept. Police Dept. Circulation -Parking Circulation -Temporary Circulation -Temporary relocation of -Temporary relocation of Police Dept. relocation of Police Dept. Police Dept. Feasibility Study Palo Alto Public Safety Building 275 Forest Avenue, Palo Alto, CA Prepared for: City of Palo Alto Public Works Department 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California HOHBACH-LEWIN, INC. STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 260 Sheridan Avenue, Suite 150 Palo Alto, CA 94306 Phone:(650) 617-5930 Fax: (650) 617-5932 May 18, 2010 Hohbach-Lewin Project Number: 5409E Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 2 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Project Scope 1.2 Methodology 1.3 General Police Department Building Description 1.4 Project History 1.5 Project Goals 1.6 Acronyms and Definitions 1.7 Reference Documents 1.8 Project Consultants 2.0 Space Needs Assessment 2.1 Non-parking Functions 2.2 Patrol 2.3 Dispatch 2.4 Traffic/Parking and Records 2.5 Other Areas 2.6 Secure Parking 3.0 Site and Building Analysis 3.1 Site and Building Description 3.2 Building Code Background and Issues 3.3 New Construction Concerns 4.0 Concept Studies/Building Options 4.1 Concept Studies 4.2 Option A: California Building Code for Non-Essential Building with Offsite Facilities Summary 4.3 Option A: California Building Code for Non-Essential Building with Offsite Facilities Structural Implications 4.4 Option A: California Building Code for Non-Essential Building with Offsite Facilities Advantages and Disadvantages 4.5 Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building Summary 4.6 Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building Structural Implications 4.7 Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building Advantages and Disadvantages 4.8 Option C1: Essential Services Building with Two-Story Addition Summary 4.9 Option C1: Essential Services Building with Two-Story Addition Structural Implications 4.10 Option C1: Essential Services Building with Two-Story Addition Advantages and Disadvantages 4.11 Option C2: Essential Services Building with One-Story Addition Summary 4.12 Option C2: Essential Services Building with One-Story Addition Structural Implications 4.13 Option C2: Essential Services Building with One-Story Addition Advantages and Disadvantages 4.14 Option C3: Essential Services Building with Two-Story Building on Forest Avenue Summary 4.15 Option C3: Essential Services Building with Two-Story Building on Forest Avenue Structural Implications 4.16 Option C3: Essential Services Building with Two-Story Building on Forest Avenue Advantages and Disadvantages 4.17 Option C4: Essential Services Building with New Underground Facility at Downtown Library Site Summary Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 3 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 4.18 Option C4: Essential Services Building with New Underground Facility at Downtown Library Site Structural Implications 4.19 Option C4: Essential Services Building with New Underground Facility at Downtown Library Site Advantages and Disadvantages 4.20 Option C5: Essential Services Building with New Two-Story Building at Downtown Library Site Summary 4.21 Option C5: Essential Services Building with New Two-Story Building at Downtown Library Site Structural Implications 4.22 Option C5: Essential Services Building with New Two-Story Building at Downtown Library Site Advantages and Disadvantages 4.23 Option C6: Essential Services Building with Two New One-Story Buildings at Downtown Library Site Summary 4.24 Option C6: Essential Services Building with Two New One-Story Buildings at Downtown Library Site Structural Implications 4.25 Option C6: Essential Services Building with Two New One-Story Buildings at Downtown Library Site Advantages and Disadvantages 4.26 Option D: New Essential Services Building 4.27 Accessibility 4.28 Parking Summary 4.29 Parking Advantages and Disadvantages 4.30 Blast Vulnerability 4.31 Summary of Concept Studies 5.0 Cost Analysis 5.1 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option A - California Building Code for Non-Essential Building with Offsite Facilities 5.2 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option B - Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building 5.3 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C1 - Essential Services Building with Two- Story Addition 5.4 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C2 - Essential Services Building with One- Story Addition 5.5 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C3 - Essential Services Building with Two- Story Building on Forest Avenue 5.6 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C4 - Essential Services Building with New Underground Facility at Downtown Library Site 5.7 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C5 - Essential Services Building with New Two-Story Building at Downtown Library Site 5.8 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C6 - Essential Services Building with Two New One-Story Buildings at Downtown Library Site 5.9 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option D - New Essential Services Building 6.0 Diagrams, Figures, and Illustrations 7.0 Detailed Cost Summary 8.0 Appendix Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 4 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Project Scope: The project scope consists of a feasibility study of renovating the existing City of Palo Alto police building to meet the required current needs of the Palo Alto Police Department. Three primary conceptual approaches were developed in the course of the study. All approaches include finishing construction of the original 2nd floor of the police building, which currently has the main floor girders installed, but would require the addition of joist framing and a concrete over steel deck floor diaphragm; as well as, utilizing additional floor area of Level A for police functions. The second approach also includes building a 2nd floor in the existing Council Chambers portion of the building, while the third option is a combination of the first two options. In addition, conformance to current handicapped accessibility standards, an assessment of the current parking conditions and the feasibility of providing additional secured parking are addressed. 1.2 Methodology: The Blue Ribbon Task Force preliminary needs assessment was used to establish the functions and floor area requirements for the various departments that constitute the police facility. Prior reports by Ross Drulis Architects and Ekona Architecture+Planning were reviewed and existing building plans were studied, supplemented with field investigation to observe later modifications. Finally, key personnel in the Police Department were interviewed to determine adjacency and work flow constraints. 1.3 General Police Department Building Description: Not including parking, the Police Department currently occupies approximately 13,000 square feet of space on Level A, plus 9600 square feet on the first floor, for a total of approximately 22,600 square feet. The facility was constructed circa 1969-1970, concurrently with the construction of the adjacent Council Chambers and City Hall tower. A 9600 square foot second floor was partially constructed in the Police building. No significant renovations other than a voluntary seismic upgrade have been made to the Police facility since the building was first constructed. The facility is not in compliance with current building codes, and the existing mechanical/electrical/plumbing systems are functionally obsolete. In addition, the space does not meet modern day programmatic and technological needs. In order for the Police Department to operate efficiently and in accordance with modern police standards, a substantial amount of additional square footage will be required. Potential areas for the additional square footage include build-out of the 9600 square foot second floor of the police building, expansion into Level A spaces currently occupied by City Hall functions, expansion into the existing Council Chambers space, and construction of an offsite facility. A small secure parking garage for the exclusive use of the Police Department currently exists on Level A. Concrete walls added for seismic strengthening that was undertaken in the last decade have resulted in the net loss of available parking. The secure garage now has the capacity to house 22 squad cars, 6 motorcycles, and 5 parking patrol carts. A small area is also reserved for the storage of recovered bicycles. The overflow police patrol parking now occupies space in the City Hall parking garage. Because this garage is open to the public, the potential exists for civilian vehicles to delay patrol vehicles from exiting from the garage in the case of emergency. 1.4 Project History: As part of the preparation of this report, we were provided and have reviewed the following previous studies that addressed the structural aspects of existing Palo Alto police building. Below, we have attempted to summarize the salient points of each report. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 5 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 • July 1990 “Design Concept Report for Structural Modification to Palo Alto Police Department” by Forell/Elsesser Engineers, Inc. • 1997 report “Public Safety Building Project Feasibility Study” by Ekona, including May 12, 1997 letter report by Dasse Design. • October 5, 1998, “Seismic Evaluation for Proposed Vertical Expansion of Palo Alto Police Facility” by Dasse Design. • March 2002, “Expansion of the Palo Alto Public Safety Building, Structural Evaluation of Plans to Expand” by Ove Arup & Partners. The July 1990 study was commissioned following the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake and noted minor seismic damage to the police station building and also noted very significant deficiencies in the seismic force resisting capability of the police building, but did not address the structural complications of it’s interconnection with the tower. This study was followed shortly by construction documents dated March 1995 for the seismic upgrade of the facility apparently constructed somewhat later. Although the calculation package recognized that the police building, the council chambers and the city hall tower, as well as the subterranean parking structure are all inter-connected, only the police building and the portion of the subterranean parking structure immediately beneath it were seismically upgraded. The design criterion for the seismic upgrade was conformance to the 1988 UBC, with the limitation that damage was anticipated in a major seismic event at the juncture between the council chambers and the tower structure. The 1997 letter report states that expansion of the existing police building is feasible, given sufficient strengthening of existing elements. It also identifies the problematic connection of the council chambers roof to the tower and the many deficiencies in bracing nonstructural elements in the police building. The 1998 report addresses the seismic retrofit of the police building necessary to allow a vertical expansion. It notes that, if constructed to 1997 Uniform Building Code Essential Facility standards, the seismic base shear would be 44% higher than the design seismic base shear of the 1995 seismic upgrade. It provides conceptual descriptions of necessary seismic strengthening measures and strongly recommends the separation of the council chambers roof from the tower. The 2002 report addresses four different specific police building expansion options, all incorporating some form of expansion of the existing police building exterior envelope. All require very significant structural modifications of the existing building. 1.5 Project Goals: This study was requested by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department for the purpose of evaluating options for providing a Public Safety facility. Per the scope of work document, the feasibility study shall include the evaluation of the current and future space requirements for a Public Safety Building Facility to meet the functional, structural and code requirements for modified, split and new facility options. The study shall also investigate the feasibility of constructing a modified and split police facility that includes essential and non-essential functions. The feasibility study will provide an operational, code and structural evaluation and a comparison of the pros and cons of the five options noted below: a) Build-out the 2nd floor only and do nothing with the remaining police facility including no changes to the secure and unsecure garage. b) Renovate the existing police facility and build within the 2nd floor area. c) Renovate the existing Council Chambers for permanent and temporary Police Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 6 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 Department needs d) Split the facility for essential service functions located off-site and tenant improvements to the existing police facility and the Council Chambers that could occupy the vacated and code deficient areas at the current location. e) A new Public Safety Building Facility located at the Park Boulevard site. In addition, the feasibility study will determine if the existing Police Department facility can be separated into essential and non-essential functions. Construction cost estimates shall include the cost of any personnel relocation and/or rental of temporary facilities during construction. During the course of the study it was determined that due to the allocation requirements of the police department and regulatory issues associated with the building code that the above noted options would need to be addressed in a slightly different manner. See section 4.0 for a detailed description of the options studied. 1.6 Acronyms and Definitions: CBC: California Building Code ESB: Essential Services Building CCR: California Code of Regulations NFPA 1221: National Fire Protection Association publication relating to the installation, maintenance, and use of emergency services communications equipment ASCE 41: American Society of Civil Engineers standard for the “Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings”. The standard specifies applicable provisions for the seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings for various performances levels. BSE-1: Basic Safety Earthquake-1, taken as the lesser of the ground shaking for a 10%/50-year earthquake of two-thirds of BSE-2 at site BSE-2: Basic Safety Earthquake-2, taken as the ground shaking based on the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) at site Non-structural component: An architectural, mechanical, or electrical component of a building that is permanently installed in, or is an integral part of a building system. For example, HVAC equipment and ductwork, plumbing/piping, partition walls, suspended ceilings, etc. 1.7 Reference Documents: Architectural Drawings: “Palo Alto Civic Center” sheets A-1 to A-42 prepared by Edward Durell Stone dated November 17, 1967 Structural Drawings: “Palo Alto Civic Center” sheets S-1 to S-20 prepared by Conrad Engineers dated November 17, 1967 Structural Drawings: “Structural Modifications, Palo Alto Police Department” sheets S0 to S12 prepared by Forell/Elsesser dated March 27, 1995 Architectural Drawings: “City of Palo Alto Public Safety Building – 100% Schematic Design” sheets A0.01 to A0.05, A2.01 A2.04, and A3.01 to A3.03 prepared by Ross, Drulis, Cusenbery Architecture dated December 05, 2008 Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 7 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 Structural Drawings: “City of Palo Alto Public Safety Building – 100% Schematic Design” sheets S0.01, S2.01 to S2.04 prepared by Rutherford and Chekene Consulting Engineers dated December 05, 2008 Architectural Drawings: “City of Palo Alto Downtown Library Improvements” sheet A1.2 dated 2/15/10, sheets 3.1 and 3.4 dated 10/5/09, prepared by Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning Inc. Structural Calculations: “Structural Modifications Palo Alto Police Department” prepared by Forell/Elsesser dated September 17, 1990 Report: “Design Concept Report for the Structural Modifications Palo Alto Police Department” prepared by Forell/Elsesser dated July 1990 Report: “Palo Alto Civic Center Tower Buildout” prepared by Forell/Elsesser Engineers, Inc., dated February 2, 1993. Report: “Palo Alto Public Safety Building Project Feasibility Study” prepared by EKONA Architecture + Planning dated 1997 Report: “Seismic Evaluation for Proposed Vertical Expansion of Palo Alto Police Facility” prepared by Dasse Design dated October 5, 1998 Report: “Expansion of the Palo Alto Public Safety Building” prepared by Ross Drulis Cusenbery Architecture dated March 2002 Report: “Blue Ribbon Task Force Police Building” dated January 5, 2006 to June 19, 2006 “Standard for the Installation, Maintenance, and Use of Emergency Services Communications Systems”, National Fire Protection Association, 2002 1.8 Project Consultants: • Architect: Stoecker & Northway Architects, Inc. • Cost Estimator: Cambridge Construction Management, Inc. • Structural Engineer: Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. • Parking : Watry Design, Inc. (under separate contract with the City of Palo Alto) 2.0 Space Needs Assessment 2.1 Non-parking functions: The attached matrix titled “Palo Alto Police Department Space Needs Assessment” illustrates the floor area needs established by the Blue Ribbon Task Force for each program function within the Police Department. Because the majority of Level A is without windows for natural light, the desirability of locating each function on Level A is also indicated, along with each function’s potential to be located at a separate offsite facility. The final column indicates required adjacencies between functions. Summing the functions yields a required gross floor area of 39,921 square feet. A Building Support area allowance of 23% has been added to account for connecting corridors and space required for duct chases, mechanical/electrical rooms, etc., bringing the total required area to 49,101 square feet. 2.2 Patrol: Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 8 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 The more complex adjacency requirements revolve around the patrol function. In order to operate effectively, Patrol/Community Policing officers must have direct access to Detention, Property and Evidence, and their patrol vehicles. Staff and Facility Support associated with patrol includes not only locker space for uniforms, but also lockers for the large variety of bulky equipment that must be loaded into and unloaded from the patrol vehicle at the beginning and end of each shift. Because Secure Parking, Property and Evidence, and Detention are all best located on Level A, Patrol must also be located on this level. 2.3 Dispatch: For maximum efficiency, it is desirable to maintain Dispatch on site with the remaining Police Department functions. If sufficient space does not exist at the current site, it is theoretically possible to locate Dispatch in a satellite location along with the Emergency Operations Center and the Multi-Purpose Room. Dispatchers operate in a high-stress environment; it is generally agreed that this function should be located in an area that provides ample natural daylight and views. In addition, per NFPA 1221 section 4.4, an independent HVAC system should be provided to serve only the communications functions such as dispatch. Plus, alternative HVAC shall be provided for use during routine maintenance of the primary system or in the event of a primary system failure. This alternative HVAC should provide sufficient conditions to allow for efficient functioning of telecommunications and other equipment within the communications center. Also, per NFPA 1221 section 4.7, an engine-driven generator should also be provided for use of the communications center. 2.4 Traffic/Parking and Records: The great majority of public interaction with the Police Department occurs in the area of Traffic/Parking and Records. For this reason, these functions are best located on the first floor, sharing a public lobby area. 2.5 Other areas: Investigative Services and Administration, Personnel and Training offer some opportunity for flexibility in their locations. While there is a great deal of interaction between the staff of these departments and that of other departments, immediate adjacencies are not required. 2.6 Secure Parking: Because the majority of police functions are performed out in the community, the Police Department’s parking requirements are more critical than those of a typical office building. Immediate response vehicles should be located to allow efficient transfer of equipment to the vehicles. A secure sallyport should be provided to facilitate prisoner and property transfer. In order to avoid response delays in an emergency, immediate response vehicles should not share garage entry and exit paths with public parking. Secure parking is required for 54 immediate response patrol automobiles and 7 motorcycles, along with miscellaneous specialty vehicles. In addition, space is required for storage and viewing of retrieved bicycles. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 9 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 3.0 Site and Building Analysis 3.1 Site and Building Description: The police department occupies a wing, denoted as the police building, of the Palo Alto Civic Center which encompasses one city block in the downtown area. The civic center is bounded by Hamilton Avenue on the North, Forest Avenue on the South, Bryant Street on the East, and Ramona Street on the West. The main public entrance to the police department faces Forest Avenue. In addition to the police building, the civic center consists of an eight story tower at the north end and the city council chambers between the tower and police department. Below these structures are three levels of underground parking, the majority of which is open to the public with a small area at Level A directly below the police department used for secured police parking and additional police department services. The police building structure is currently a double height, single story rectangular structure with a floor plan of approximately 9600 square feet. The building was designed as part of the civic center in 1967. The roof consists of a post-tensioned concrete slab supported by post-tensioned concrete beams. Exterior walls consist of shaped, post-tensioned columns at approximately 4 feet on center in-filled with glass. At the time of the building design, a second floor suspended from the roof framing was included. However, the second floor was not fully constructed, apparently as a cost saving measure, with only the columns and major steel floor framing installed. 3.2 Building Code Background and Issues: The original Palo Alto Civic Center was designed per the 1964 Uniform Building Code (UBC). There are many differences between that code and the current code adopted by the City of Palo Alto, the 2007 California Building Code (CBC) with city amendments, but the differences in the seismic and handicapped accessibility provisions are the most significant for this project. The 1964 UBC included seismic provisions, however these provisions were much less detailed than the 2007 CBC and specified a design seismic force approximately one third of what current code would specify. Also, no distinct seismic provisions addressing essential services buildings were provided. Notwithstanding the less rigorous provisions of the 1964 UBC, it is still unclear when reviewing the original construction documents how conformance with that code was achieved. Thus the 1990’s voluntary seismic upgrade was completely warranted. The structural aspects of this upgrade were designed per the 1988 Uniform Building Code (with the limitations noted previously), which included a 1.25 factor amplifying the design seismic force, however non- structural deficiencies with respect to that code were not addressed, apparently since the upgrade was constructed while the building remained occupied. There are two significant aspects of the seismic provisions of the 2007 CBC as adopted by the City of Palo Alto that directly pertain to the potential renovation of the Police Building. First are the provisions that are included based on the Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act of 1986 and second are the provisions related to the seismic upgrade of existing buildings provided in Chapter 34. Sections 16000 – 16022 of the California Health & Safety Code is known as the Essential Services Building Seismic Safety Act of 1986. It states that it is the intent of the Legislature that essential services buildings and the non-structural components vital to their operation, shall be designed and constructed to resist, insofar as practical, the forces generated by earthquakes, gravity and winds and to assure, insofar as practical, continued operation of the building after a disaster. The Act places much emphasis on the appropriate design, plan checking and inspection of essential services buildings and tasks the State Architect with establishing and adopting those regulations deemed necessary to carry out the Act. Those are now primarily found in Chapter 4 – 201 through 4-222 of the part 1 (Administrative) portion of the California Building Code. Therein Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 10 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 the following relevant definitions are found. (Some have been edited to delete phrases that are not relevant to this study.) Addition shall mean an increase in floor area or volume of enclosed space which is physically attached to an existing building by connections which are required for transmitting vertical or horizontal loads between the addition and the existing structure. Alteration shall mean changes within an existing building as defined in Part 2, Title 24, CCR. 1 Alterations to existing essential services buildings shall conform to the requirements of Title 24, CCR. Major alterations will be permitted, provided the entire essential services building as modified, including the structural alterations or additions, conform to the requirements of Title 24, CCR. Enforcement Agency shall mean the Division of the State Architect for state-owned or state-leased buildings and shall mean the enforcement agency of any city or county having jurisdiction over locally owned or locally leased essential services facilities. Essential Services Building means any building, or any building a portion of which is used or designed to be used as a fire station, police station, emergency operations center, California Highway Patrol Office, sheriff’s office or emergency communication dispatch center. New Essential Services Building shall mean any newly erected essential services building or any existing building converted to essential services use subsequent to the effective date of the act regardless of whether the building is owned or leased by the public agency. Existing buildings housing essential services facilities owned or leased by the State, a city, a city and county or a county prior to the effective date of the act are exempt from these regulations except for the installation of new or replacement equipment. When a portion of a building is to be utilized for an essential services operation, the area so utilized and the utilities system and components servicing the area shall be constructed according to these rules and regulations and shall be separated or protected from damage due to failures of other portions of the structure to the extent determined by the enforcement agency to ensure continued functioning after an earthquake or other disaster. Ancillary buildings and facilities related to the essential services building function may be exempt from these regulations if the enforcement agency determines that such building and facilities are not necessary to the functioning of the essential services operation after an earthquake or other disaster. Police Station shall mean any building that contains the operational facilities and the alarm and communications equipment necessary to respond to police emergencies. Note that a “grandfather” clause, exempting existing buildings from the regulations, except for the installation of new or replacement equipment, is contained within the definition of New Essential Services Buildings. Note also that the special case of a partially constructed structural element that was part of the “grandfathered” original design, such as the existing partially constructed second floor of the police building, is not surprisingly, not directly addressed. It appears that the requirement to apply the ESB regulations hinges on whether the remaining construction necessary to make the second floor of the police building functional is construed by the Enforcement Agency as an addition or a major alteration or neither. In our professional opinion it is both, being classified as an addition due the addition of a floor deck and a major alteration due to the addition of seismic mass. If the remaining construction to complete the second floor is deemed to be an addition or major alteration, then the ESB act states that the entire building must conform to the ESB regulations. 1 Per Section 3403.2.3.2 of Part 2, Title 24, CCR the relevant characteristic of a major alteration is that it increases the seismic force in any existing structural element by more than 10 percent . Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 11 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 Interestingly, there is no provision for the relocation of an essential service function to a building not conforming to the ESB act even if the new building is of equal or greater seismic safety, no matter how short the duration of the relocation. It appears clear that the intent of the Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act was to encourage the construction of safer and more resilient essential services buildings and not to facilitate keeping older non-conforming buildings in use. The inclusion of the clause, insofar as practical, as well as the exception for existing buildings indicates the legislature recognized the need for some flexibility in applying the Act, if the result is a safer and more resilient essential services building. Also of importance are the provisions contained in Chapter 34, Existing Structures, of Part 2 of the CBC, as amended by the City of Palo Alto. A few of the relevant provisions follow, again edited for conciseness. 3403.1 Existing buildings or structures. Additions or alterations shall not be made to an existing building or structure that will cause the existing building or structure to be in violation of any provisions of this code. 3403.2.3.2 Alterations. Alterations that increase the seismic force in any existing structural element by more than 10 percent cumulative since the original construction or decrease the design strength of any existing structural element to resist seismic forces by more than 10 percent cumulative since the original construction shall not be permitted unless the entire seismic-force-resisting system is determined to conform to ASCE 7 for a new structure. 3403.5.1.2 (City of Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.04.250) CBC level seismic forces. When seismic forces are required to meet the building code level, they shall be one of the following: 1. 100 percent of the values in the building code. 2. Forces corresponding to BSE-1 and BSE-2 Earthquake Hazard Levels defined in ASCE 41. ASCE 41 is a national standard for the seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings and is considered to be more appropriate for that purpose than are new building codes. It is intended to be adopted by jurisdictions to apply to the seismic retrofit of existing buildings. In addition, the City of Palo Alto has amended the CBC per Section 3403.6 to state that when additions, alterations or repairs exceed 50 percent of the value of an existing building, such a building shall be made to conform to the requirements for a new building. Note that even if the Enforcement Agency deems that the remaining construction necessary to make the second floor of the police building functional is not an addition or major alteration, then this clause would still be expected to apply. Finally, the 1993 Forell/Elsesser Palo Alto Civic Center Tower Buildout report states that the tower’s original lateral load resisting system was updated in 1982 based on a seismic performance criterion developed by the consulting firm EDAC and the seismic force level used for the upgrade was higher than the force level required by the 1991 Uniform Building Code. Based on this information it is likely that the tower is not a collapse hazard in a major seismic event and the Level A functions located beneath the tower will be accessible after a seismic event. The proposed retrofit schemes and their treatment of the existing building have been developed within the context of the above code language. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 12 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 3.3 New Construction Concerns: Of major concern with new construction at this facility, regardless of either of the primary concepts, is that the entire police department would need to be vacated per the construction sequencing noted in sections 5.1 through 5.8. Therefore, police department services would be required to operate from split facilities on a temporary basis during construction. In order to install the new framing at the second floor, existing partition walls at the first floor would need to be removed to allow for unobstructed access. Also, existing partition walls would need to be removed due to the revised layout at Level A. In addition, any new construction will result in high levels of noise apparent to occupants of the City Hall tower and high amounts of construction debris. 4.0 Concept Studies/Building Options 4.1 Concept Studies: Working within the above identified constraints, concepts A, B, C, and D were developed for evaluation in this feasibility study. Option C has six different variations associated with it although upgrading the existing police department to an essential services facility is typical in each case. In addition, Option D, a new Public Safety Building, is included for comparison purposes. A. California Building Code (CBC) for Non-Essential Building with Offsite Facilities: Renovate the existing police facility and finish the construction of the existing 2nd floor area, with some of the most critical functions provided at an off-site location built to Essential Services Building standards. The existing police building would be seismically upgraded to 2007 California Building Code equivalence utilizing ASCE 41 procedures in order to comply with CBC Section 3403.6, but would be deemed “grandfathered” as an essential services building (including the second floor) and thus not subject to the higher seismic design criteria of that type of building. Nevertheless, the new non-structural components of the building would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards, a very significant improvement over the existing construction of these components. See the attached matrix titled “Palo Alto Police Department Space Allocation with Offsite Facilities” and the corresponding bubble diagram. Improved handicapped accessibility and expanding the existing secured parking area into Levels A and B is included. It should be noted that if the second floor of the existing structure is deemed to not be “grandfathered” as an essential services building, Option A, as outlined above, would no longer be applicable. The police facility would therefore need to be seismically upgraded as outlined in Options B or C. B. Essential Services Building (ESB) with all Facilities Onsite within Existing Building: Renovate the existing facility to provide all functions onsite with the existing police building seismically upgraded to 2007 California Building Code Essential Services Building equivalence utilizing ASCE 41 procedures to a seismic performance level of “Immediate Occupancy”, and the new non-structural components would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards. This would include finishing construction of the existing 2nd floor plus adding a 2nd floor over the council chamber space. See the attached matrix titled “Palo Alto Police Department Space Allocation Onsite” and corresponding bubble diagram. Improved handicapped accessibility and expanding the existing secured parking area into Levels A and B is included. C1. Essential Services Building (ESB) with Two-Story Addition: Renovate the existing facility to provide all functions onsite. This would include finishing construction of the existing 2nd floor and constructing a new two-story addition expanding towards Forest Avenue. All portions of the renovated police department, including the council Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 13 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 chambers, would also be seismically upgraded to 2007 California Building Code Essential Services Building equivalence, utilizing ASCE 41 procedures to a seismic performance level of “Immediate Occupancy”. The new non-structural components would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards. See the attached matrix labeled “Palo Alto Police Department Space Allocation: Essential Services Building with Two Story Addition.” C2. Essential Services Building (ESB) with One-Story Addition: Renovate the existing facility to provide all functions onsite. This would include finishing construction of the existing 2nd floor and constructing a new one-story addition expanding towards Forest Avenue which would require the street to be closed to vehicular traffic from Bryant to Ramona Streets. All portions of the renovated police department, including the council chambers, would also be seismically upgraded to 2007 California Building Code Essential Services Building equivalence utilizing ASCE 41 procedures to a seismic performance level of “Immediate Occupancy”. The new non-structural components would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards. See the attached matrix labeled “Palo Alto Police Department Space Allocation: Essential Services Building with One Story Addition.” C3. Essential Services Building (ESB) with Two-Story Building on Forest Avenue: Renovate the existing police facility including finishing the construction of the existing second floor area and seismically upgrade the entire annex (council chambers and police department) to 2007 California Building Code Essential Services Building equivalence utilizing ASCE 41 procedures to a seismic performance level of “Immediate Occupancy”, and the new non-structural components would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards. In addition, critical functions would be relocated to a new two-story essential services building built on Forest Avenue, between the existing police facility and library, requiring that the street be closed to vehicular traffic from Bryant to Ramona Streets. See the attached matrix labeled “Palo Alto Police Department Space Allocation with Offsite Facilities.” C4. Essential Services Building (ESB) with New Underground Facility at Downtown Library Site: Renovate the existing police facility, including seismic upgrade, as described in Option C3. In addition, critical functions would be relocated to a new underground essential services structure on the downtown library site. See the attached matrix labeled “Palo Alto Police Department Space Allocation with Offsite Facilities.” C5. Essential Services Building (ESB) with New Two-Story Building at Downtown Library Site: Renovate the existing police facility, including seismic upgrade, as described in Option C3. In addition, critical functions would be relocated to a new two-story essential services structure on the downtown library site where one story would be below grade and the other would be above grade. See the attached matrix labeled “Palo Alto Police Department Space Allocation with Offsite Facilities.” C6. Essential Services Building (ESB) with Two New One-Story Buildings at the Downtown Library Site: Renovate the existing police facility, including seismic upgrade, as described in Option C3. In addition, critical functions would be relocated to two new one-story essential services buildings on the downtown library site where one building is located on the east side of the existing library and the other on the west side of the existing library. See the attached matrix labeled “Palo Alto Police Department Space Allocation with Offsite Facilities.” D. New Essential Services Building: Provide a new building designed per the 2007 California Building Code Essential Services Building standards as described in the City of Palo Alto Public Safety Building – 100% Schematic Design drawings. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 14 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 4.2 Option A - California Building Code for Non-Essential Building with Offsite Facilities Summary: Construction of the second floor that was planned in the existing police building but never executed would yield an additional 9,600 square feet of area. This addition, coupled with an expansion into Level A and the construction of an offsite facility, would serve the projected space needs of the Police Department. The attached spreadsheet titled “Palo Alto Police Department Space Allocation with Offsite Facilities” illustrates how space would be allocated in the newly expanded and offsite facilities. The attached sketch, SK-01, shows the extent of the required new structural framing. 4.3 Option A - California Building Code for Non-Essential Building with Offsite Facilities Structural Implications: The original second floor framing was not fully installed during the initial construction. The main girders were installed but the majority of the beams and virtually none of the concrete floor is present. Therefore, a large portion of the floor framing system would need to be completed. Of major importance is the ability of the existing structure to resist lateral forces generated by a seismic event. At the current time, the lateral force resisting systems consists of exterior concrete shear walls installed as part of a previous seismic upgrade project. It was determined that these walls would be adequate to resist the anticipated design forces but that the following upgrades would be required: • The collector connection between the existing roof beam and existing concrete shear walls would need to be strengthened. See sketch SK-02. • A new connection between the 2nd floor and the existing shear walls would need to be added. See sketch SK-03. • Existing concrete columns in the parking levels would need to be strengthened at the discontinuous shear walls • Existing foundations would need to be strengthened due to the increased demand It should be noted that with this option, the connection between the office tower and police department/council chambers is not addressed. Due to the difference in relative stiffnesses of the lateral force resisting systems of these two structures, it is anticipated that severe damage of this connection could occur during a significant seismic event. 4.4 Option A - California Building Code for Non-Essential Building with Offsite Facilities Advantages and Disadvantages: • In order to meet the Police Department’s space needs, the areas on Level A of City Hall currently occupied by City Hall’s Central Filing, Print Shop/Mail Room and City staff’s lunch room would need to be vacated and repurposed as police space. • Insufficient space exists on Level A to allow the entire Patrol/Community Policing function to remain on the same floor; it will be necessary to move some Patrol functions up to the first floor, resulting in a loss of functional efficiency. • Dispatch would be located offsite, resulting in functional inefficiency, some duplication of facilities, and the loss of the vital face-to-face relationship that the patrol officers currently share with the dispatchers. • The existing police building would be seismically upgraded to a lower standard than the other options considered in this report. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 15 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 • The non-structural components within the police facility would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards, significantly enhancing the likelihood of the police department remaining functional after a seismic event or other disaster. • The new off site building will be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards, with an expected post-disaster improvement of function of the departments housed therein. • The joint between the tower and police department/council chambers is not addressed. Due to the relative stiffness between the lateral force resisting systems of the office tower and police department/council chambers, it is anticipated that severe damage to this connection could occur during a significant seismic event. It is likely that the entrance to the council chambers at this location would be impaired due to damage and debris caused by a significant seismic event. • During construction, some functions will be housed in facilities not conforming to the ESB act. 4.5 Option B - Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building Summary: It has been suggested by the City of Palo Alto that the City Council Chambers could be moved to an offsite location and that the vacated 4,080 square feet area could be repurposed for use by the Police Department. The height of the Council Chambers matches the height of the existing Police building. It is feasible to add a second floor on the same footprint, resulting in an additional 8,160 square feet available for police use. This addition, coupled with an expansion into Level A would serve the projected space needs of the Police Department on site without requiring the construction of an offsite Police facility. The attached spreadsheet titled “Palo Alto Police Department Space Allocation Onsite” illustrates how space would be allocated in the newly expanded facility. In addition, the attached sketch, SK-05, which shows the extent of the required new second floor framing. 4.6 Option B - Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building Structural Implications: In addition to needing to complete the framing at the second floor of the police department, a new second floor would be added at the council chambers. This would likely consist of a concrete over steel deck floor system supported by structural steel framing members. In addition, the lateral force resisting system would be upgraded to a level equivalent to Essential Services Building standards. This would consist of the addition of new concrete shear walls as shown in the sketches SK-04 to SK-08 and corresponding 3D rendering. These walls would be continuous from the roof of the police department and council chambers down to the lowest parking level and therefore would require new foundations as shown in the sketch SK-08. In addition, the existing connection between the office tower and the roof of the council chambers would be severed to produce two seismically separated structures above the ground level. The existing concrete shear walls would also be used to resist lateral loading. The following upgrades would be required: • Addition of concrete shear walls, associated connections and foundations. • The collector connection between the existing roof beam and existing concrete shear walls would need to be strengthened. See sketch SK-02. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 16 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 • A new connection between the 2nd floor and the existing shear walls would need to be added. See sketch SK-03. • Existing concrete columns in the parking levels would need to be strengthened at the discontinuous shear walls • Existing foundations would need to be strengthened due to the increased demand 4.7 Option B - Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building Advantages and Disadvantages: • All of the police functions would be located on the same site, eliminating the functional inefficiencies and duplicated facilities inherent in the split facility option. • Insufficient space exists for inclusion of the Multi-Purpose Room; its function would need to be somehow combined with another City facility (for example, offsite with the Council Chambers or other acceptable space or onsite with the EOC) • In order to meet the Police Department’s space needs, the areas on Level A of City Hall currently occupied by City Hall’s Central Filing, Print Shop/Mail Room and City staff’s lunch room would need to be vacated and repurposed as police space. • Insufficient space exists on Level A to allow the entire Patrol/Community Policing function to remain on the same floor; it will be necessary to move some Patrol functions up to the first floor, resulting in a loss of functional efficiency. • Addition of the new concrete shear walls would result in the complete loss of 8 parking stalls. • Creates a seismic separation of the tower and council chambers, enhancing the expected seismic performance of both portions of the building. • The non-structural components within the police facility would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards, significantly enhancing the likelihood of the police department remaining functional after a seismic event or other disaster. • During construction, some functions will be housed in facilities not conforming to the ESB act. 4.8 Option C1 - Essential Services Building with Two-Story Addition Summary: Construction of a two-story addition to the existing Police Department, if combined with the addition of the second floor and Level A expansion described in Section 4.2, would meet the space needs of the Police Department. The addition would extend to the property line along Forest Avenue as shown in the attached plan, block diagram and section, titled “Option C1: Essential Services Building with Two-Story Addition.” 4.9 Option C1 - Essential Services Building with Two-Story Addition Structural Implications: In addition to needing to complete the framing at the second floor of the police department, a new two-story addition would need to be added on the Forest Avenue side of the building. All new construction would likely consist of a concrete over steel deck floor system and steel deck roof system all supported by structural steel framing members. In addition, the lateral force resisting system would be upgraded to a level equivalent to Essential Services Building standards. This would consist of the addition of new concrete shear walls as Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 17 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 shown in the sketches SK-09 to SK-13. These walls would be continuous from the roof of the police department and council chambers down to the lowest parking level and therefore would require new foundations as shown in the sketch SK-13. In addition, the existing connection between the office tower and the roof of the council chambers would be severed to produce two seismically separated structures above the ground level. The existing concrete shear walls would also be used to resist lateral loading. See Section 4.6 for the required structural upgrades. 4.10 Option C1 - Essential Services Building with Two-Story Addition Advantages and Disadvantages: • A variance would be required to extend the Police Building to the property line; the required setback along Forest Avenue is 20 feet. • A variance would be required to allow additional square footage on the Civic Center site. • A two-story addition would bring the large mass of the building closer to the sidewalk, creating a more imposing façade. • Construction of an addition connected to the existing Police Building would provide direct access between related police functions. • Extending the building would make a partial-height space beneath the first floor available for mechanical and/or storage uses. • The extension of the building would offer the opportunity to develop an accessible entrance from Forest via elevator without impacting the parking levels below. • In order to meet the Police Department’s space needs, the areas on Level A of City Hall currently occupied by City Hall’s Central Filing, Print Shop/Mail Room and City staff’s lunch room would need to be vacated and repurposed as police space. • Insufficient space exists on Level A to allow the entire Patrol/Community Policing function to remain on the same floor; it will be necessary to move some Patrol functions up to the first floor, resulting in a loss of functional efficiency. • Addition of the new concrete shear walls would result in the complete loss of 8 parking stalls, • Creates a seismic separation of the tower and council chambers, enhancing the expected seismic performance of both portions of the building. • The non-structural components within the police facility would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards, significantly enhancing the likelihood of the police department remaining functional after a seismic event or other disaster. • During construction, some functions will be housed in facilities not conforming to the ESB act. . 4.11 Option C2 - Essential Services Building with One-Story Addition Summary: Construction of a one-story addition to the existing Police Department, if combined with the addition of the second floor and Level A expansion described in Section 4.2, would meet the space needs of the Police Department. This option would require the closure of Forest Avenue between Bryant and Ramona Streets. The Forest Avenue land would be merged into the Civic Center parcel, as illustrated in the attached plan, block diagram, and section, all titled “Option C2: Essential Services Building with One-Story Addition. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 18 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 4.12 Option C2 - Essential Services Building with One-Story Addition Structural Implications: In addition to needing to complete the framing at the second floor of the police department, a new one-story addition would need to be added which would extend into Forest Avenue. All new construction would likely consist of a concrete over steel deck floor system and steel deck roof system all supported by structural steel framing members. In addition, the foundation system at the new construction on Forest Avenue would need to be designed around existing underground utilities. See diagram entitled “Existing City Utilities on Forest”. In addition, the lateral force resisting system would be upgraded to a level equivalent to Essential Services Building standards. This would consist of the addition of new concrete shear walls as shown in the sketches SK-14 to SK-17. These walls would be continuous from the roof of the police department and council chambers down to the lowest parking level and therefore would require new foundations as shown in the sketch SK-18. In addition, the existing connection between the office tower and the roof of the council chambers would be severed to produce two seismically separated structures above the ground level. The existing concrete shear walls would also be used to resist lateral loading. In addition to the upgrades required in Section 4.6, the following upgrades would be required: • New foundations at Forest Avenue would need to be designed to account for existing underground utilities and to prevent surcharging the existing basement retaining walls. 4.13 Option C2 - Essential Services Building with One-Story Addition Advantages and Disadvantages: • The closure of Forest Avenue would result in the loss of 5 on-street parking spaces. • A variance would be required to allow additional square footage on the Civic Center site. • Construction of an addition connected to the existing Police Building would provide direct access between related police functions. • Extending the building would make a partial-height space beneath the first floor available for mechanical and/or storage uses. • The extension of the building would offer the opportunity to develop an accessible entrance from Forest via elevator without impacting the parking levels below. • A one-story addition to the existing Police Building would provide a more pedestrian- scaled transition to the street than currently exists. • If the City elects to close one block of Forest Avenue, a gracious pedestrian plaza could be created to serve both the Police Building and the Downtown Library. This may cause some community concern, however; if this option is to be considered, a traffic study would be necessary. • In order to meet the Police Department’s space needs, the areas on Level A of City Hall currently occupied by City Hall’s Central Filing, Print Shop/Mail Room and City staff’s lunch room would need to be vacated and repurposed as police space. • Insufficient space exists on Level A to allow the entire Patrol/Community Policing function to remain on the same floor; it will be necessary to move some Patrol functions up to the first floor, resulting in a loss of functional efficiency. • Addition of the new concrete shear walls would result in the complete loss of 8 parking stalls. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 19 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 • Creates a seismic separation of the tower and council chambers, enhancing the expected seismic performance of both portions of the building. • The non-structural components within the police facility would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards, significantly enhancing the likelihood of the police department remaining functional after a seismic event or other disaster. • During construction, some functions will be housed in facilities not conforming to the ESB act. 4.14 Option C3 - Essential Services Building with Two-Story Building on Forest Avenue Summary: In this option, Forest Avenue would be closed to vehicular traffic between Bryant and Ramona Streets to provide space for a free-standing building between the current Police Department and the Downtown Library. Construction of the second floor and Level A expansion described in Section 4.2 along with the new two-story building would meet the Police Department’s space needs. The attached plan and section, both titled “Option C3: Essential Services Building with Two-Story Building on Forest Avenue illustrates the approximate scale of the proposed building on Forest Avenue. 4.15 Option C3 - Essential Services Building with Two-Story Building on Forest Avenue Structural Implications: In addition to needing to complete the framing at the second floor of the police department, a new two-story stand alone building would need to be constructed on Forest Avenue. Framing at both the new and existing structures would likely consist of a concrete over steel deck floor system and steel deck roof system all supported by structural steel framing members. The foundation system at the new construction on Forest Avenue would need to be designed around existing underground utilities. See diagram entitled “Existing City Utilities on Forest”. In addition, the lateral force resisting system of the existing structure would be upgraded as noted in Section 4.6 and as shown in sketches SK-19 to SK-23. In addition to the upgrade requirements noted in Section 4.6, the following upgrades would be required: • New foundations at Forest Avenue would need to be designed to account for existing underground utilities and to prevent surcharging the existing basement retaining walls 4.16 Option C3 - Essential Services Building with Two-Story Building on Forest Avenue Advantages and Disadvantages: • The closure of one block of Forest Avenue may cause some community concern; if this option is to be considered, a traffic study would be necessary. • Insufficient space exists on level A to allow the entire Patrol/Community Policing function to remain on the same floor; it will be necessary to move some Patrol functions up to the first floor, resulting in a loss of functional efficiency. • Dispatch would be somewhat isolated from day-to-day police activities, resulting in a reduction in the face-to-face relationship currently shared between dispatchers and patrol officers. • The closure of the block affords the opportunity to create a public plaza serving both the police structures and the Downtown Library. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 20 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 • Addition of the new concrete shear walls would result in the complete loss of 8 parking stalls, • Creates a seismic separation of the tower and council chambers, enhancing the expected seismic performance of both portions of the building. • The non-structural components within the police facility would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards, significantly enhancing the likelihood of the police department remaining functional after a seismic event or other disaster. • During construction, some functions will be housed in facilities not conforming to the ESB act. • The closure of Forest Avenue would result in the loss of 5 on-street parking spaces. 4.17 Option C4 - Essential Services Building with New Underground Facility at Downtown Library Site Summary: Construction of the second floor and Level A expansion as described in Section 4.2, along with the construction of an additional building underground on the 270 Forest Avenue site, would meet the projected space needs of the Police Department. The attached plan titled “Option C4: Essential Services Building with New Underground Facility at Downtown Library Site” indicates the potential location of the new space on the 270 Forest site. 4.18 Option C4 - Essential Services Building with New Underground Facility at Downtown Library Site Structural Implications: In addition to needing to complete the framing at the second floor of the police department, a new underground facility would need to be constructed at the downtown library site. Framing at the existing structure would likely consist of a concrete over steel deck floor system all supported by structural steel framing members. In addition, the new underground facility would be constructed with concrete retaining walls and a concrete ceiling. In addition, the lateral force resisting system of the existing structure would be upgraded as noted in Section 4.6 and as shown in sketches SK-19 to SK-23. In addition to the upgrade requirements noted in Section 4.6, the following upgrades would be required: • Underpinning of the adjacent perimeter library footing would be required 4.19 Option C4 - Essential Services Building with New Underground Facility at Downtown Library Site Advantages and Disadvantages: • In order to replace the existing Library parking area, the required second exit for the underground facility would likely need to be located in the required setback, necessitating a variance. • Multiple mature trees including oaks would need to be removed to allow for the new construction on the Library Site. • The areas on Level A of City hall currently occupied by City Hall’s Central Filing, Print Shop/Mail Room and City staff’s lunch room would need to be vacated and repurposed as police space. • Insufficient space exists on level A to allow the entire Patrol/Community Policing function to remain on the same floor; it will be necessary to move some Patrol functions up to the first floor, resulting in a loss of functional efficiency. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 21 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 • Dispatch would be somewhat isolated from day-to-day police activities, resulting in a reduction in the face-to-face relationship currently shared between dispatchers and patrol officers. • Placing Dispatch underground is not advisable. In a fast-paced, high stress environment such as a dispatch center, employees should have access to abundant natural light and views. • Addition of the new concrete shear walls would result in the complete loss of 8 parking stalls. • Creates a seismic separation of the tower and council chambers, enhancing the expected seismic performance of both portions of the building. • The non-structural components within the police facility would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards, significantly enhancing the likelihood of the police department remaining functional after a seismic event or other disaster. • During construction, some functions will be housed in facilities not conforming to the ESB act. 4.20 Option C5 - Essential Services Building with New Two-Story Building at Downtown Library Site Summary: Construction of the second floor and Level A expansion as described in Section 4.2, along with the construction of an additional two-story building (one story above ground, one story below ground) on the 270 Forest Avenue site, would meet the projected space needs of the Police Department. The attached plan titled “Option C5: Essential Services Building with New Two Story Building at Downtown Library Site” indicates the potential location of the new space on the 270 Forest site. 4.21 Option C5 - Essential Services Building with New Two-Story Building at Downtown Library Site Structural Implications: In addition to needing to complete the framing at the second floor of the police department, a new two-story facility would need to be constructed at the downtown library site with one level above grade and one below. Framing at the existing structure would likely consist of a concrete over steel deck floor system all supported by structural steel framing members. In addition, the new facility would also be constructed with a concrete over steel deck floor system and a steel deck roof system, all supported by structural steel framing. Perimeter foundations would all consist of concrete retaining walls. In addition, the lateral force resisting system of the existing structure would be upgraded as noted in Section 4.6 and as shown in sketches SK-19 to SK-23. 4.22 Option C5 - Essential Services Building with New Two-Story Building at Downtown Library Site Advantages and Disadvantages: • Variances would be required for setbacks in order to construct either of the new building options on the Library site; the required variance findings may not be possible. The required setback along Ramona Street is currently 20 feet. In order to maintain the existing non-fire rated roof overhangs of the Library, a five foot minimum clearance would be required between the Library roof overhang and the wall of any new building, This would force the new construction to extend to the property line along Ramona Street In order to preserve the existing Library parking lot, the new construction would also encroach into the Forest Avenue setback by approximately ten feet. A variance would be required for site coverage. The site is limited to 9,699 square feet of lot coverage. The Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 22 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 existing Library floor area is approximately 9,046 square feet, leaving only 653 square feet available for additional development without variances. • Multiple mature trees including oaks would need to be removed to allow for the new construction on the Library site. • Construction on the same site as the Downtown Library would result in a loss of patio space currently enjoyed by Library users • Construction of a new building(s) on the Downtown Library site would have a negative aesthetic effect on the site and landscape design of the Library. • The areas on Level A of City hall currently occupied by City Hall’s Central Filing, Print Shop/Mail Room and City staff’s lunch room would need to be vacated and repurposed as police space. • Insufficient space exists on level A to allow the entire Patrol/Community Policing function to remain on the same floor; it will be necessary to move some Patrol functions up to the first floor, resulting in a loss of functional efficiency. • Dispatch would be somewhat isolated from day-to-day police activities, resulting in a reduction in the face-to-face relationship currently shared between dispatchers and patrol officers. • Addition of the new concrete shear walls would result in the complete loss of 8 parking stalls. • Creates a seismic separation of the tower and council chambers, enhancing the expected seismic performance of both portions of the building. • The non-structural components within the police facility would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards, significantly enhancing the likelihood of the police department remaining functional after a seismic event or other disaster. • During construction, some functions will be housed in facilities not conforming to the ESB act. 4.23 Option C6 - Essential Services Building with Two New One-Story Buildings at Downtown Library Site Summary: Construction of the second floor and Level A expansion as described in Section 4.2, along with the construction of two additional one-story buildings on the 270 Forest Avenue site, would meet the projected space needs of the Police Department. The attached plan titled “Option C6: Essential Services Building with Two New One- Story Buildings at Downtown Library Site” indicates the potential locations of the new space on the 270 Forest site. 4.24 Option C6 - Essential Services Building with Two New One-Story Buildings at Downtown Library Site Structural Implications: In addition to needing to complete the framing at the second floor of the police department, two new one-story facilities would need to be constructed at the downtown library site, one on each side of the existing structure. Framing at the existing structure would likely consist of a concrete over steel deck floor system all supported by structural steel framing members. In addition, the new facilities would be constructed with a steel deck roof system supported by structural steel framing. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 23 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 In addition, the lateral force resisting system of the existing structure would be upgraded as noted in Section 4.6 and as shown in sketches SK-19 to SK-23. 4.25 Option C6 - Essential Services Building with Two New One-Story Buildings at Downtown Library Site Advantages and Disadvantages: • Variances would be required for setbacks in order to construct the new building options on the Library site; the required variance findings may not be possible. The required setback along Bryant and Ramona Street is currently 20 feet. In order to maintain the existing non-fire rated roof overhangs of the Library, a five foot minimum clearance would be required between the Library roof overhang and the wall of any new building, This would force the new construction to extend to the property line along Bryant and Ramona. In order to preserve the existing Library parking lot, the new construction would also encroach into the Forest Avenue setback by approximately ten feet. • A variance would be required for site coverage. The site is limited to 9,699 square feet of lot coverage. The Library floor area is approximately 9,046 square feet, leaving only 653 square feet available for additional development without variances. • Multiple mature trees, including oaks and a redwood, would need to be removed to allow for the new construction on the Library site. • Construction on the same site as the Downtown Library would result in a loss of patio space currently enjoyed by Library users. • Construction of a new building(s) on the Downtown Library site would have a negative aesthetic effect on the site and landscape design of the Library. • The areas on Level A of City hall currently occupied by City Hall’s Central Filing, Print Shop/Mail Room and City staff’s lunch room would need to be vacated and repurposed as police space. • Insufficient space exists on level A to allow the entire Patrol/Community Policing function to remain on the same floor; it will be necessary to move some Patrol functions up to the first floor, resulting in a loss of functional efficiency. • Dispatch would be somewhat isolated from day-to-day police activities, resulting in a reduction in the face-to-face relationship currently shared between dispatchers and patrol officers. • Addition of the new concrete shear walls would result in the complete loss of 8 parking stalls. • Creates a seismic separation of the tower and council chambers, enhancing the expected seismic performance of both portions of the building. • The non-structural components within the police facility would be constructed to current Essential Services Building standards, significantly enhancing the likelihood of the police department remaining functional after a seismic event or other disaster. • During construction, some functions will be housed in facilities not conforming to the ESB act. 4.26 New Essential Services Building This option consists of a completely new Public Safety Building designed to satisfy all the space needs and operational requirements of the police department and built to current Essential Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 24 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 Services Building standards. This option allows for all police services to occupy the same building and would not disrupt any of the other city departments located at the civic center. 4.27 Accessibility: Section 1134B of the California Building Code requires renovations of existing facilities to comply with current accessibility standards, including access to: • the primary building entrance • a path of travel to the renovated areas • sanitary facilities serving the area • drinking fountains serving the area (if provided) • signs serving the area • public telephones serving the area (if provided) Therefore, the building code would require the following accessibility upgrades to the existing structure: • The existing entrance to the police facility is elevated substantially above Forest Avenue and is served by stairs leading to the sidewalk. If the entrance to the facility were to remain on the Forest Avenue side of the building, an elevator would be required to convey visitors up from the sidewalk level to the first floor level. Adding such an elevator would present significant challenges, therefore it would be preferable to eliminate the Forest Avenue entrance. Reorienting the primary entrance to the side facing the Council Chambers would allow all visitors to access the facility directly from the plaza level connected to the Hamilton Avenue sidewalk without negotiating changes in grade level. Alternate access to the facility from the parking garage via the City Hall elevators and the Council Chambers would also remain; the existing doors facing Forest Avenue would serve as emergency exits only. Note that the above comment does not apply to Options C1 and C2 which could be designed to provide an accessible entrance on the Forest Avenue side. • Because the renovation would occur on multiple levels, the existing stairs serving the police facility would need to be upgraded to meet current standards. The stair upgrades would include new handrails and the addition of vision striping. • An elevator would also be required; a shaft originally intended to house a future elevator currently exists. This shaft could be fitted with an elevator to meet Palo Alto’s gurney requirements in addition to meeting CBC requirements including operation and leveling, door size, door operation, door re-opening protection, car controls, handrails, hall lanterns and call buttons, and illumination. • All sanitary facilities serving the police facility would be required to be accessible. The existing toilet rooms are substantially smaller than the current code requires, therefore they will need to be removed and replaced in their entirety. • For the purposes of this study, it is assumed that no drinking fountains would be provided, therefore no related upgrades would be required. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 25 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 • A new signage program would need to be implemented to meet current requirements including accessibility signage, mounting locations, finish and contrast, character type and height, and Braille. • A public telephone is currently provided in the Detention area. In a renovated facility, this telephone would be required to incorporate volume controls and additional features for the hearing impaired. 4.28 Parking Summary: The possibility of expanding the existing secured parking under Forest Avenue was considered and found to be very impractical because it would require modification of the existing post- tensioned slabs forming the ceiling of the parking levels below. While the scope of this report does not include detailed parking design, a conceptual approach would be to modify the layout of the existing public parking garage to provide additional secure parking on Levels A and B. The concept would include building a wall from Hamilton to the Civic Center Lobby, bisecting the Level A parking garage and would thereby dedicate the existing entry/exit driveway at Bryant Street for police use only. The public would utilize the existing entry/exit driveway at Ramona Street, and would retain access to the public lobby on Level A. The ramp that currently serves outbound traffic from level B to Level A would be converted to two-way traffic. A more detailed parking study, as it relates to providing additional secure parking in the public parking garage, was commissioned by the City. The findings of this study along with diagrams produced by Watry Design can be found in the appendix of this report. 4.29 Parking Advantages and Disadvantages: Reworking the drive aisles for two-way traffic, to allow for secure parking, would result in a net loss of parking stalls as follows: o Level A: 69 stalls o Level B: 31 stalls o Level C: 0 stalls o Total Lost: 100 stalls In addition, Option B and all Option C iterations would result in the following additional loss parking stalls due to the new shear walls: o Level B: 4 stalls o Level C: 4 stalls o Total Lost: 8 stalls Plus, for Options C2 and C3 the following number of street parking stalls on Forest Avenue would also be lost: o Street Parking: 5 stalls Finally, It is required that the supplanted parking stalls be added elsewhere in the downtown district such that there is no change to the net available public parking. In addition, per City of Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.57, an In-Lieu Parking Fee would also be required for every 250 square feet added to the Police Department. This would result in the required addition of the following number of parking stalls for each option: o Option A: 61 stalls o Option B: 94 stalls Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 26 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 o Option C1: 96 stalls o Option C2: 92 stalls o Option C3: 92 stalls o Option C4: 92 stalls o Option C5: 92 stalls o Option C6: 92 stalls In addition to the loss of parking stalls, the addition of secured parking in the parking garage would result in the following: • The removal of public access to the garage entrance/exit ramps on Bryant Street may have a significant impact on Ramona Street. A traffic study would need to be performed. • The removal of public access to the garage exit ramp on Bryant Street may result in the slowing of traffic in the public parking areas. 4.30 Blast Vulnerability: Since the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, greater attention is being paid to blast vulnerability of government facilities, specifically as it relates to improvised car bombs. One of the best ways to prevent damage from a blast is to provide a large standoff distance from the origin of the blast to the structural elements. In the case of the police department, the main structure is set back from the street on all sides which will provide some protection in the case of a car bomb. However, columns supporting the roof are much closer to the street and could experience damage during a significant blast. This could lead to a partial failure of the roof since the perimeter columns support concrete beams at this level. Of major concern, would be a blast from underneath the structure. As the parking garage offers public access it would be fairly easy to damage significant portions of the police department by damaging the structural columns below it, although the construction of the parking structure is relatively “tough” with respect to blast resistance. Due to the spacing of the columns, a large enough blast could cause major damage and possible collapse of the entire structure. This risk is not directly addressed in Option A through C, although Options B and C will improve the structures resistance to blast. 4.31 Summary of Concept Studies: The following is a tabular summary of the concept studies noted above along with a new facility option. The following items include replacing all city parking stalls lost due to new construction, leasing temporary facilities as required, furniture, fixtures, and equipment, and all design fees. However, these items exclude land and easement acquisition if required. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 27 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 Op t i o n D $4 8 , 3 6 8 , 0 0 0 12 m o n t h s No n e In c o r p o r a t e d in t o d e s i g n No n e De p a r t m e n t co u l d oc c u p y o n e sp a c e Al l s e r v i c e s , in c l u d i n g es s e n t i a l se r v i c e s , wo u l d oc c u p y t h e sa m e bu i l d i n g Op t i o n C 6 $3 7 , 1 1 4 , 0 0 0 17 m o n t h s 10 8 s t a l l s Up g r a d e Re q u i r e d Ce n t r a l Fi l i n g , P r i n t Sh o p / M a i l Ro o m , a n d Lu n c h R o o m at L e v e l A De p t w o u l d ne e d t o b e sp l i t be t w e e n Le v e l A a n d th e f i r s t f l o o r Es s e n t i a l se r v i c e s ( i . e . Di s p a t c h an d Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r ) wo u l d b e of f s i t e Op t i o n C 5 $3 7 , 9 2 6 , 0 0 0 17 m o n t h s 10 8 s t a l l s Up g r a d e Re q u i r e d Ce n t r a l Fi l i n g , P r i n t Sh o p / M a i l Ro o m , a n d Lu n c h R o o m at L e v e l A De p t w o u l d ne e d t o b e sp l i t be t w e e n Le v e l A a n d th e f i r s t f l o o r Es s e n t i a l se r v i c e s ( i . e . Di s p a t c h an d Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r ) wo u l d b e of f s i t e Op t i o n C 4 $3 9 , 6 8 2 , 0 0 0 17 m o n t h s 10 8 s t a l l s Up g r a d e Re q u i r e d Ce n t r a l Fi l i n g , P r i n t Sh o p / M a i l Ro o m , a n d Lu n c h Ro o m a t Le v e l A De p t w o u l d ne e d t o b e sp l i t be t w e e n Le v e l A a n d th e f i r s t f l o o r Es s e n t i a l se r v i c e s (i . e . Di s p a t c h an d Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r ) wo u l d b e of f s i t e Op t i o n C 3 $3 8 , 1 5 4 , 0 0 0 17 m o n t h s 11 3 s t a l l s Up g r a d e Re q u i r e d Ce n t r a l Fi l i n g , P r i n t Sh o p / M a i l Ro o m , a n d Lu n c h R o o m at L e v e l A De p t w o u l d ne e d t o b e sp l i t b e t w e e n Le v e l A a n d th e f i r s t f l o o r Es s e n t i a l se r v i c e s ( i . e . Di s p a t c h a n d Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r ) wo u l d b e of f s i t e Op t i o n C 2 $3 8 , 9 4 3 , 0 0 0 17 m o n t h s 11 3 s t a l l s In c o r p o r a t e d in t o d e s i g n Ce n t r a l Fi l i n g , P r i n t Sh o p / M a i l Ro o m , a n d Lu n c h R o o m at L e v e l A De p t w o u l d ne e d t o b e sp l i t be t w e e n Le v e l A a n d th e f i r s t f l o o r Al l s e r v i c e s , in c l u d i n g es s e n t i a l se r v i c e s , wo u l d re m a i n on s i t e Op t i o n C 1 $3 8 , 9 9 1 , 0 0 0 17 m o n t h s 10 8 s t a l l s In c o r p o r a t e d in t o d e s i g n Ce n t r a l Fi l i n g , P r i n t Sh o p / M a i l Ro o m , a n d Lu n c h R o o m at L e v e l A De p t w o u l d ne e d t o b e sp l i t be t w e e n Le v e l A a n d th e f i r s t f l o o r Al l s e r v i c e s , in c l u d i n g es s e n t i a l se r v i c e s , wo u l d re m a i n on s i t e Op t i o n B $3 8 , 6 1 5 , 0 0 0 20 m o n t h s 10 8 s t a l l s Up g r a d e Re q u i r e d Co u n c i l Ch a m b e r s , Ce n t r a l Fi l i n g , P r i n t Sh o p / M a i l Ro o m , a n d Lu n c h R o o m at L e v e l A De p t w o u l d ne e d t o b e sp l i t be t w e e n Le v e l A a n d th e f i r s t f l o o r Al l s e r v i c e s , in c l u d i n g es s e n t i a l se r v i c e s , wo u l d re m a i n on s i t e Op t i o n A $3 7 , 3 8 1 , 0 0 0 17 m o n t h s 10 0 s t a l l s Up g r a d e Re q u i r e d Ce n t r a l Fi l i n g , P r i n t Sh o p / M a i l Ro o m , a n d Lu n c h R o o m at L e v e l A De p t w o u l d ne e d t o b e sp l i t be t w e e n Le v e l A a n d th e f i r s t f l o o r Es s e n t i a l se r v i c e s ( i . e . Di s p a t c h an d Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r ) wo u l d b e of f s i t e Co s t Co n s t r u c t i o n Du r a t i o n Pu b l i c Pa r k i n g L o s s Ac c e s s i b i l i t y Ci t y De p a r t m e n t Re l o c a t i o n Pa t r o l - Co m m u n i t y Po l i c i n g De p a r t m e n t Fu n c t i o n a l in e f f i c i e n c y Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 28 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 Op t i o n D Ty p i c a l bu i l d i n g In c o r p o r a t e d in t o d e s i g n Se i s m i c l o a d re s i s t i n g sy s t e m Op t i o n C 6 So m e w h a t im p a i r e d a t ne w s e c o n d fl o o r In s u f f i c i e n t fl o o r s p a c e av a i l a b l e b u t ro o m c o u l d be co m b i n e d wi t h a n o t h e r sp a c e s u c h as Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r Se i s m i c up g r a d e o f va r i o u s el e m e n t s o f th e e x i s t i n g la t e r a l f o r c e re s i s t i n g sy s t e m wo u l d b e re q u i r e d a s we l l a s ad d i t i o n t o ne w l a t e r a l fo r c e re s i s t i n g el e m e n t s Op t i o n C 5 So m e w h a t im p a i r e d a t ne w s e c o n d fl o o r In s u f f i c i e n t fl o o r s p a c e av a i l a b l e b u t ro o m c o u l d be co m b i n e d wi t h a n o t h e r sp a c e s u c h as Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r Se i s m i c up g r a d e o f va r i o u s el e m e n t s o f th e e x i s t i n g la t e r a l f o r c e re s i s t i n g sy s t e m wo u l d b e re q u i r e d a s we l l a s ad d i t i o n t o ne w l a t e r a l fo r c e re s i s t i n g el e m e n t s Op t i o n C 4 So m e w h a t im p a i r e d a t ne w s e c o n d fl o o r In s u f f i c i e n t fl o o r s p a c e av a i l a b l e b u t ro o m c o u l d be c o m b i n e d wi t h a n o t h e r sp a c e s u c h as Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r Se i s m i c up g r a d e o f va r i o u s el e m e n t s o f th e e x i s t i n g la t e r a l f o r c e re s i s t i n g sy s t e m wo u l d b e re q u i r e d a s we l l a s ad d i t i o n t o ne w l a t e r a l fo r c e re s i s t i n g el e m e n t s Op t i o n C 3 So m e w h a t im p a i r e d a t ne w s e c o n d fl o o r In s u f f i c i e n t fl o o r s p a c e av a i l a b l e b u t ro o m c o u l d be c o m b i n e d wi t h a n o t h e r sp a c e s u c h as Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r Se i s m i c up g r a d e o f va r i o u s el e m e n t s o f th e e x i s t i n g la t e r a l f o r c e re s i s t i n g sy s t e m wo u l d b e re q u i r e d a s we l l a s ad d i t i o n t o ne w l a t e r a l fo r c e re s i s t i n g el e m e n t s Op t i o n C 2 So m e w h a t im p a i r e d a t ne w s e c o n d fl o o r In s u f f i c i e n t fl o o r s p a c e av a i l a b l e b u t ro o m c o u l d be c o m b i n e d wi t h a n o t h e r sp a c e s u c h as Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r Se i s m i c up g r a d e o f va r i o u s el e m e n t s o f th e e x i s t i n g la t e r a l f o r c e re s i s t i n g sy s t e m w o u l d be r e q u i r e d as w e l l a s ad d i t i o n t o ne w l a t e r a l fo r c e r e s i s t i n g el e m e n t s Op t i o n C 1 So m e w h a t im p a i r e d a t ne w s e c o n d fl o o r In s u f f i c i e n t fl o o r s p a c e av a i l a b l e b u t ro o m c o u l d b e co m b i n e d w i t h an o t h e r s p a c e su c h a s Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r Se i s m i c up g r a d e o f va r i o u s el e m e n t s o f th e e x i s t i n g la t e r a l f o r c e re s i s t i n g sy s t e m w o u l d be r e q u i r e d a s we l l a s ad d i t i o n t o n e w la t e r a l f o r c e re s i s t i n g el e m e n t s Op t i o n B So m e w h a t im p a i r e d a t ne w s e c o n d fl o o r In s u f f i c i e n t fl o o r s p a c e av a i l a b l e b u t ro o m c o u l d be c o m b i n e d wi t h a n o t h e r sp a c e s u c h as Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r Se i s m i c up g r a d e o f va r i o u s el e m e n t s o f th e e x i s t i n g la t e r a l f o r c e re s i s t i n g sy s t e m wo u l d b e re q u i r e d a s we l l a s ad d i t i o n o f ne w l a t e r a l fo r c e re s i s t i n g el e m e n t s Op t i o n A So m e w h a t im p a i r e d a t ne w s e c o n d fl o o r In s u f f i c i e n t fl o o r s p a c e av a i l a b l e bu t r o o m co u l d b e co m b i n e d wi t h a n o t h e r sp a c e s u c h as Em e r g e n c y Op e r a t i o n s Ce n t e r Se i s m i c up g r a d e o f va r i o u s el e m e n t s o f th e e x i s t i n g la t e r a l f o r c e re s i s t i n g sy s t e m wo u l d b e re q u i r e d , bu t w i t h l i t t l e im p a c t o n ex i s t i n g sp a c e Fl o o r - t o - Fl o o r He i g h t s Mu l t i - Pu r p o s e Ro o m Ex t e n t o f Se i s m i c Up g r a d e Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 29 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 Op t i o n D De s i g n e d p e r 20 0 7 C B C Es s e n t i a l Se r v i c e s Bu i l d i n g pr o v i s i o n s Im m e d i a t e oc c u p a n c y No s p l i t f a c i l i t y re q u i r e d 22 , 6 0 0 s q u a r e fe e t c u r r e n t l y oc c u p i e d b y pu b l i c s a f e t y wo u l d b e av a i l a b l e f o r ot h e r f u n c t i o n s Op t i o n C 6 Eq u i v a l e n t to 2 0 0 7 CB C Es s e n t i a l Se r v i c e s Bu i l d i n g pr o v i s i o n s Im m e d i a t e oc c u p a n c y Te m p o r a r y sp l i t f a c i l i t y re q u i r e d No n e , re q u i r e s re l o c a t i o n of o t h e r ci t y fu n c t i o n s Op t i o n C 5 Eq u i v a l e n t to 2 0 0 7 CB C Es s e n t i a l Se r v i c e s Bu i l d i n g pr o v i s i o n s Im m e d i a t e oc c u p a n c y Te m p o r a r y sp l i t f a c i l i t y re q u i r e d No n e , re q u i r e s re l o c a t i o n of o t h e r ci t y fu n c t i o n s Op t i o n C 4 Eq u i v a l e n t to 2 0 0 7 CB C Es s e n t i a l Se r v i c e s Bu i l d i n g pr o v i s i o n s Im m e d i a t e oc c u p a n c y Te m p o r a r y sp l i t f a c i l i t y re q u i r e d No n e , re q u i r e s re l o c a t i o n of o t h e r ci t y fu n c t i o n s Op t i o n C 3 Eq u i v a l e n t to 2 0 0 7 CB C Es s e n t i a l Se r v i c e s Bu i l d i n g pr o v i s i o n s Im m e d i a t e oc c u p a n c y Te m p o r a r y sp l i t f a c i l i t y re q u i r e d No n e , re q u i r e s re l o c a t i o n of o t h e r ci t y fu n c t i o n s Op t i o n C 2 Eq u i v a l e n t t o 20 0 7 C B C Es s e n t i a l Se r v i c e s Bu i l d i n g pr o v i s i o n s Im m e d i a t e oc c u p a n c y Te m p o r a r y sp l i t f a c i l i t y re q u i r e d No n e , re q u i r e s re l o c a t i o n o f ot h e r c i t y fu n c t i o n s Op t i o n C 1 Eq u i v a l e n t t o 20 0 7 C B C Es s e n t i a l Se r v i c e s Bu i l d i n g pr o v i s i o n s Im m e d i a t e oc c u p a n c y Te m p o r a r y sp l i t f a c i l i t y re q u i r e d No n e , r e q u i r e s re l o c a t i o n o f ot h e r c i t y fu n c t i o n s Op t i o n B Eq u i v a l e n t t o 20 0 7 C B C Es s e n t i a l Se r v i c e s Bu i l d i n g pr o v i s i o n s Im m e d i a t e oc c u p a n c y Te m p o r a r y sp l i t f a c i l i t y re q u i r e d No n e , re q u i r e s re l o c a t i o n o f ot h e r c i t y fu n c t i o n s Op t i o n A Eq u i v a l e n t to 2 0 0 7 CB C bu i l d i n g pr o v i s i o n s Li f e s a f e t y pr o t e c t e d an d si g n i f i c a n t en h a n c e m e nt o f p o s t - ea r t h q u a k e fu n c t i o n a l i t y Te m p o r a r y sp l i t f a c i l i t y re q u i r e d No n e , re q u i r e s re l o c a t i o n o f ot h e r c i t y fu n c t i o n s Se i s m i c De s i g n Cr i t e r i o n Ex p e c t e d Pe r f o r m a n c e Af t e r M a j o r Ea r t h q u a k e Co n s t r u c t i o n Co n c e r n s Av a i l a b l e Sp a c e a t Ci v i c C e n t e r fo r O t h e r Fu n c t i o n s Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 30 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 Op t i o n D Bl a s t vu l n e r a b i l i t y ca n b e mi t i g a t e d i n ne w d e s i g n Pr o v i d e d sp a c e i s ad e q u a t e f o r re q u i r e d sp a c e Op t i o n C 6 Vu l n e r a b l e to b l a s t d u e to p u b l i c pa r k i n g be l o w p o l i c e de p a r t m e n t bu t im p r o v e d du e t o se i s m i c up g r a d e Re q u i r e d sp a c e i s 3, 5 7 2 sq u a r e f e l t la r g e r t h a n ac t u a l s p a c e pr o v i d e d Op t i o n C 5 Vu l n e r a b l e to b l a s t d u e to p u b l i c pa r k i n g be l o w po l i c e de p a r t m e n t bu t im p r o v e d du e t o se i s m i c up g r a d e Re q u i r e d sp a c e i s 3, 5 7 2 sq u a r e f e l t la r g e r t h a n ac t u a l sp a c e pr o v i d e d Op t i o n C 4 Vu l n e r a b l e to b l a s t d u e to p u b l i c pa r k i n g be l o w p o l i c e de p a r t m e n t bu t im p r o v e d du e t o se i s m i c up g r a d e Re q u i r e d sp a c e i s 3, 5 7 2 sq u a r e f e l t la r g e r t h a n ac t u a l s p a c e pr o v i d e d Op t i o n C 3 Vu l n e r a b l e to b l a s t d u e to p u b l i c pa r k i n g be l o w p o l i c e de p a r t m e n t bu t im p r o v e d du e t o se i s m i c up g r a d e Re q u i r e d sp a c e i s 3, 5 7 2 sq u a r e f e l t la r g e r t h a n ac t u a l s p a c e pr o v i d e d Op t i o n C 2 Vu l n e r a b l e t o bl a s t d u e t o pu b l i c pa r k i n g be l o w p o l i c e de p a r t m e n t bu t i m p r o v e d du e t o se i s m i c up g r a d e Re q u i r e d sp a c e i s 3, 5 7 2 s q u a r e fe l t l a r g e r th a n a c t u a l sp a c e pr o v i d e d Op t i o n C 1 Vu l n e r a b l e to b l a s t d u e to p u b l i c pa r k i n g be l o w p o l i c e de p a r t m e n t bu t im p r o v e d du e t o se i s m i c up g r a d e Re q u i r e d sp a c e i s 2, 6 1 4 sq u a r e f e e t la r g e r t h a n ac t u a l s p a c e pr o v i d e d Op t i o n B Vu l n e r a b l e to b l a s t d u e to p u b l i c pa r k i n g be l o w p o l i c e de p a r t m e n t bu t i m p r o v e d du e t o se i s m i c up g r a d e Re q u i r e d sp a c e i s 2, 6 1 4 s q u a r e fe e t l a r g e r th a n a c t u a l sp a c e pr o v i d e d Op t i o n A Vu l n e r a b l e to b l a s t d u e to p u b l i c pa r k i n g be l o w p o l i c e de p a r t m e n t Re q u i r e d sp a c e i s 3, 5 7 2 sq u a r e f e l t la r g e r t h a n ac t u a l sp a c e pr o v i d e d Bl a s t Vu l n e r a b i l i t y Sp a c e Al l o c a t i o n Re q u i r e m e n t s Ac h i e v e d Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 31 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 5.0 Cost Analysis The cost analyses below are all exclusive of the cost of any land required, financing costs and any indirect costs such as personnel costs. 5.1 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option A - California Building Code for Non- Essential Building with Offsite Facilities: Based on the space need requirements of the police department and the required structural remodel and retrofit, the construction cost estimate for the Option A is approximately $37,381,000 with an estimated time of completion of approximately 17 months. Phasing for this option would begin with the construction of the offsite essential services building and preparation of the temporary facility. Once the essential services building is complete, the departments which would permanently occupy this building would be relocated while all remaining departments are relocated to the temporary facility so that construction of the new second floor could proceed. Once construction is complete, the departments at the temporary facility would be moved back to the newly remodeled police department. Renovation of the parking garage would happen concurrently with the remodel of the police department. 5.2 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option B - Essential Services Building with all Facilities Onsite within Existing Building: Based on the space need requirements of the police department and the required structural remodel and retrofit, the construction cost estimate for Option B is approximately $38,615,000 with an estimated time of completion of approximately 20 months. Phasing for this option would begin with moving all departments on the existing first floor to the temporary facility once it has been prepared. Construction of the new second floor above the existing police department could then proceed followed by the remodel of both the first and second floors in this area. Once completed, the departments occupying these spaces could return. Concurrently, existing Level A departments would be moved to the temporary facility while Dispatch and the Emergency Operations Center would be relocated to their new areas within the building. Construction of the new 2nd floor over the existing council chambers could them commence. Once construction and the corresponding tenant improvement (TI) have been completed, the remainder of the police departments would be moved from the temporary facility. Renovation of the parking garage would happen concurrently with the remodel of the police department. 5.3 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C1 - Essential Services Building with Two- Story Addition: Based on the space need requirements of the police department and the required structural remodel and retrofit, the construction cost estimate for Option C1 is approximately $38,991,000 with an estimated time of completion of approximately 17 months. Phasing for this option would begin with moving all departments on the existing first floor to the temporary facility once it has been prepared. Construction of the new second floor above the existing police department could then proceed followed by the remodel of both the first and second floors in this area. Once completed, the departments occupying these spaces could return. Concurrently, existing Level A departments would be moved to the temporary facility while Dispatch and the Emergency Operations Center would be relocated to their new areas Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 32 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 within the building. Once the Level A TI has been completed, the remainder of the police departments would be moved from the temporary facility. Renovation of the parking garage would happen concurrently with the remodel of the police department. 5.4 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C2 – Essential Services Building with One- Story Addition: Based on the space need requirements of the police department and the required structural remodel and retrofit, the construction cost estimate for Option C2 is approximately $38,943,000 with an estimated time of completion of approximately 17 months. Phasing for this option would be the same as Option C1. 5.5 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C3 – Essential Services Building with Two- Story Building on Forest Avenue: Based on the space need requirements of the police department and the required structural remodel and retrofit, the construction cost estimate for Option C3 is approximately $38,154,000 with an estimated time of completion of approximately 17 months. Phasing for this option would begin construction of the new building while moving all departments on the existing first floor to the temporary facility once it has been prepared. Construction of the new second floor above the existing police department could then proceed followed by the remodel of both the first and second floors in this area. Once completed, the departments occupying these spaces could return. Concurrently, existing Level A departments would be moved to the temporary facility while Dispatch and the Emergency Operations Center would be relocated to the newly completed building. Once the Level A TI has been completed, the remainder of the police departments would be moved from the temporary facility. Renovation of the parking garage would happen concurrently with the remodel of the police department. 5.6 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C4 – Essential Services Building with New Underground Facility at Downtown Library Site: Based on the space need requirements of the police department and the required structural remodel and retrofit, the construction cost estimate for Option C4 is approximately $39,682,000 with an estimated time of completion of approximately 17 months. Phasing for this option would be the same as Option C3. 5.7 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C5 – Essential Services Building with New Two-Story Building at Downtown Library Site: Based on the space need requirements of the police department and the required structural remodel and retrofit, the construction cost estimate for Option C5 is approximately $37,926,000 with an estimated time of completion of approximately 17 months. Phasing for this option would be the same as Option C3. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 33 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 5.8 Cost Analysis and Phasing for Option C6 – Essential Services Building with Two New One-Story Buildings at Downtown Library Site: Based on the space need requirements of the police department and the required structural remodel and retrofit, the construction cost estimate for Option C6 is approximately $37,114,000 with an estimated time of completion of approximately 17 months. Phasing for this option would be the same as Option C3. 5.9 Cost Analysis for Option D – New Essential Services Building: Based on the schematic design drawings prepared by Ross, Drulis, Cusenbery and along with the initial detail cost summary prepared by Davis Langdon, a new essential services building would cost approximately $48,368,000. The estimated time of completion of construction is approximately 12 months. As this would be a new facility, phasing of construction would not affect the functionality of the existing police department. The new building would be constructed and once it is completed, all departments would be transferred. Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 34 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 6.0 Diagrams, Figures, and Illustrations # Pr o g r a m Re q u i r e d G r o s s Sq . F t . ( B l u e Ri b b o n T a s k Fo r c e 5 / 9 / 0 6 ) Le v e l A pr e f e r r e d Off s i t e Po t e n t i a l No t e s Ad j a c e n c y 10 0 A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , P e r s o n n e l a n d T r a i n i n g 2, 4 9 4 no no In v e s t i g a t i v e S e r v i c e s 20 0 D i s p a t c h ( C o m m u n i c a t i o n s ) 3, 3 0 6 no ye s EO C 30 0 E O C 2, 9 1 3 ma y b e ye s Dis p a t c h 40 0 R e c o r d s a n d I n f o r m a t i o n 2, 7 5 8 no no Tr a f f i c / P a r k i n g , L o b b y 50 0 P a t r o l / C o m m u n i t y P o l i c i n g 6, 2 1 9 ye s no Se c u r e P a r k i n g , S t a f f & F a c i l i t y Su p p o r t , D e t e n t i o n , P r o p e r t y & Ev i d e n c e 60 0 D e t e n t i o n 3, 2 9 9 ye s no P r o p e r t y & E v i d e n c e , P a t r o l 70 0 T r a f f i c / P a r k i n g 1, 5 0 3 ma y b e no Re c o r d s & I n f o , L o b b y 80 0 I n v e s t i g a t i o n s 3, 8 0 7 no no Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n 90 0 P r o p e r t y a n d E v i d e n c e 4, 8 1 6 ye s no De t e n t i o n 10 0 0 P r o p e r t y W a r e h o u s e 1, 4 2 3 ye s no Pr o p e r t y & E v i d e n c e 11 0 0 M u l t i - P u r p o s e R o o m 2, 1 2 5 no ye s 12 0 0 S t a f f a n d F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t 5, 2 5 8 n/ a no ne e d s o m e o n e a c h l e v e l Pa t r o l 39 , 9 2 1 9, 1 8 0 49 , 1 0 1 14 P a r k i n g - S e c u r e d & U n s e c u r e d P o l i c e V e h i c l e s a n d E m p l o y e e s so m e 19 2 p a r k i n g s p a c e s : m i n i m u m 5 4 i m m e d i a t e r e s p o n s e p o l i c e ve h i c l e s , 1 r a d i o m a i n t e n e n c e v a n , 1 S W A T , 7 m o t o r c y c l e s a n d 2 ra d a r t r a i l e r s Pa t r o l , T r a f f i c Pa l o A l t o P o l i c e D e p a r t m e n t S p a c e N e e d s A s s e s s m e n t : Su b t o t a l TO T A L Bu i l d i n g S u p p o r t A r e a A l l o w a n c e ( 2 3 % ) Lo c a t i o n # Pr o g r a m De p t . gr o s s ( s . f . ) pl u s 2 3 % bld g . su p p o r t No t e s 50 0 Pa t r o l / C o m m u n i t y P o l i c i n g ( p a r t i a l ) 3 , 6 5 9 4 , 5 0 1 Ap p r o x . e x i s t . a v a i l a b l e L e v e l A s p a c e (g ro s s ) 13 , 0 0 0 60 0 De t e n t i o n 3 , 2 9 9 4 , 0 5 8 en t i r e l u n c h r o o m 1 , 4 8 0 90 0 Pr o p e r t y a n d E v i d e n c e 4 , 8 1 6 5 , 9 2 4 en t i r e c e n t r a l f i l i n g 1, 9 7 0 10 0 0 Pr o p e r t y W a r e h o u s e 1 , 4 2 3 1 , 7 5 0 en t i r e p r i n t s h o p / m a i l r o o m 2 , 2 3 1 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t ( p a r t i a l ) 1, 9 9 1 2 , 4 4 9 To t a l gro s s a r e a a v a i l a b l e (no t i n c l u d i n g p a r k i n g) 18 , 6 8 1 15 , 1 8 8 1 8 , 6 8 1 ex c e s s L e v e l A p r o gra m a r e a : (0) 40 0 R e c o r d s a n d I n f o r m a t i o n 2, 7 5 8 3 , 3 9 2 50 0 P a t r o l / C o m m u n i t y P o l i c i n g ( o f f i c e s / w o r k s t a t i o n s ) 2, 5 6 0 3 , 1 4 9 70 0 T r a f f i c / P a r k i n g 1, 5 0 3 1 , 8 4 9 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t ( p a r t i a l ) 98 4 1 , 2 1 0 Ap p r o x . a v a i l a b l e f i r s t f l o o r s p a c e : 9, 6 0 0 7, 8 0 5 9 , 6 0 0 ex c e s s f i r s t f l o o r a r e a : (0) 10 0 Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n , P e r s o n n e l a n d T r a i n i n g 2 , 4 9 4 3 , 0 6 8 80 0 In v e s t i g a t i o n s 3 , 8 0 7 4 , 6 8 3 Ap p r o x . a v a i l a b l e s e c o n d f l o o r s p a c e : 9, 6 0 0 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t ( p a r t i a l ) 2 , 2 8 3 2 , 8 0 8 8, 5 8 4 1 0 , 5 5 8 ex c e s s s e c o n d f l o o r p r o gra m a r e a : (95 8 ) 20 0 D i s p a t c h ( C o m m u n i c a t i o n s ) 3, 3 0 6 4 , 0 6 6 30 0 E O C 2, 9 1 3 3 , 5 8 3 6, 2 1 9 7 , 6 4 9 FIRST FLOOR OFFSITE Of f s i t e S u b t o t a l Pa l o A l t o P o l i c e D e p a r t m e n t S p a c e A l l o c a t i o n w i t h O f f s i t e F a c i l i t i e s : O p t i o n s A , C 3 , C 4 , C 5 , C 6 Le v e l A S u b t o t a l SECOND FLOORLEVEL A Se c o n d F l o o r S u b t o t a l Fi r s t F l o o r S u b t o t a l Lo c a t i o n # Pr o g r a m De p t . gr o s s ( s . f . ) pl u s 2 3 % bld g . su p p o r t No t e s 50 0 Pa t r o l / C o m m u n i t y P o l i c i n g ( p a r t i a l ) 3 , 6 5 9 4 , 5 0 1 Ap p r o x . e x i s t . a v a i l a b l e L e v e l A s p a c e (g ro s s ) 13 , 0 0 0 60 0 De t e n t i o n 3 , 2 9 9 4 , 0 5 8 en t i r e l u n c h r o o m 1 , 4 8 0 90 0 Pr o p e r t y a n d E v i d e n c e 4 , 8 1 6 5 , 9 2 4 en t i r e c e n t r a l f i l i n g 1, 9 7 0 10 0 0 Pr o p e r t y W a r e h o u s e 1 , 4 2 3 1 , 7 5 0 en t i r e p r i n t s h o p / m a i l r o o m 2, 2 3 1 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t ( p a r t i a l ) 1, 9 9 1 2 , 4 4 9 To t a l gro s s L e v e l A a r e a a v a i l a b l e (no t i n c l u d i n g p a r k i n g) 18 , 6 8 1 15 , 1 8 8 1 8 , 6 8 1 ex c e s s L e v e l A p r o gra m a r e a : (0) 10 0 Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n , P e r s o n n e l a n d T r a i n i n g 2 , 3 3 8 2 , 8 7 6 40 0 R e c o r d s a n d I n f o r m a t i o n 2 , 7 5 8 3 , 3 9 2 Ap p r o x . a v a i l a b l e f i r s t f l o o r p o l i c e s p a c e : 9 , 6 0 0 50 0 P a t r o l / C o m m u n i t y P o l i c i n g ( o f f i c e s / w o r k s t a t i o n s ) 2 , 5 6 0 3 , 1 4 9 Ap p r o x . a v a i l a b l e f i r s t f l o o r c o u n c i l s p a c e : 4 0 8 0 70 0 T r a f f i c / P a r k i n g 1, 5 0 3 1 , 8 4 9 To t a l gro s s f i r s t f l o o r a v a i l a b l e : 13 , 6 8 0 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t (pa r t i a l ) 2, 3 5 0 2 , 8 9 1 11 , 5 0 9 1 4 , 1 5 6 ex c e s s f i r s t f l o o r a r e a : (47 6 ) 10 0 Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n , P e r s o n n e l a n d T r a i n i n g 1 5 6 1 9 2 Ap p r o x . a v a i l a b l e s e c o n d f l o o r s p a c e : 9 , 6 0 0 20 0 Dis p a t c h ( C o m m u n i c a t i o n s ) 3 , 3 0 6 4 , 0 6 6 30 0 EO C 2 , 9 1 3 3 , 5 8 3 80 0 In v e s t i g a t i o n s 3 , 8 0 7 4 , 6 8 3 Ap p r o x . a v a i l a b l e s e c o n d f l o o r c o u n c i l s p a c e : 4 0 8 0 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t ( p a r t i a l ) 9 1 6 1 , 1 2 7 To t a l gro s s s e c o n d f l o o r a r e a a v a i l a b l e : 13 , 6 8 0 11 , 0 9 8 1 3 , 6 5 1 un u s e d s e c o n d f l o o r a r e a : 29 Pa l o A l t o P o l i c e D e p a r t m e n t S p a c e A l l o c a t i o n O n s i t e - O p t i o n B FIRST FLOOR SECOND FLOOR Se c o n d F l o o r S u b t o t a l LEVEL A Le v e l A S u b t o t a l Fir s t F l o o r S u b t o t a l 237,21% (66(17,$/6(59,&(6%8,/',1* :,7+$//)$&,/,7,(6216,7(:,7+,1(;,67,1*%8,/',1* (2& ,19(67,*$7,216 67$)) )$&,/,7< 6833257 3$752/ &20081,7< 32/,&,1* $'0,1,675$7,21 75$)),& 3$5.,1* 67$)) )$&,/,7< 6833257 5(&25'6 ,1)250$7,21 3$752/ &20081,7< 32/,&,1*3523(57< (9,'(1&( 3523(57< :$5(+286( '(7(17,21 67$)) )$&,/,7< 6833257 )25( 6 7 $ 9 ( 1 8 ( ',63$7&+ $'0,1,675$7,21 Lo c a t i o n # Pr o g r a m De p t . gr o s s ( s . f . ) plu s 2 3 % bl d g . su p p o r t No t e s 50 0 Pa t r o l / C o m m u n i t y P o l i c i n g ( p a r t i a l ) 3 , 6 5 9 4 , 5 0 1 Ap p r o x . e x i s t . a v a i l a b l e L e v e l A s p a c e ( g r o s s ) 1 3 , 0 0 0 60 0 De t e n t i o n 3 , 2 9 9 4 , 0 5 8 en t i r e l u n c h r o o m 1 , 4 8 0 90 0 Pr o p e r t y a n d E v i d e n c e 4 , 8 1 6 5 , 9 2 4 en t i r e c e n t r a l f i l i n g 1 , 9 7 0 10 0 0 Pr o p e r t y W a r e h o u s e 1 , 4 2 3 1 , 7 5 0 en t i r e p r i n t s h o p / m a i l r o o m 2 , 2 3 1 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t ( p a r t i a l ) 1, 9 9 1 2 , 4 4 9 To t a l g r o s s a r e a a v a i l a b l e ( n o t i n c l u d i n g p a r k i n g ) 1 8 , 6 8 1 15 , 1 8 8 1 8 , 6 8 1 ex c e s s L e v e l A p r o g r a m a r e a : (0 ) 30 0 E O C 2, 9 1 3 3 , 5 8 3 40 0 R e c o r d s a n d I n f o r m a t i o n 2, 7 5 8 3 , 3 9 2 50 0 P a t r o l / C o m m u n i t y P o l i c i n g ( o f f i c e s / w o r k s t a t i o n s ) 2, 5 6 0 3 , 1 4 9 70 0 T r a f f i c / P a r k i n g 1, 5 0 3 1 , 8 4 9 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t (pa r t i a l ) 2, 2 8 3 2 , 8 0 8 Ap p r o x . a v a i l a b l e f i r s t f l o o r s p a c e : 1 4 , 7 8 1 12 , 0 1 7 1 4 , 7 8 1 ex c e s s f i r s t f l o o r p r o g r a m a r e a : 0 10 0 Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n , P e r s o n n e l a n d T r a i n i n g 2 , 4 9 4 3 , 0 6 8 20 0 D i s p a t c h ( C o m m u n i c a t i o n s ) 3, 3 0 6 4 , 0 6 6 80 0 In v e s t i g a t i o n s 3 , 8 0 7 4 , 6 8 3 Ap p r o x . a v a i l a b l e s e c o n d f l o o r s p a c e : 1 3 , 0 2 7 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t ( p a r t i a l ) 9 8 4 1 , 2 1 0 10 , 5 9 1 1 3 , 0 2 7 ex c e s s s e c o n d f l o o r p r o g r a m a r e a : 0 SECOND FLOOR Se c o n d F l o o r S u b t o t a l Pa l o A l t o P o l i c e D e p a r t m e n t S p a c e A l l o c a t i o n : E s s e n t i a l S e r v i c e s B u i l d i n g w i t h T w o S t o r y A d d i t i o n - O p t i o n C 1 LEVEL A Le v e l A S u b t o t a l FIRST FLOOR Fi r s t F l o o r S u b t o t a l 237,21& (66(17,$/6(59,&(6%8,/',1* :,7+7:26725<$'',7,21 ,19(67,*$7,216 67$)) )$&,/,7<6833257 ',63$7&+ $'0,1,675$7,21 (2& 5(&25'6 ,1)250$7,21 3$752/ &20081,7< 32/,&,1* 67$)) )$&,/,7< 6833257 75$)),& 3$5.,1* '(7(17,21 3523(57< :$5(+286( )25( 6 7 $ 9 ( 1 8 ( 3$752/ &20081,7< 32/,&,1* 3523(57< (9,'(1&( 67$)) )$&,/,7< 6833257 Lo c a t i o n # Pr o g r a m De p t . gro s s (s . f . ) plu s 2 3 % bl d g . su p p o r t No t e s 50 0 Pa t r o l / C o m m u n i t y P o l i c i n g ( p a r t i a l ) 3 , 6 5 9 4 , 5 0 1 Ap p r o x . e x i s t . a v a i l a b l e L e v e l A s p a c e ( g r o s s ) 1 3 , 0 0 0 60 0 De t e n t i o n 3 , 2 9 9 4 , 0 5 8 en t i r e l u n c h r o o m 1 , 4 8 0 90 0 Pr o p e r t y a n d E v i d e n c e 4 , 8 1 6 5 , 9 2 4 en t i r e c e n t r a l f i l i n g 1 , 9 7 0 10 0 0 Pr o p e r t y W a r e h o u s e 1 , 4 2 3 1 , 7 5 0 en t i r e p r i n t s h o p / m a i l r o o m 2 , 2 3 1 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t ( p a r t i a l ) 1, 9 9 1 2 , 4 4 9 To t a l g r o s s a r e a a v a i l a b l e ( n o t i n c l u d i n g p a r k i n g ) 1 8 , 6 8 1 15 , 1 8 8 1 8 , 6 8 1 ex c e s s L e v e l A p r o g r a m a r e a : (0 ) 20 0 D i s p a t c h ( C o m m u n i c a t i o n s ) 3, 3 0 6 4 , 0 6 6 30 0 E O C 2, 9 1 3 3 , 5 8 3 40 0 R e c o r d s a n d I n f o r m a t i o n 2, 7 5 8 3 , 3 9 2 50 0 P a t r o l / C o m m u n i t y P o l i c i n g ( o f f i c e s / w o r k s t a t i o n s ) 2, 5 6 0 3 , 1 4 9 70 0 T r a f f i c / P a r k i n g 1, 5 0 3 1 , 8 4 9 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t (pa r t i a l ) 98 4 1 , 2 1 0 Ap p r o x . a v a i l a b l e f i r s t f l o o r s p a c e : 1 7 , 2 5 0 14 , 0 2 4 1 7 , 2 5 0 ex c e s s f i r s t f l o o r a r e a : 0 10 0 Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n , P e r s o n n e l a n d T r a i n i n g 2 , 4 9 4 3 , 0 6 8 80 0 In v e s t i g a t i o n s 3 , 8 0 7 4 , 6 8 3 Ap p r o x . a v a i l a b l e s e c o n d f l o o r s p a c e : 9 , 6 0 0 12 0 0 St a f f & F a c i l i t y S u p p o r t ( p a r t i a l ) 2 , 2 8 3 2 , 8 0 8 8, 5 8 4 1 0 , 5 5 8 ex c e s s s e c o n d f l o o r p r o g r a m a r e a : (9 5 8 ) SECOND FLOOR Se c o n d F l o o r S u b t o t a l FIRST FLOOR Pa l o A l t o P o l i c e D e p a r t m e n t S p a c e A l l o c a t i o n : E s s e n t i a l S e r v i c e s B u i l d i n g w i t h O n e - S t o r y A d d i t i o n - O p t i o n C 2 LEVEL A Le v e l A S u b t o t a l Fi r s t F l o o r S u b t o t a l 2SWLRQ& (66(17,$/6(59,&(6%8,/',1* :,7+21(6725<$'',7,21 ,19(67,*$7,216 67$)) )$&,/,7< 6833257 $'0,1,675$7,21 ',63$7&+ 3$752/ &20081,7< 32/,&,1* (2& 5(&25'6 ,1)250$7,21 75$)),&3$5.,1* 3$752/ &20081,7< 32/,&,1* 67$)) )$&,/,7< 6833257 3523(57< (9,'(1&( 3523(57< :$5(+286( 67$)) )$&,/,7< 6833257 '(7(17,21 )25( 6 7 $ 9 ( 1 8 ( UNDERGROUND LEVELS ABOVE GROUND LEVELS EXISTING POLICE FACILITY EXISTING COUNCIL CHAMBERS RA M O N A STRE E T FO R E S T AV E N U E EXISTING POLICE FACILITY BRYA N T STREET CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS 3D CONCRETE SHEAR WALL DIAGRAM AT OPTIONS B, C3, C4, C5, AND C6 SIMILAR AT OPTIONS C1 AND C2 Do w n t o w n L i b r a r y C it y H a ll 242 220-244240 250 275 2 270 66 8 70 0 70 0 218 50.0'' 225.0' 21 8 . 0 ' 200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0' 137.5' 11 2 5 ' 150.0' 22 5 . 0 ' 85.0' 66 . 0 ' 66 . 0 ' 200.0' 150.0' 200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0'200.0' ' (ABANDOct-1970) (ABANDOct-1970) (ABANDOct-1970) 1"C U (A B A N D Feb -1 9 4 9) 31 ' CUT&ABAND 1968-Mar-01 CUT&ABAND CUT&ABAND1968-Mar-01 2. " D . C . 3" A M A R 6 8 4." BWP GAS (ABAND) 2."BWP GAS (ABAND) FEB66 ABS 51' 3/4" 10 5 ' 3/4"JUN40 3/4" MAY38 48' 1 5' 5' 3' 1/2" 17' OCT70 P C C10." S T O R M P C C S T O R M10." S T OR MPCC10." STORMPCC12." S T O R M10." P C C 10."STORMPCC 1 2." S TO R MPCC P C C12." S T O R M 1 2." P C C S T OR M 12."CMP STORM ACB-0 1 7-6-0 5 ACB-0 1 7-6-0 7 C B -01 7-6-0 6 A C B-0 17-6-08 A ACB-0 17-6-04 ACB-017 -5 -2 3 ACB-0 1 7-5-2 4 C B -017-6-0 1 A C B -017-6-0 2 A I IN-0 1 7-6-9 3 IN IN-0 1 7-6-3 1 IN IN -01 7-6-3 2 S D MH-017-6-03 4" VCFEB49 4" 91' 4" ABS May-2004 4" AC Apr-1970 6" P E A u g - 2 0 0 6 200'151' 149' 102' 23 2 ' 20 0 ' 15 1 ' 14 9 ' 10 2 ' 10 0 ' 322' 320' 53' 51' 51'200' 151' 149' 103' 101' 50 ' 296' 67 ' 5. 5 " P E S A N S E W E R A B M # 1 1 8 7 J u l - 1 9 9 7 8." PVC SAN SEWER ABM #1245 Aug-2006 CO CO CO CO CO 318' 407' S17-6-3/A04 S 17 - 6 - 1 / A 0 4 S 17-5-18/A04 S17-6-5100' 20 2 ' 6"SANSEWER XXX X X X X 80'1"PE05-10-200 3/4"ABS01-19-1966 2X 3 P V C B U S H I N G 3" P V C G A S 13 9 ' 2 " P E 0 6 - 1 3 - 2 0 0 6 3' 2" PE 4"PEGAS ABM#12412006 15' 3/8"ABS 1" PE11-1989 16' /4"BWP 58' 1/4"ABS1969 3/4" BWP 12-01-1978 38' 64'1"PE Nov-1990 4"PVC GAS 4"PEGAS ABM#1237-2005 PE 2"PE GAS2" P E 3"87' 8"CIP WATER 8"ACP WATER 6" C I P W A T E R 8"ACWATER 6" CIPWATER 6"PVCWATER ABM#1184-98 6"PVC WATER ABM#1184-98 6 CIP WATER 6"ACPWATER 11 8 5 1 1 8 6 W G G G M M M M M M M M M M S Th i s m a p i s a p r o d u c t o f t h e Ci t y o f P a l o A l t o G I S Th i s d o c u m e n t i s a g r a p h i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o n l y o f b e s t a v a i l a b l e s o u r c e s . 0' 49 ' Existing City Utilities on Forest CITY O F PALO A L TO I N C O R P O R AT E D C ALIFOR N I A P a l o A l t o T h e C i t y o f A P R IL 16 1 894 Th e C i t y o f P a l o A l t o a s s u m e s n o r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a n y e r r o r s . © 1 9 8 9 t o 2 0 1 0 C i t y o f P a l o A l t o mb r u n n i , 2 0 1 0 - 0 3 - 0 8 0 9 : 0 3 : 1 4 Blo c k B o o k W / N e w E n g W a t e r & G a s ( \ \ c c - m a p s \ g i s $ \ g i s \ a d m i n \ P e r s o n a l \ g s v i e w . m d b ) Fu e l T a n k Fi b e r o p t i c l i n e ( a p p r o x . l o c a t i o n ) Ap p r o x . 6 f e e t f r o m c u r b e d g e t o c e n t e r o f w a t e r l i n e Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 35 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 7.0 Detailed Cost Summary PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OVERALL COST PLAN SUMMARY GFA $/SF $,000 1. California Building Code Upgrades 37,881 212 8,028,220 2. New Essential Offsite Facilities 10,263 382 3,919,209 3. Removed Civic Center Services 5,681 350 1,988,350 1 LS 350,000 100 30,250 3,025,000 6. Leased Office Space During Construction 6a. Lease Office Space - Class B for 17 Months @ $4/SF 23,000 68 1,564,000 6b. TI upgrades on Leased building 23,000 75 1,725,000 6c. Relocation costs 1 Allow 50,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 20,599,779 Program and Construction Management - 3% Allowance 617,993 Design and Engineering Architectural and engineering - 10% Allowance 1,903,578 Reimbursables - 1% Allowance 190,358 TOTAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 2,711,929 Permits and plan check fees 1% allowance 173,108 Haz Mat Test and analyze existing structure Allowance 50,000 Testing and Special Inspections Allowance 100,000 Parking in-lieu fee 61 Spaces 30250 1,845,250 FF&E Allowance 3,000,000 Relocation costs - Radio infrastructure Allowance 1,750,000 Contingency 25.00%7,129,030 TOTAL Permits, testing, AND CONTINGENCY 14,068,869 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 37,380,577 OPTION A: CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE WITH OFFSITE FACILITIES May 5, 2010 4. Parking Option: Redesign civic center for parking garage for police department 5. Replace city parking stalls lost from parking option on alternative site New Building on green field site to replace "Level A" removed City Services Page 1 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE UPGRADES SECTION 1 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 0%0.26 10 Structure 5%10.60 402 Exterior Enclosure 1%1.58 60 Roofing 0%0.61 23 Sub-total - Shell & Core 6%13.06 495 Interior Walls 52% 109.86 4,162 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 0%0.00 0 ` Sub-total - Internal Finishes 52%109.86 4,162 Equipment & Specialties 3%6.60 250 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 3%7.00 265 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 6%13.60 515 Plumbing 0% 0.00 0 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%17.44 661 Electrical 5% 11.31 428 Fire Protection 2% 4.55 172 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 16%33.29 1,261 Sub-total - Construction 80%169.81 6,432 Site Preparation & Demolition 3%7.01 266 Landscaping 0%0.00 0 Site Utilities 2%3.96 150 Sub-total - Sitework 5%10.97 416 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%180.78 6,848 General Conditions 10.00%9%18.08 685 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00%5%9.94 377 Bond & Insurance 1.50%1%3.13 119 Sub-total 100%211.93 8,028 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%211.93 8,028 May 5, 2010 May, 2010 GFA: 37,881 SF Page 2 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN SUBSTRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structural Allowance 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Substructure:10,000 STRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Vertical Structure Columns and posts 5500 1-1/2" Steel Pipe Columns 3.00 EA 2,500.00 7,500 Column base plates, including bolts and grout 5500 Columns - 4"x4"3 EA 500.00 1,500 5500 Columns for misc.1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 Horizontal Structure Metal Decks3300Metal deck lay-out 120 MH 120 14,400 3300 Metal deck 3"9,600 SF 5.00 48,000 3300 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Cast in Place Concrete 3300 440 LF 18.00 7,920 3300 110 SF 18.00 1,980 3300 103 CY 325.00 33,511 3300 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 3300 80 HR 65.00 5,200 Fireproofing to metal deck 9,600 SF 4.00 38,400 Steel Structure - upgrades 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 6.2 TON 5,000.00 30,780 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 10.0 TON 5,000.00 50,220 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,550 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,395 5500 L5x3x3/8 2.2 TON 5,500.00 11,858 5500 Misc Connections 2.8 TON 5,500.00 15,630 Fireproofing to steel 46.8 TON 400.00 18,715 5500 Misc structure and bracing 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 5500 Misc Connections at perimeter & other walls 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 5500 Miscellaneous supports, structures, connections, 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000 5500 Piping supports not shown 1 ALLOW 10,000.00 10,000 6000 Bracing and hardware 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Structure:401,558 Pump, place, finish and cure Concrete clean-up May 5, 2010 Openings through metal deck - allowance for small Metal Deck Edge Form Edge Form at Deck Openings 3 1/2" Lt. Wt. Conc. On Mtl. Deck Page 3 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 EXTERIOR ENCLOSURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Window upgrade allowance 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 Exterior wall treatment 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 60,000 ROOFING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Patch & repair exisiting for new penetrations 1 Allow 15,000.00 15,000 Caulking and sealing - allowance 1 Allow 8,000.00 8,000 23,000 INTERIOR WALLS Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 7200 Tenant Improvements - 40% office 60% open office mix 6000 Level A 18,681 SF 120.00 2,241,720 Level 1 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 8100 Level 2 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 4,161,720 FLOOR, WALL & CEILING FINISHES Unit Rate Total ($) Included with TI costs EQUIPMENT & SPECIALTIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 LEED - Gold Rated (3% Construction Costs)1 Allow 250,000.00 250,000 250,000 Sub-Total for Interior Walls: Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Page 4 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 STAIRS & VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 11000 3 STOP 65,000.00 195,000 11000 2 EA 30,000.00 60,000 11000 2 EA 5,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation:265,000 PLUMBING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Included with TI costs HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 37,881 SF 15.00 568,215 HVAC for P&E 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 HVAC - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.50 42,422 660,637 ELECTRICAL Unit Rate Total ($) Electrical allowance for infrastructure 37,881 SF 10.00 378,810 Electrical - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.75 49,492 250 kW Generator Allow 100,000.00 428,302 FIRE PROTECTION Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 37,881 SF 4.55 172,283 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:172,283 HVAC allowance to include piping, ductwork & controls, testing & commissioning Elevator - 3 stop - hydraulic Add new Stairs Upgrade Existing Stairs Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: Page 5 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Demolition Works Interior Walls Remove wall, gypsum wall board, metal stud 8,325 SF 1.25 10,406 12" Concrete walls 1,200 SF 12.00 14,400 CMU wall 4,800 SF 10.00 48,000 Flooring Remove resilient flooring 25,781 SF 0.50 12,891 Remove tile 2,500 SF 1.00 2,500 Ceiling Remove ceiling, suspended grid - Assume 70%19,797 SF 1.50 29,695 Remove ceiling, hard lid -Assume 30%8,484 SF 1.50 12,726 Miscellaneous Salvage existing furniture and relocate 400 MH 60.00 24,000 Core-drilling 1 Allow 20,000.00 20,000 Remove office cubicles 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Abatement & asbestos removal 1 Allow 35,000.00 35,000 Protection of existing facilities 1 Allow 25,000.00 25,000 Demolition Accessories Debris bin, chute, dump charges 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 Palo Alto Green Building recycling Program Premium 1 LS 6,000.00 6,000 265,618 LANDSCAPING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticipated in this section NIC SITE UTILITIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Upgrade site utilities at Civic Center 1 Allow 150,000.00 150,000 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:150,000 Sub-Total for Landscaping: Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Demolition: Page 6 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OPTION A: UTILIZING OFFSITE FACILITIES SECTION 2 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 7% 25.00 257 Structure 17%65.00 667 Exterior Enclosure 9%35.00 359 Roofing 3%12.00 123 Sub-total - Shell & Core 36%137.00 1,406 Interior Walls 7%25.00 257 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 3%12.00 123 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 10%37.00 380 Equipment & Specialties 0%0.00 0 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 0%0.00 0 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 0%0.00 0 Plumbing 4% 15.00 154 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%32.00 328 Electrical 14%54.74 562 Fire Protection 1%5.00 51 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 28%106.74 1,096 Sub-total - Construction 74%280.74 2,881 Demolition 0% 0.00 0 Site Preparation & Landscaping 8%30.00 308 Site Utilities 4%15.00 154 Sub-total - Sitework 12%45.00 462 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%325.74 3,343 General Conditions 10.00%9%32.57 334 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00%5%17.92 184 Bond & Insurance 1.50%1%5.64 58 Sub-total 100%381.88 3,919 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%381.88 3,919 September 16, 2009 September, 2009 GFA: 10,263 SF Page 7 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OPTION A: UTILIZING OFFSITE FACILITIES SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN Substructure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Substructure for Essential Service Building 10,263 SF 25.00 256,575 Sub-Total for Substructure:256,575 Structure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structure - Horizontal & Vertical 10,263 SF 65.00 667,095 Sub-Total for Structure:667,095 Exterior Enclosure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Includes glazing, exterior walls & stucco 10,263 35.00 359,205 359,205 Roofing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Built up roof 10,263 12.00 123,156 123,156 Interior Walls Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Wall insulation, interior walls, partitions & doors 10,263 25.00 256,575 256,575 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) . Floors, Bases, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 10,263 SF 12.00 123,156 123,156 Equipment & Specialties Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 Owner requested equipment in summary Stairs & Vertical Transportation Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticipated in this section Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation: Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: May 5, 2010 Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Page 8 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OPTION A: UTILIZING OFFSITE FACILITIES SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 Plumbing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Fixtures, piping & accessories 10,263 SF 15.00 153,945 153,945 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) HVAC including piping, ductwork and controls 10,263 SF 32.00 328,416 328,416 Electrical Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Power, lighting, FA, telephone & communications 10,263 SF 45.00 461,835 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 561,835 Fire Protection Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protectionOrdinary Hazard System 10,263 SF 5.00 51,315 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:51,315 Demolition Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticipated in this section Site Preparation & Landscaping Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Grading, site concrete, paving & softscape 20,526 SF 15.00 307,890 307,890 Site Utilities Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Water mains, UG drainage piping, gas piping 20,526 SF 7.50 153,945 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:153,945 Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Landscaping: Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Demolition: Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: Page 9 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OVERALL COST PLAN SUMMARY GFA $/SF $ 46,012 236 10,846,456$ 2. Removed Civic Center Services 5,681 350 1,988,350$ 4,080 250 1,020,000$ 1 LS 350,000$ 108 30,250 3,267,000$ 5. Leased Office Space During Construction 5a. Lease Office Space - Class B for 30 Months @ $4/SF 23,000 120 2,760,000$ 5b. TI upgrades on Leased building 23,000 75 1,725,000$ 5c. Relocation costs 1 Allow 50,000$ TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 21,956,806$ Program and Construction Management - 3% Allowance 658,704$ Design and Engineering Architectural and engineering - 10% Allowance 1,919,681$ Reimbursables - 1% Allowance 191,968$ TOTAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 2,770,353$ Permits and plan check fees 1% Allowance 174,718$ Haz Mat Test and analyze existing structure Allowance 50,000$ Testing and Special Inspections Allowance 100,000$ 94 Spaces 30250 2,843,500$ FF&E Allowance 3,000,000$ Misc Relocation Costs - Inc. radio infrastructure Allowance -$ Contingency 25.00%7,719,836$ TOTAL Permits, testing, AND CONTINGENCY 13,888,054$ DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 38,615,212$ OPTION B: ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING WITH ALL FACILITIES ONSITE WITHIN EXISTING BUILDING Palo Alto municipal code - Chapter 16.57 ($30,250 for every 250sq.ft - Council Chambers 2nd story) May 5, 2010 3. Parking Option: Redesign Civic Center Public Parking 4. Replace city parking spots lost from Parking option 1. Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite 2b. Upgrades to Existing City Building for Council Chambers (Salvage existing chamber furniture as possible) 2a. New Building on green field site to replace "Level A" removed City Services Page 1 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING SECTION 1 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 1%2.48 114 Structure 13%30.36 1,397Exterior Enclosure 0%1.09 50 Roofing 0%0.70 32 Sub-total - Shell & Core 15%34.62 1,593 Interior Walls 46%108.11 4,974 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 0%0.00 0 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 46%108.11 4,974 Equipment & Specialties 3%6.52 300 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 3%6.32 291 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 5%12.84 591 Plumbing 0% 0.00 0 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 7%17.14 789 Electrical 6%13.40 617 Fire Protection 2%4.55 209 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 15%35.09 1,615 Sub-total - Construction 81%190.66 8,773 Site Preparation & Demolition 3%7.16 329 Landscaping 0%0.00 0 Site Utilities 1%3.26 150 Sub-total - Sitework 4%10.42 479 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%201.08 9,252 General Conditions 10.00%9%20.11 925 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00%5%11.06 509 Bond & Insurance 1.50%1%3.48 160 Sub-total 100%235.73 10,846 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%235.73 10,846 Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building May 5, 2010 May, 2010 GFA: 46,012 SF Page 2 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN SUBSTRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate 1 - 4 Structural upgrades to exisitng foundations New Shear wall foundations 106 CY 750.00 79,200 Sawcutting, excavation, and misc.1 LS 35,000.00 35,000 Sub-Total for Substructure:114,200 STRUCTURE Unit Rate Total ($) Vertical Structure Columns and posts 1-1/2" Steel Pipe Columns 3.00 EA 2,500.00 7,500 Concrete Columns 24" Concrete Columns (12' height)6.00 EA 10,000.00 60,000 Column base plates, including bolts and groutColumns - 4"x4"3 EA 500.00 1,500 Columns for misc. 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 Shear Walls 11,760 SF 55.00 646,800 Horizontal Structure Metal Decks Metal deck lay-out 180 MH 120 21,600 Metal deck 3"13,680 SF 5.00 68,400 1 Allow 16,000.00 16,000 Cast in Place Concrete 700 LF 25.00 17,500 175 SF 25.00 4,375 147 CY 450.00 66,120 13,680 SF 2.50 34,200 120 HR 65.00 7,800 Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building May 5, 2010 24" Concrete Shear Wall 3 1/2" Lt. Wt. Conc. On Mtl. Deck Pump, place, finish and cure Concrete clean-up Openings through metal deck - allowance for small Metal Deck Edge Form Edge Form at Deck Openings Page 3 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building May 5, 2010 Councel Chambers Ground Level Level Concrete Foundation 76 CY 400.00 30,222 4,080 SF 2.50 10,200 Fireproofing to metal deck 13,680 SF 4.00 54,720 Steel Structure - upgrades W8 x 18 Beams 6.2 TON 5,000.00 30,780 W8 x 18 Beams 10.0 TON 5,000.00 50,220 W8 x 31 Girder 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,550 W8 x 31 Girder 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,395 W12 x 26 Beams 1.0 TON 5,000.00 5,200 W21 x 50 beams 1.0 TON 5,000.00 5,000 W24 x 55 beams 7.7 TON 5,000.00 38,500 W12 x 26 Beams 0.5 TON 5,000.00 2,600 W21 x 50 beams 0.5 TON 5,000.00 2,500 W27 x 84 Girder 2.5 TON 5,000.00 12,600 W24 x 76 Girder 0.9 TON 5,000.00 4,560 W24 x 78 Girder 2.3 TON 5,000.00 11,700 W18 x 35 Girder 1.1 TON 5,000.00 5,250 L5x3x3/8 2.2 TON 5,500.00 11,858 Misc Connections 5.5 TON 5,500.00 30,135 Fireproofing to steel 67.0 TON 400.00 26,802 Misc structure and bracing 13,680 SF 2.50 34,200 Misc Connections at perimeter & other walls 1 LS 16,000.00 16,000 Miscellaneous supports, structures, connections, etc.1 LS 30,000.00 30,000 Piping supports not shown 1 ALLOW 10,000.00 10,000 Bracing and hardware 1 LS 14,000.00 14,000 Sub-Total for Structure:1,396,787 EXTERIOR ENCLOSURE Unit Rate Total ($) Upgrade windows at new second floor 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 50,000Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Pump, place, finish and cure Page 4 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building May 5, 2010 ROOFING Unit Rate Total ($) Patch & repair exisiting for new penetrations 1 Allow 20,000.00 20,000 Caulking and sealing - allowance 1 Allow 12,000.00 12,000 32,000 INTERIOR WALLS Unit Rate Total ($) Tenant Improvements - 40% office 60% open office mix PD - Level A 18,652 SF 120.00 2,238,240 PD - Level 1 13,680 SF 100.00 1,368,000 PD - Level 2 13,680 SF 100.00 1,368,000 4,974,240 FLOOR, WALL & CEILING FINISHES Unit Rate Total ($) See Interior Walls section for Tenant Improvement costs EQUIPMENT & SPECIALTIES Unit Rate Total ($) LEED - Gold Rated (3% Construction Costs)1 Allow 300,000.00 300,000 300,000Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Page 5 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building May 5, 2010 STAIRS & VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION Unit Rate Total ($) 11000 3 STOP 65,000.00 195,000 11000 3 EA 30,000.00 90,000 11000 2 EA 3,000.00 6,000 Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation:291,000 PLUMBING Unit Rate Total ($) Included with TI costs HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING Unit Rate Total ($) 46,012 SF 15.00 690,180 HVAC - P&E 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 32,332 SF 1.50 48,498 788,678 ELECTRICAL Unit Rate Total ($) Electrical allowance for infrastructure 46,012 SF 10.00 460,120 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 Electrical - Safeoff and Demo 32,332 SF 1.75 56,581 616,701 FIRE PROTECTION Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 46,012 SF 4.55 209,263 Upgrade Existing Stairs Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: HVAC - Safeoff and Demo HVAC allowance to include piping, ductwork & controls, Elevator - 3 stop - hydraulic Add new Stairs Page 6 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building May 5, 2010 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:209,263 Page 7 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building May 5, 2010 SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION Unit Rate Total ($) Demolition Works Interior Walls Remove wall, gypsum wall board, metal stud 9,765 SF 1.25 12,206 12" Concrete walls 1,200 SF 12.00 14,400 CMU wall 4,800 SF 10.00 48,000 Flooring Remove resilient flooring 32,332 SF 0.50 16,166 Remove tile 2,500 SF 1.50 3,750 Ceiling Remove ceiling, suspended grid 22,632 SF 1.50 33,949 Remove ceiling, hard lid 9,700 SF 1.50 14,549 MiscellaneousSalvage existing furniture and relocate 420 MH 60.00 25,200 Core-drilling - Includes Scanning 1 Allow 35,000.00 35,000 Remove office cubicles 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Abatement and asbestos 1 Allow 45,000.00 45,000 Protection of existing facilities 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 Demolition Accessories Debris bin, chute, dump charges 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 Palo Alto Green Building recycling Program Premium 1 LS 6,000.00 6,000 329,220 LANDSCAPING Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticipated in this section NIC Sub-Total for Landscaping: Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Demolition: Page 8 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN Option B: Essential Services Building with All Facilities Onsite within Existing Building May 5, 2010 SITE UTILITIES Unit Rate Total ($) Upgrade site utilities at Civic Center 1 Allow 150,000.00 150,000 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:150,000 Page 9 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OVERALL COST PLAN SUMMARY GFA $/SF $ 1. Essential Services Building Upgrades 37,881 232 8,779,656 2. Two Story Addition at (E) Police Building 8,068 469 3,780,549 3. Removed Civic Center Services 5,681 350 1,988,350 108 30,250 3,267,000 1 LS 350,000 6. Leased Office Space During Construction 6a. Lease Office Space - Class B for 17 Months @ $4/SF 23,000 68 1,564,000 6b. TI upgrades on Leased building 23,000 75 1,725,000 6c. Relocation costs 1 Allow 50,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 21,504,556 Program and Construction Management - 3% Allowance 376,806 Design and EngineeringArchitectural and engineering - 10% Allowance 1,256,021 Reimbursables - 1% Allowance 125,602 TOTAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 1,758,429 Permits and plan check fees 1% allowance 125,602 Haz Mat Test and analyze existing structure Allowance 0 Testing and Special Inspections Allowance 150,000 Parking in-lieu fee 96 Spaces 30250 2,904,000 FF&E Allowance 3,000,000 Misc Relocation Costs - Inc. radio infrastructure Allowance 1,750,000 Contingency 25.00%7,798,147 TOTAL Permits, testing, AND CONTINGENCY 15,727,749 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 38,990,733 5. Parking Option: Redesign civic center for parking garage for police department New Building on green field site to replace "Level A" removed City Services 4. Replace city parking stalls lost from parking option on alternative site OPTION C1: TWO-STORY BUILDING ADDITION May 5, 2010 Page 1 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 1%3.01 114 Structure 8%19.44 737 Exterior Enclosure 1% 1.32 50 Roofing 0%0.61 23 Sub-total - Shell & Core 11%24.39 924 Interior Walls 48% 110.99 4,204 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 0%0.00 0 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 48%110.99 4,204 Equipment & Specialties 3%7.92 300 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 3%7.00 265 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 6%14.92 565 Plumbing 0% 0.00 0 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%17.44 661 Electrical 6% 13.95 528 Fire Protection 2% 4.55 172 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 16%35.93 1,361 Sub-total - Construction 80%186.22 7,054 Site Preparation & Demolition 3%7.52 285 Landscaping 0%0.00 0 Site Utilities 2%3.96 150 Sub-total - Sitework 5%11.48 435 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%197.70 7,489 General Conditions 10.00%9% 19.77 749 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00% 5% 10.87 412 Bond & Insurance 1.50% 1% 3.43 130 Sub-total 100%231.77 8,780 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%231.77 8,780 May 5, 2010 May, 2010 GFA: 37,881 SF Page 2 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN SUBSTRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structural upgrades to exisitng foundationsNew Shear wall foundations 106 CY 750.00 79,200 Sawcutting, excavation, and misc.1 LS 35,000.00 35,000 Sub-Total for Substructure:114,200 STRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Vertical Structure Columns and posts 5500 1-1/2" Steel Pipe Columns 3.00 EA 2,500.00 7,500 Concrete Columns 24" Concrete Columns (12' height)6.00 EA 10,000.00 60,000 Column base plates, including bolts and grout 5500 Columns - 4"x4"3 EA 500.00 1,500 5500 Columns for misc.1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 Shear Walls 5,000 SF 55.00 275,000 Horizontal Structure Metal Decks3300Metal deck lay-out 120 MH 120 14,400 3300 Metal deck 3"9,600 SF 5.00 48,000 3300 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Cast in Place Concrete 3300 440 LF 18.00 7,920 3300 110 SF 18.00 1,980 3300 103 CY 325.00 33,511 3300 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 3300 80 HR 65.00 5,200 Fireproofing to metal deck 9,600 SF 4.00 38,400 Steel Structure - upgrades 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 6.2 TON 5,000.00 30,780 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 10.0 TON 5,000.00 50,220 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,550 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,395 5500 L5x3x3/8 2.2 TON 5,500.00 11,858 5500 Misc Connections 2.8 TON 5,500.00 15,630 Fireproofing to steel 46.8 TON 400.00 18,715 May 5, 2010 24" Concrete Shear Wall Openings through metal deck - allowance for small Metal Deck Edge Form Edge Form at Deck Openings 3 1/2" Lt. Wt. Conc. On Mtl. Deck Pump, place, finish and cure Concrete clean-up Page 3 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 5500 Misc structure and bracing 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 5500 Misc Connections at perimeter & other walls 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 5500 Miscellaneous supports, structures, connections, 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000 5500 Piping supports not shown 1 ALLOW 10,000.00 10,000 6000 Bracing and hardware 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Structure:736,558 EXTERIOR ENCLOSURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Window upgrade allowance 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 50,000 ROOFING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Patch & repair exisiting for new penetrations 1 Allow 15,000.00 15,000 Caulking and sealing - allowance 1 Allow 8,000.00 8,000 23,000 INTERIOR WALLS Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 7200 Tenant Improvements - 40% office 60% open office mix 6000 Level A 18,681 SF 120.00 2,241,720 Level 1 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 8100 Leve 2 - Mezzanine 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 Council Chamber RepairsFloors 4,080 SF 3.50 14,280Walls1,440 SF 3.50 5,040New paint 2,880 SF 1.00 2,880Ceiling4,080 SF 5.00 20,400 4,204,320 Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: Page 4 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 FLOOR, WALL & CEILING FINISHES Unit Rate Total ($) See Interior Walls section for Tenant Improvement costs EQUIPMENT & SPECIALTIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 LEED - Gold Rated (3% Construction Costs)1 Allow 300,000.00 300,000 300,000 STAIRS & VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 11000 3 STOP 65,000.00 195,000 11000 2 EA 30,000.00 60,000 11000 2 EA 5,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation:265,000 PLUMBING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Included with TI costs HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 37,881 SF 15.00 568,215 HVAC - P&E 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 HVAC - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.50 42,422 660,637 Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: HVAC allowance to include piping, ductwork & controls, testing & commissioning Elevator - 3 stop - hydraulic Add new Stairs Upgrade Existing Stairs Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Page 5 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 ELECTRICAL Unit Rate Total ($) Electrical allowance for infrastructure 37,881 SF 10.00 378,810 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 Electrical - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.75 49,492 528,302 FIRE PROTECTION Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 37,881 SF 4.55 172,283 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:172,283 SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Demolition Works Interior Walls Remove wall, gypsum wall board, metal stud 8,325 SF 1.25 10,406 12" Concrete walls 1,200 SF 12.00 14,400 CMU wall 4,800 SF 10.00 48,000 Flooring Remove resilient flooring 25,781 SF 0.50 12,891 Remove tile 2,500 SF 1.00 2,500 Council Chambers Carpet 4,080 SF 0.25 1,020 Ceiling Remove ceiling, suspended grid - Assume 70%19,797 SF 1.50 29,695 Remove ceiling, hard lid -Assume 30%8,484 SF 1.50 12,726 Council Chambers Suspended Hard lid 4,080 SF 2.00 8,160 Miscellaneous Salvage existing furniture and relocate 400 MH 60.00 24,000 Core-drilling 1 Allow 20,000.00 20,000 Remove office cubicles 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Abatement & asbestos removal 1 Allow 40,000.00 40,000 Protect Finishes in Council Chambers 1 Allow 5,000.00 5,000 Protection of existing facilities 1 Allow 25,000.00 25,000 Demolition Accessories Debris bin, chute, dump charges 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 Palo Alto Green Building recycling Program Premium 1 LS 6,000.00 6,000 284,798 Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Demolition: Page 6 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 LANDSCAPING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticipated in this section NIC SITE UTILITIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Upgrade site utilities at Civic Center 1 Allow 150,000.00 150,000 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:150,000 Sub-Total for Landscaping: Page 7 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Two Story Addition at (E) Police Building SECTION 2 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 14%65.00 524 Structure 18%85.00 686 Exterior Enclosure 7%35.00 282 Roofing 3%12.00 97 Sub-total - Shell & Core 42%197.00 1,589 Interior Walls 5% 25.00 202 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 3%12.00 97 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 8%37.00 299 Equipment & Specialties 3%12.39 100 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 2%9.30 75 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 5%21.69 175 Plumbing 3% 15.00 121 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%38.20 308 Electrical 12%57.39 463 Fire Protection 1%5.00 40 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 25%115.59 933 Sub-total - Construction 79%371.28 2,996 Demolition 2% 7.26 59 Site Preparation & Landscaping 1%6.05 49 Site Utilities 3%15.12 122 Sub-total - Sitework 6%28.42 229 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%399.71 3,225 General Conditions 10.00%9%39.97 322 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00%5%21.98 177 Bond & Insurance 1.50%1%6.92 56 Sub-total 100%468.59 3,781 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%468.59 3,781 May 5, 2010 September, 2009 GFA: 8,068 SF Page 8 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Two Story Addition at (E) Police Building SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN Substructure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Substructure for Essential Service Building 8,068 SF 65.00 524,420 Sub-Total for Substructure:524,420 Structure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structure - Horizontal & Vertical 8,068 SF 85.00 685,780 Sub-Total for Structure:685,780 Exterior Enclosure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Includes glazing, exterior walls & stucco 8,068 35.00 282,380 282,380 Roofing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Built up roof 8,068 12.00 96,816 96,816 Interior Walls Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Wall insulation, interior walls, partitions & doors 8,068 25.00 201,700 201,700 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) . Floors, Bases, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 8,068 SF 12.00 96,816 96,816 Equipment & Specialties Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 Miscellaneous equipment 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 100,000 Stairs & Vertical Transportation Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Two Stop Elevator 1 EA 75,000.00 75,000 Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation:75,000 Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: May 5, 2010 Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Page 9 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Two Story Addition at (E) Police Building SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 Plumbing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Fixtures, piping & accessories 8,068 SF 15.00 121,020 121,020 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) HVAC including piping, ductwork and controls 8,068 SF 32.00 258,176 HVAC - P&E 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 308,176 Electrical Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Power, lighting, FA, telephone & communications 8,068 SF 45.00 363,060 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 463,060 Fire Protection Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 8,068 SF 5.00 40,340 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:40,340 Demolition Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Existing building for tie in & site 4,879 SF 12.00 58,550 58,550 Site Preparation & Landscaping Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Grading, site concrete, paving & softscape 3,253 SF 15.00 48,792 48,792 Site Utilities Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Water mains, UG drainage piping, gas piping 4,879 SF 25.00 121,980 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:121,980 Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Landscaping: Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Demolition: Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: Page 10 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OVERALL COST PLAN SUMMARY GFA $/SF $,000 1. Essential Services Building Upgrades 37,881 233 8,838,273 2. One Story Addition at (E) Police Building 7,649 481 3,677,302 3. Removed Civic Center Services 5,631 350 1,970,850 113 30,250 3,418,250 1 LS 350,000 6. Leased Office Space During Construction 6a. Lease Office Space - Class B for 17 Months @ $4/SF 23,000 68 1,564,000 6b. TI upgrades on Leased building 23,000 75 1,725,000 6c. Relocation costs 1 Allow 50,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 21,593,675 Program and Construction Management - 3% Allowance 375,467 Design and EngineeringArchitectural and engineering - 10% Allowance 1,251,557 Reimbursables - 1% Allowance 125,156 TOTAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 1,752,180 Permits and plan check fees 1% allowance 125,156 Haz Mat Test and analyze existing structure Allowance 0 Testing and Special Inspections Allowance 150,000 Parking in-lieu fee 92 Spaces 30250 2,783,000 FF&E Allowance 3,000,000 Misc Relocation Costs - Inc. radio infrastructure Allowance 1,750,000 Contingency 25.00%7,788,503 TOTAL Permits, testing, AND CONTINGENCY 15,596,659 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 38,942,514 5. Parking Option: Redesign civic center for parking garage for police department 4. Replace city parking stalls lost from parking option on alternative site OPTION C2: ONE-STORY ADDITION May 5, 2010 New Building on green field site to replace "Level A" removed City Services Page 1 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 1%3.01 114 Structure 9%20.76 787 Exterior Enclosure 1%1.32 50 Roofing 0%0.61 23 Sub-total - Shell & Core 11%25.71 974 Interior Walls 48% 110.99 4,204 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 0%0.00 0 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 48%110.99 4,204 Equipment & Specialties 3%7.92 300 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 3%7.00 265 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 6%14.92 565 Plumbing 0% 0.00 0 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 7%17.44 661 Electrical 6% 13.95 528 Fire Protection 2% 4.55 172 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 15%35.93 1,361 Sub-total - Construction 80%187.54 7,104 Site Preparation & Demolition 3%7.52 285 Landscaping 0%0.00 0 Site Utilities 2%3.96 150 Sub-total - Sitework 5%11.48 435 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%199.02 7,539 General Conditions 10.00%9% 19.90 754 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00% 5% 10.95 415 Bond & Insurance 1.50% 1% 3.45 131 Sub-total 100%233.32 8,838 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%233.32 8,838 May 5, 2010 May, 2010 GFA: 37,881 SF Page 2 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN SUBSTRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structural upgrades to exisitng foundationsNew Shear wall foundations 106 CY 750.00 79,200 Sawcutting, excavation, and misc.1 LS 35,000.00 35,000 Sub-Total for Substructure:114,200 STRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Vertical Structure Columns and posts 5500 1-1/2" Steel Pipe Columns 3.00 EA 2,500.00 7,500 Column base plates, including bolts and grout 5500 Columns - 4"x4"3 EA 500.00 1,500 5500 Columns for misc.1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 Shear Walls 7,000 SF 55.00 385,000 Horizontal Structure Metal Decks 3300 Metal deck lay-out 120 MH 120 14,400 3300 Metal deck 3"9,600 SF 5.00 48,000 3300 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Cast in Place Concrete 3300 440 LF 18.00 7,920 3300 110 SF 18.00 1,980 3300 103 CY 325.00 33,511 3300 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 3300 80 HR 65.00 5,200 Fireproofing to metal deck 9,600 SF 4.00 38,400 Steel Structure - upgrades 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 6.2 TON 5,000.00 30,780 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 10.0 TON 5,000.00 50,220 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,550 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,395 5500 L5x3x3/8 2.2 TON 5,500.00 11,858 5500 Misc Connections 2.8 TON 5,500.00 15,630 Fireproofing to steel 46.8 TON 400.00 18,715 May 5, 2010 24" Concrete Shear Wall Pump, place, finish and cure Concrete clean-up Openings through metal deck - allowance for small Metal Deck Edge Form Edge Form at Deck Openings 3 1/2" Lt. Wt. Conc. On Mtl. Deck Page 3 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 5500 Misc structure and bracing 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 5500 Misc Connections at perimeter & other walls 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 5500 Miscellaneous supports, structures, connections, 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000 5500 Piping supports not shown 1 ALLOW 10,000.00 10,000 6000 Bracing and hardware 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Structure:786,558 EXTERIOR ENCLOSURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Window upgrade allowance 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 50,000 ROOFING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Patch & repair exisiting for new penetrations 1 Allow 15,000.00 15,000 Caulking and sealing - allowance 1 Allow 8,000.00 8,000 23,000 INTERIOR WALLS Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 7200 Tenant Improvements - 40% office 60% open office mix 6000 Level A 18,681 SF 120.00 2,241,720 Level 1 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 8100 Leve 2 - Mezzanine 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 Council Chamber Repairs Floors 4,080 SF 3.50 14,280 Walls 1,440 SF 3.50 5,040 New paint 2,880 SF 1.00 2,880 Ceiling 4,080 SF 5.00 20,400 4,204,320 Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: Sub-Total for Roofing: Page 4 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 FLOOR, WALL & CEILING FINISHES Unit Rate Total ($) See Interior Walls section for Tenant Improvement costs EQUIPMENT & SPECIALTIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 LEED - Gold Rated (3% Construction Costs)1 Allow 300,000.00 300,000 300,000 STAIRS & VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 11000 3 STOP 65,000.00 195,000 11000 2 EA 30,000.00 60,000 11000 2 EA 5,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation:265,000 PLUMBING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Included with TI costs HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 37,881 SF 15.00 568,215 HVAC - P&E 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 HVAC - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.50 42,422 660,637 Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: HVAC allowance to include piping, ductwork & controls, testing & commissioning Upgrade Existing Stairs Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Elevator - 3 stop - hydraulic Add new Stairs Page 5 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 ELECTRICAL Unit Rate Total ($) Electrical allowance for infrastructure 37,881 SF 10.00 378,810 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 Electrical - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.75 49,492 528,302 FIRE PROTECTION Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 37,881 SF 4.55 172,283 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:172,283 SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Demolition Works Interior Walls Remove wall, gypsum wall board, metal stud 8,325 SF 1.25 10,406 12" Concrete walls 1,200 SF 12.00 14,400 CMU wall 4,800 SF 10.00 48,000 Flooring Remove resilient flooring 25,781 SF 0.50 12,891 Remove tile 2,500 SF 1.00 2,500 Council Chambers Carpet 4,080 SF 0.25 1,020 Ceiling Remove ceiling, suspended grid - Assume 70%19,797 SF 1.50 29,695 Remove ceiling, hard lid -Assume 30%8,484 SF 1.50 12,726 Council Chambers Suspended Hard lid 4,080 SF 2.00 8,160 Miscellaneous Salvage existing furniture and relocate 400 MH 60.00 24,000 Core-drilling 1 Allow 20,000.00 20,000 Remove office cubicles 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Abatement & asbestos removal 1 Allow 40,000.00 40,000 Protect Finishes in Council Chambers 1 Allow 5,000.00 5,000 Protection of existing facilities 1 Allow 25,000.00 25,000 Demolition Accessories Debris bin, chute, dump charges 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 Palo Alto Green Building recycling Program Premium 1 LS 6,000.00 6,000 284,798 Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Demolition: Page 6 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 LANDSCAPING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticipated in this section NIC SITE UTILITIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Upgrade site utilities at Civic Center 1 Allow 150,000.00 150,000 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:150,000 Sub-Total for Landscaping: Page 7 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. One Story Addition at (E) Police Building SECTION 2 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 10%50.00 382 Structure 14%65.00 497 Exterior Enclosure 7%35.00 268 Roofing 2%12.00 92 Sub-total - Shell & Core 34%162.00 1,239 Interior Walls 5% 25.00 191 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 2%12.00 92 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 8%37.00 283 Equipment & Specialties 3%13.07 100 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 0%0.00 0 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 3%13.07 100 Plumbing 6% 28.07 215 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%38.54 295 Electrical 12% 58.07 444 Fire Protection 1% 5.00 38 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 27%129.68 992 Sub-total - Construction 71%341.76 2,614 Demolition 3% 16.67 127 Site Preparation & Landscaping 2%10.00 76 Site Utilities 9% 41.66 319 Sub-total - Sitework 14%68.33 523 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%410.09 3,137 General Conditions 10.00%9%41.01 314 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00%5%22.55 173 Bond & Insurance 1.50%1%7.10 54 Sub-total 100%480.76 3,677 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%480.76 3,677 May 5, 2010 September, 2009 GFA: 7,649 SF Page 8 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. One Story Addition at (E) Police Building SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN Substructure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Substructure for Essential Service Building 7,649 SF 50.00 382,450 Sub-Total for Substructure:382,450 Structure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structure - Horizontal & Vertical 7,649 SF 65.00 497,185 Sub-Total for Structure:497,185 Exterior Enclosure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Includes glazing, exterior walls & stucco 7,649 35.00 267,715 267,715 Roofing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Built up roof 7,649 12.00 91,788 91,788 Interior Walls Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Wall insulation, interior walls, partitions & doors 7,649 25.00 191,225 191,225 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) . Floors, Bases, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 7,649 SF 12.00 91,788 91,788 Equipment & Specialties Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 Miscellaneous equipment 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 100,000 Stairs & Vertical Transportation Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticapted in this section Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation: Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: May 5, 2010 Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Page 9 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. One Story Addition at (E) Police Building SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 Plumbing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Fixtures, piping & accessories 7,649 SF 15.00 114,735 Relocate existing fuel tank 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 214,735 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) HVAC including piping, ductwork and controls 7,649 SF 32.00 244,768 HVAC - P&E 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 294,768 Electrical Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Power, lighting, FA, telephone & communications 7,649 SF 45.00 344,205 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 444,205 Fire Protection Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 7,649 SF 5.00 38,245 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:38,245 Demolition Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Existing building for tie in & site 12,748 SF 10.00 127,476 127,476 Site Preparation & Landscaping Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Grading, site concrete, paving & softscape 5,099 SF 15.00 76,490 76,490 Site Utilities Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Water mains, UG drainage piping, gas piping 12,748 SF 25.00 318,690 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:318,690 Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Landscaping: Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Demolition: Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: Page 10 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OVERALL COST PLAN SUMMARY GFA $/SF $,000 1. Essential Services Building Upgrades 37,881 230 8,709,317 2. Dispatch over E.O.C.7,649 426 3,257,441 3. Removed Civic Center Services 5,631 350 1,970,850 113 30,250 3,418,250 1 LS 350,000 6. Leased Office Space During Construction 6a. Lease Office Space - Class B for 17 Months @ $4/SF 23,000 68 1,564,000 6b. TI upgrades on Leased building 23,000 75 1,725,000 6c. Relocation costs 1 Allow 50,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 21,044,858 Program and Construction Management - 3% Allowance 359,003 Design and EngineeringArchitectural and engineering - 10% Allowance 1,196,676 Reimbursables - 1% Allowance 119,668 TOTAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 1,675,346 Permits and plan check fees 1% allowance 119,668 Haz Mat Test and analyze existing structure Allowance 0 Testing and Special Inspections Allowance 150,000 Parking in-lieu fee 92 Spaces 30250 2,783,000 FF&E Allowance 3,000,000 Misc Relocation Costs - Inc. radio infrastructure Allowance 1,750,000 Contingency 25.00%7,630,718 TOTAL Permits, testing, AND CONTINGENCY 15,433,386 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 38,153,590 5. Parking Option: Redesign civic center for parking garage for police department 4. Replace city parking stalls lost from parking option on alternative site OPTION C3: SINGLE 2-STORY BUILDING ON FOREST AVE. May 5, 2010 New Building on green field site to replace "Level A" removed City Services Page 1 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 1%3.01 114 Structure 8%17.86 677 Exterior Enclosure 1%1.32 50 Roofing 0%0.61 23 Sub-total - Shell & Core 10%22.80 864 Interior Walls 48% 110.99 4,204 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 0%0.00 0 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 48%110.99 4,204 Equipment & Specialties 3%7.92 300 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 3%7.00 265 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 6%14.92 565 Plumbing 0% 0.00 0 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%17.44 661 Electrical 6% 13.95 528 Fire Protection 2% 4.55 172 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 16%35.93 1,361 Sub-total - Construction 80%184.64 6,994 Site Preparation & Demolition 3%7.52 285 Landscaping 0%0.00 0 Site Utilities 2%3.96 150 Sub-total - Sitework 5%11.48 435 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%196.12 7,429 General Conditions 10.00%9% 19.61 743 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00% 5% 10.79 409 Bond & Insurance 1.50% 1% 3.40 129 Sub-total 100%229.91 8,709 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%229.91 8,709 May 5, 2010 May, 2010 GFA: 37,881 SF Page 2 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN SUBSTRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structural upgrades to exisitng foundationsNew Shear wall foundations 106 CY 750.00 79,200 Sawcutting, excavation, and misc.1 LS 35,000.00 35,000 Sub-Total for Substructure:114,200 STRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Vertical Structure Columns and posts 5500 1-1/2" Steel Pipe Columns 3.00 EA 2,500.00 7,500 Column base plates, including bolts and grout 5500 Columns - 4"x4"3 EA 500.00 1,500 5500 Columns for misc.1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 Shear Walls 5,000 SF 55.00 275,000 Horizontal Structure Metal Decks 3300 Metal deck lay-out 120 MH 120 14,400 3300 Metal deck 3"9,600 SF 5.00 48,000 3300 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Cast in Place Concrete 3300 440 LF 18.00 7,920 3300 110 SF 18.00 1,980 3300 103 CY 325.00 33,511 3300 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 3300 80 HR 65.00 5,200 Fireproofing to metal deck 9,600 SF 4.00 38,400 Steel Structure - upgrades 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 6.2 TON 5,000.00 30,780 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 10.0 TON 5,000.00 50,220 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,550 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,395 5500 L5x3x3/8 2.2 TON 5,500.00 11,858 5500 Misc Connections 2.8 TON 5,500.00 15,630 Fireproofing to steel 46.8 TON 400.00 18,715 3 1/2" Lt. Wt. Conc. On Mtl. Deck May 5, 2010 24" Concrete Shear Wall Pump, place, finish and cure Concrete clean-up Openings through metal deck - allowance for small Metal Deck Edge Form Edge Form at Deck Openings Page 3 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 5500 Misc structure and bracing 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 5500 Misc Connections at perimeter & other walls 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 5500 Miscellaneous supports, structures, connections, 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000 5500 Piping supports not shown 1 ALLOW 10,000.00 10,000 6000 Bracing and hardware 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Structure:676,558 EXTERIOR ENCLOSURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Window upgrade allowance 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 50,000 ROOFING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Patch & repair exisiting for new penetrations 1 Allow 15,000.00 15,000 Caulking and sealing - allowance 1 Allow 8,000.00 8,000 23,000 INTERIOR WALLS Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 7200 Tenant Improvements - 40% office 60% open office mix 6000 Level A 18,681 SF 120.00 2,241,720 Level 1 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 8100 Leve 2 - Mezzanine 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 Council Chamber Repairs Floors 4,080 SF 3.50 14,280 Walls 1,440 SF 3.50 5,040 New paint 2,880 SF 1.00 2,880 Ceiling 4,080 SF 5.00 20,400 4,204,320 Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Page 4 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 FLOOR, WALL & CEILING FINISHES Unit Rate Total ($) See Interior Walls section for Tenant Improvement costs EQUIPMENT & SPECIALTIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 LEED - Gold Rated (3% Construction Costs)1 Allow 300,000.00 300,000 300,000 STAIRS & VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 11000 3 STOP 65,000.00 195,000 11000 2 EA 30,000.00 60,000 11000 2 EA 5,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation:265,000 PLUMBING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Included with TI costs HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 37,881 SF 15.00 568,215 HVAC - P&E 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 HVAC - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.50 42,422 660,637 Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: HVAC allowance to include piping, ductwork & controls, testing & commissioning Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Elevator - 3 stop - hydraulic Add new Stairs Upgrade Existing Stairs Page 5 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 ELECTRICAL Unit Rate Total ($) Electrical allowance for infrastructure 37,881 SF 10.00 378,810 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 Electrical - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.75 49,492 528,302 FIRE PROTECTION Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 37,881 SF 4.55 172,283 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:172,283 SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Demolition Works Interior Walls Remove wall, gypsum wall board, metal stud 8,325 SF 1.25 10,406 12" Concrete walls 1,200 SF 12.00 14,400 CMU wall 4,800 SF 10.00 48,000 Flooring Remove resilient flooring 25,781 SF 0.50 12,891 Remove tile 2,500 SF 1.00 2,500 Council Chambers Carpet 4,080 SF 0.25 1,020 Ceiling Remove ceiling, suspended grid - Assume 70%19,797 SF 1.50 29,695 Remove ceiling, hard lid -Assume 30%8,484 SF 1.50 12,726 Council Chambers Suspended Hard lid 4,080 SF 2.00 8,160 Miscellaneous Salvage existing furniture and relocate 400 MH 60.00 24,000 Core-drilling 1 Allow 20,000.00 20,000 Remove office cubicles 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Abatement & asbestos removal 1 Allow 40,000.00 40,000 Protect Finishes in Council Chambers 1 Allow 5,000.00 5,000 Protection of existing facilities 1 Allow 25,000.00 25,000 Demolition Accessories Debris bin, chute, dump charges 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 Palo Alto Green Building recycling Program Premium 1 LS 6,000.00 6,000 284,798 Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Demolition: Page 6 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 LANDSCAPING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticipated in this section NIC SITE UTILITIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Upgrade site utilities at Civic Center 1 Allow 150,000.00 150,000 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:150,000 Sub-Total for Landscaping: Page 7 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Dispatch over E.O.C. SECTION 2 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 8%35.00 268 Structure 20% 85.00 650 Exterior Enclosure 8% 35.00 268 Roofing 3%12.00 92 Sub-total - Shell & Core 39%167.00 1,277 Interior Walls 6% 25.00 191 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 3%12.00 92 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 9%37.00 283 Equipment & Specialties 3%13.07 100 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 2%9.81 75 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 5%22.88 175 Plumbing 7% 28.07 215 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%32.00 245 Electrical 11%45.00 344 Fire Protection 1%5.00 38 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 26%110.07 842 Sub-total - Construction 79%336.95 2,577 Demolition 1% 6.38 49 Site Preparation & Landscaping 1%3.99 30 Site Utilities 4%15.95 122 Sub-total - Sitework 6%26.31 201 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%363.27 2,779 General Conditions 10.00%9%36.33 278 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00%5%19.98 153 Bond & Insurance 1.50%1%6.29 48 Sub-total 100%425.86 3,257 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%425.86 3,257 May 5, 2010 September, 2009 GFA: 7,649 SF Page 8 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Dispatch over E.O.C. SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN Substructure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Substructure for Essential Service Building 7,649 SF 35.00 267,715 Sub-Total for Substructure:267,715 Structure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structure - Horizontal & Vertical 7,649 SF 85.00 650,165 Sub-Total for Structure:650,165 Exterior Enclosure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Includes glazing, exterior walls & stucco 7,649 35.00 267,715 267,715 Roofing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Built up roof 7,649 12.00 91,788 91,788 Interior Walls Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Wall insulation, interior walls, partitions & doors 7,649 25.00 191,225 191,225 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) . Floors, Bases, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 7,649 SF 12.00 91,788 91,788 Equipment & Specialties Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 Miscellaneous equipment 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 100,000 Stairs & Vertical Transportation Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Two Stop Elevator 1 EA 75,000.00 75,000 Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation:75,000 Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: May 5, 2010 Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Page 9 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Dispatch over E.O.C. SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 Plumbing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Fixtures, piping & accessories 7,649 SF 15.00 114,735 Relocate existing fuel tank 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 214,735 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) HVAC including piping, ductwork and controls 7,649 SF 32.00 244,768 244,768 Electrical Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Power, lighting, FA, telephone & communications 7,649 SF 45.00 344,205 344,205 Fire Protection Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 7,649 SF 5.00 38,245 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:38,245 Demolition Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Existing paving, landscaping etc.4,879 SF 10.00 48,792 48,792 Site Preparation & Landscaping Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Grading, site concrete, paving & softscape 2,033 SF 15.00 30,495 30,495 Site Utilities Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Water mains, UG drainage piping, gas piping 4,879 SF 25.00 121,980 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:121,980 Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Landscaping: Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Demolition: Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: Page 10 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OVERALL COST PLAN SUMMARY GFA $/SF $,000 1. Essential Services Building Upgrades 37,881 232 8,779,656 2. Underground Facility 7,649 573 4,381,755 3. Removed Civic Center Services 5,631 350 1,970,850 108 30,250 3,267,000 1 LS 350,000 6. Leased Office Space During Construction 6a. Lease Office Space - Class B for 17 Months @ $4/SF 23,000 68 1,564,000 6b. TI upgrades on Leased building 23,000 75 1,725,000 6c. Relocation costs 1 Allow 50,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 22,088,262 Program and Construction Management - 3% Allowance 394,842 Design and EngineeringArchitectural and engineering - 10% Allowance 1,316,141 Reimbursables - 1% Allowance 131,614 TOTAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 1,842,598 Permits and plan check fees 1% allowance 131,614 Haz Mat Test and analyze existing structure Allowance 0 Testing and Special Inspections Allowance 150,000 Parking in-lieu fee 92 Spaces 30250 2,783,000 FF&E Allowance 3,000,000 Misc Relocation Costs - Inc. radio infrastructure Allowance 1,750,000 Contingency 25.00%7,936,368 TOTAL Permits, testing, AND CONTINGENCY 15,750,982 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 39,681,842 5. Parking Option: Redesign civic center for parking garage for police department 4. Replace city parking stalls lost from parking option on alternative site OPTION C4: UNDERGROUND FACILITY AT DOWNTOWN LIBRARY May 5, 2010 New Building on green field site to replace "Level A" removed City Services Page 1 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 1%3.01 114 Structure 8%19.44 737 Exterior Enclosure 1% 1.32 50 Roofing 0%0.61 23 Sub-total - Shell & Core 11%24.39 924 Interior Walls 48% 110.99 4,204 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 0%0.00 0 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 48%110.99 4,204 Equipment & Specialties 3%7.92 300 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 3%7.00 265 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 6%14.92 565 Plumbing 0% 0.00 0 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%17.44 661 Electrical 6% 13.95 528 Fire Protection 2% 4.55 172 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 16%35.93 1,361 Sub-total - Construction 80%186.22 7,054 Site Preparation & Demolition 3%7.52 285 Landscaping 0%0.00 0 Site Utilities 2%3.96 150 Sub-total - Sitework 5%11.48 435 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%197.70 7,489 General Conditions 10.00%9% 19.77 749 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00% 5% 10.87 412 Bond & Insurance 1.50% 1% 3.43 130 Sub-total 100%231.77 8,780 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%231.77 8,780 May 5, 2010 May, 2010 GFA: 37,881 SF Page 2 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN SUBSTRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structural upgrades to exisitng foundationsNew Shear wall foundations 106 CY 750.00 79,200 Sawcutting, excavation, and misc.1 LS 35,000.00 35,000 Sub-Total for Substructure:114,200 STRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Vertical Structure Columns and posts 5500 1-1/2" Steel Pipe Columns 3.00 EA 2,500.00 7,500 Concrete Columns 24" Concrete Columns (12' height)6.00 EA 10,000.00 60,000 Column base plates, including bolts and grout 5500 Columns - 4"x4"3 EA 500.00 1,500 5500 Columns for misc.1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 Shear Walls 5,000 SF 55.00 275,000 Horizontal Structure Metal Decks3300Metal deck lay-out 120 MH 120 14,400 3300 Metal deck 3"9,600 SF 5.00 48,000 3300 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Cast in Place Concrete 3300 440 LF 18.00 7,920 3300 110 SF 18.00 1,980 3300 103 CY 325.00 33,511 3300 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 3300 80 HR 65.00 5,200 Fireproofing to metal deck 9,600 SF 4.00 38,400 Steel Structure - upgrades 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 6.2 TON 5,000.00 30,780 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 10.0 TON 5,000.00 50,220 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,550 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,395 5500 L5x3x3/8 2.2 TON 5,500.00 11,858 5500 Misc Connections 2.8 TON 5,500.00 15,630 Fireproofing to steel 46.8 TON 400.00 18,715 Pump, place, finish and cure Concrete clean-up May 5, 2010 Openings through metal deck - allowance for small Metal Deck Edge Form Edge Form at Deck Openings 3 1/2" Lt. Wt. Conc. On Mtl. Deck 24" Concrete Shear Wall Page 3 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 5500 Misc structure and bracing 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 5500 Misc Connections at perimeter & other walls 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 5500 Miscellaneous supports, structures, connections, 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000 5500 Piping supports not shown 1 ALLOW 10,000.00 10,000 6000 Bracing and hardware 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Structure:736,558 EXTERIOR ENCLOSURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Window upgrade allowance 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 50,000 ROOFING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Patch & repair exisiting for new penetrations 1 Allow 15,000.00 15,000 Caulking and sealing - allowance 1 Allow 8,000.00 8,000 23,000 INTERIOR WALLS Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 7200 Tenant Improvements - 40% office 60% open office mix 6000 Level A 18,681 SF 120.00 2,241,720 Level 1 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 8100 Leve 2 - Mezzanine 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 Council Chamber RepairsFloors 4,080 SF 3.50 14,280Walls1,440 SF 3.50 5,040New paint 2,880 SF 1.00 2,880Ceiling4,080 SF 5.00 20,400 4,204,320Sub-Total for Interior Walls: Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Page 4 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 FLOOR, WALL & CEILING FINISHES Unit Rate Total ($) See Interior Walls section for Tenant Improvement costs EQUIPMENT & SPECIALTIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 LEED - Gold Rated (3% Construction Costs)1 Allow 300,000.00 300,000 300,000 STAIRS & VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 11000 3 STOP 65,000.00 195,000 11000 2 EA 30,000.00 60,000 11000 2 EA 5,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation:265,000 PLUMBING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Included with TI costs HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 37,881 SF 15.00 568,215 HVAC - P&E 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 HVAC - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.50 42,422 660,637 HVAC allowance to include piping, ductwork & controls, testing & commissioning Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Elevator - 3 stop - hydraulic Add new Stairs Upgrade Existing Stairs Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: Page 5 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 ELECTRICAL Unit Rate Total ($) Electrical allowance for infrastructure 37,881 SF 10.00 378,810 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 Electrical - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.75 49,492 528,302 FIRE PROTECTION Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 37,881 SF 4.55 172,283 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:172,283 SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Demolition Works Interior Walls Remove wall, gypsum wall board, metal stud 8,325 SF 1.25 10,406 12" Concrete walls 1,200 SF 12.00 14,400 CMU wall 4,800 SF 10.00 48,000 Flooring Remove resilient flooring 25,781 SF 0.50 12,891 Remove tile 2,500 SF 1.00 2,500 Council Chambers Carpet 4,080 SF 0.25 1,020 Ceiling Remove ceiling, suspended grid - Assume 70%19,797 SF 1.50 29,695 Remove ceiling, hard lid -Assume 30%8,484 SF 1.50 12,726 Council Chambers Suspended Hard lid 4,080 SF 2.00 8,160 Miscellaneous Salvage existing furniture and relocate 400 MH 60.00 24,000 Core-drilling 1 Allow 20,000.00 20,000 Remove office cubicles 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Abatement & asbestos removal 1 Allow 40,000.00 40,000 Protect Finishes in Council Chambers 1 Allow 5,000.00 5,000 Protection of existing facilities 1 Allow 25,000.00 25,000 Demolition Accessories Debris bin, chute, dump charges 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 Palo Alto Green Building recycling Program Premium 1 LS 6,000.00 6,000 284,798 Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Demolition: Page 6 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 LANDSCAPING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticipated in this section NIC SITE UTILITIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Upgrade site utilities at Civic Center 1 Allow 150,000.00 150,000 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:150,000 Sub-Total for Landscaping: Page 7 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Underground Facility SECTION 2 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 13%75.00 574 Structure 15%85.00 650 Exterior Enclosure 6%35.00 268 Roofing 3%15.00 115 Sub-total - Shell & Core 37%210.00 1,606 Interior Walls 4% 25.00 191 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 2%12.00 92 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 6%37.00 283 Equipment & Specialties 2%13.07 100 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 0%0.00 0 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 2%13.07 100 Plumbing 3% 18.00 138 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 6%35.00 268 Electrical 10%58.07 444 Fire Protection 1%5.00 38 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 20%116.07 888 Sub-total - Construction 66%376.15 2,877 Demolition 4% 22.50 172 Site Preparation & Landscaping 4%22.50 172 Site Utilities 12%67.50 516 Sub-total - Sitework 20%112.50 861 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%488.65 3,738 General Conditions 10.00%9%48.86 374 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00%5%26.88 206 Bond & Insurance 1.50%1%8.47 65 Sub-total 100%572.85 4,382 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%572.85 4,382 May 5, 2010 September, 2009 GFA: 7,649 SF Page 8 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Underground Facility SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN Substructure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Substructure for Essential Service Building 7,649 SF 75.00 573,675 Sub-Total for Substructure:573,675 Structure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structure - Horizontal & Vertical 7,649 SF 85.00 650,165 Sub-Total for Structure:650,165 Exterior Enclosure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Includes exterior walls & waterproofing 7,649 35.00 267,715 267,715 Roofing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Concrete walk way 7,649 15.00 114,735 114,735 Interior Walls Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Wall insulation, interior walls, partitions & doors 7,649 25.00 191,225 191,225 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) . Floors, Bases, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 7,649 SF 12.00 91,788 91,788 Equipment & Specialties Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 Miscellaneous equipment 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 100,000 Stairs & Vertical Transportation Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticapted in this section Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation: Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: May 5, 2010 Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Page 9 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Underground Facility SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 Plumbing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Fixtures, piping & accessories 7,649 SF 18.00 137,682 137,682 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) HVAC including piping, ductwork and controls 7,649 SF 35.00 267,715 267,715 Electrical Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Power, lighting, FA, telephone & communications 7,649 SF 45.00 344,205 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 444,205 Fire Protection Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protectionOrdinary Hazard System 7,649 SF 5.00 38,245 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:38,245 Demolition Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Existing paving, landscaping etc.11,474 SF 15.00 172,103 172,103 Site Preparation & Landscaping Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Grading, site concrete, paving & softscape 11,474 SF 15.00 172,103 172,103 Site Utilities Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Water mains, UG drainage piping, gas piping 11,474 SF 45.00 516,308 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:516,308 Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Landscaping: Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Demolition: Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: Page 10 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OVERALL COST PLAN SUMMARY GFA $/SF $,000 1. Essential Services Building Upgrades 37,881 232 8,779,656 2. Two Story Building at Southside of Library 7,649 413 3,160,499 3. Removed Civic Center Services 5,631 350 1,970,850 108 30,250 3,267,000 1 LS 350,000 6. Leased Office Space During Construction 6a. Lease Office Space - Class B for 17 Months @ $4/SF 23,000 68 1,564,000 6b. TI upgrades on Leased building 23,000 75 1,725,000 6c. Relocation costs 1 Allow 50,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 20,867,006 Program and Construction Management - 3% Allowance 358,205 Design and EngineeringArchitectural and engineering - 10% Allowance 1,194,016 Reimbursables - 1% Allowance 119,402 TOTAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 1,671,622 Permits and plan check fees 1% allowance 119,402 Haz Mat Test and analyze existing structure Allowance 0 Testing and Special Inspections Allowance 150,000 Parking in-lieu fee 92 Spaces 30250 2,783,000 FF&E Allowance 3,000,000 Misc Relocation Costs - Inc. radio infrastructure Allowance 1,750,000 Contingency 25.00%7,585,257 TOTAL Permits, testing, AND CONTINGENCY 15,387,659 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 37,926,286 5. Parking Option: Redesign civic center for parking garage for police department 4. Replace city parking stalls lost from parking option on alternative site OPTION C5: ONE-STORY DISPATCH ABOVE GROUND O/ ONE STORY EOC BELOW GROUND May 5, 2010 New Building on green field site to replace "Level A" removed City Services Page 1 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 1%3.01 114 Structure 8%19.44 737 Exterior Enclosure 1% 1.32 50 Roofing 0%0.61 23 Sub-total - Shell & Core 11%24.39 924 Interior Walls 48% 110.99 4,204 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 0%0.00 0 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 48%110.99 4,204 Equipment & Specialties 3%7.92 300 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 3%7.00 265 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 6%14.92 565 Plumbing 0% 0.00 0 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%17.44 661 Electrical 6% 13.95 528 Fire Protection 2% 4.55 172 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 16%35.93 1,361 Sub-total - Construction 80%186.22 7,054 Site Preparation & Demolition 3%7.52 285 Landscaping 0%0.00 0 Site Utilities 2%3.96 150 Sub-total - Sitework 5%11.48 435 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%197.70 7,489 General Conditions 10.00%9% 19.77 749 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00% 5% 10.87 412 Bond & Insurance 1.50% 1% 3.43 130 Sub-total 100%231.77 8,780 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%231.77 8,780 May 5, 2010 May, 2010 GFA: 37,881 SF Page 2 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN SUBSTRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structural upgrades to exisitng foundationsNew Shear wall foundations 106 CY 750.00 79,200 Sawcutting, excavation, and misc.1 LS 35,000.00 35,000 Sub-Total for Substructure:114,200 STRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Vertical Structure Columns and posts 5500 1-1/2" Steel Pipe Columns 3.00 EA 2,500.00 7,500 Concrete Columns 24" Concrete Columns (12' height)6.00 EA 10,000.00 60,000 Column base plates, including bolts and grout 5500 Columns - 4"x4"3 EA 500.00 1,500 5500 Columns for misc.1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 Shear Walls 5,000 SF 55.00 275,000 Horizontal Structure Metal Decks3300Metal deck lay-out 120 MH 120 14,400 3300 Metal deck 3"9,600 SF 5.00 48,000 3300 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Cast in Place Concrete 3300 440 LF 18.00 7,920 3300 110 SF 18.00 1,980 3300 103 CY 325.00 33,511 3300 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 3300 80 HR 65.00 5,200 Fireproofing to metal deck 9,600 SF 4.00 38,400 Steel Structure - upgrades 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 6.2 TON 5,000.00 30,780 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 10.0 TON 5,000.00 50,220 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,550 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,395 5500 L5x3x3/8 2.2 TON 5,500.00 11,858 5500 Misc Connections 2.8 TON 5,500.00 15,630 Fireproofing to steel 46.8 TON 400.00 18,715 May 5, 2010 24" Concrete Shear Wall Pump, place, finish and cure Concrete clean-up Openings through metal deck - allowance for small Metal Deck Edge Form Edge Form at Deck Openings 3 1/2" Lt. Wt. Conc. On Mtl. Deck Page 3 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 5500 Misc structure and bracing 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 5500 Misc Connections at perimeter & other walls 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 5500 Miscellaneous supports, structures, connections, 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000 5500 Piping supports not shown 1 ALLOW 10,000.00 10,000 6000 Bracing and hardware 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Structure:736,558 EXTERIOR ENCLOSURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Window upgrade allowance 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 50,000 ROOFING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Patch & repair exisiting for new penetrations 1 Allow 15,000.00 15,000 Caulking and sealing - allowance 1 Allow 8,000.00 8,000 23,000 INTERIOR WALLS Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 7200 Tenant Improvements - 40% office 60% open office mix 6000 Level A 18,681 SF 120.00 2,241,720 Level 1 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 8100 Leve 2 - Mezzanine 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 Council Chamber RepairsFloors 4,080 SF 3.50 14,280Walls1,440 SF 3.50 5,040New paint 2,880 SF 1.00 2,880Ceiling4,080 SF 5.00 20,400 4,204,320 Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: Page 4 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 FLOOR, WALL & CEILING FINISHES Unit Rate Total ($) See Interior Walls section for Tenant Improvement costs EQUIPMENT & SPECIALTIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 LEED - Gold Rated (3% Construction Costs)1 Allow 300,000.00 300,000 300,000 STAIRS & VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 11000 3 STOP 65,000.00 195,000 11000 2 EA 30,000.00 60,000 11000 2 EA 5,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation:265,000 PLUMBING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Included with TI costs HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 37,881 SF 15.00 568,215 HVAC - P&E 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 HVAC - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.50 42,422 660,637 HVAC allowance to include piping, ductwork & controls, testing & commissioning Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Elevator - 3 stop - hydraulic Add new Stairs Upgrade Existing Stairs Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: Page 5 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 ELECTRICAL Unit Rate Total ($) Electrical allowance for infrastructure 37,881 SF 10.00 378,810 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 Electrical - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.75 49,492 528,302 FIRE PROTECTION Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 37,881 SF 4.55 172,283 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:172,283 SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Demolition Works Interior Walls Remove wall, gypsum wall board, metal stud 8,325 SF 1.25 10,406 12" Concrete walls 1,200 SF 12.00 14,400 CMU wall 4,800 SF 10.00 48,000 Flooring Remove resilient flooring 25,781 SF 0.50 12,891 Remove tile 2,500 SF 1.00 2,500 Council Chambers Carpet 4,080 SF 0.25 1,020 Ceiling Remove ceiling, suspended grid - Assume 70%19,797 SF 1.50 29,695 Remove ceiling, hard lid -Assume 30%8,484 SF 1.50 12,726 Council Chambers Suspended Hard lid 4,080 SF 2.00 8,160 Miscellaneous Salvage existing furniture and relocate 400 MH 60.00 24,000 Core-drilling 1 Allow 20,000.00 20,000 Remove office cubicles 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Abatement & asbestos removal 1 Allow 40,000.00 40,000 Protect Finishes in Council Chambers 1 Allow 5,000.00 5,000 Protection of existing facilities 1 Allow 25,000.00 25,000 Demolition Accessories Debris bin, chute, dump charges 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 Palo Alto Green Building recycling Program Premium 1 LS 6,000.00 6,000 284,798 Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Demolition: Page 6 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 LANDSCAPING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticipated in this section NIC SITE UTILITIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Upgrade site utilities at Civic Center 1 Allow 150,000.00 150,000 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:150,000 Sub-Total for Landscaping: Page 7 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Two Story Building at Southside of Library SECTION 2 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 8%35.00 268 Structure 21% 85.00 650 Exterior Enclosure 8% 35.00 268 Roofing 3%12.00 92 Sub-total - Shell & Core 40%167.00 1,277 Interior Walls 6% 25.00 191 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 3%12.00 92 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 9%37.00 283 Equipment & Specialties 3%13.07 100 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 2%9.81 75 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 6%22.88 175 Plumbing 4% 15.00 115 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%32.00 245 Electrical 14%58.07 444 Fire Protection 1%5.00 38 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 27%110.07 842 Sub-total - Construction 82%336.95 2,577 Demolition 1% 6.00 46 Site Preparation & Landscaping 1%5.00 38 Site Utilities 1%4.50 34 Sub-total - Sitework 4%15.50 119 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%352.45 2,696 General Conditions 10.00%9%35.25 270 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00%5%19.38 148 Bond & Insurance 1.50%1%6.11 47 Sub-total 100%413.19 3,160 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%413.19 3,160 May 5, 2010 September, 2009 GFA: 7,649 SF Page 8 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Two Story Building at Southside of Library SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN Substructure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Substructure for Essential Service Building 7,649 SF 35.00 267,715 Sub-Total for Substructure:267,715 Structure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structure - Horizontal & Vertical 7,649 SF 85.00 650,165 Sub-Total for Structure:650,165 Exterior Enclosure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Includes glazing, exterior walls & stucco 7,649 35.00 267,715 267,715 Roofing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Built up roof 7,649 12.00 91,788 91,788 Interior Walls Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Wall insulation, interior walls, partitions & doors 7,649 25.00 191,225 191,225 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) . Floors, Bases, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 7,649 SF 12.00 91,788 91,788 Equipment & Specialties Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 Miscellaneous equipment 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 100,000 Stairs & Vertical Transportation Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Two stop elevator 1 EA 75,000.00 75,000 Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation:75,000 Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: May 5, 2010 Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Page 1 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. Two Story Building at Southside of Library SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 Plumbing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Fixtures, piping & accessories 7,649 SF 15.00 114,735 114,735 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) HVAC including piping, ductwork and controls 7,649 SF 32.00 244,768 244,768 Electrical Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Power, lighting, FA, telephone & communications 7,649 SF 45.00 344,205 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 444,205 Fire Protection Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 7,649 SF 5.00 38,245 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:38,245 Demolition Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Existing paving, landscaping etc.4,590 SF 10.00 45,900 45,900 Site Preparation & Landscaping Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Grading, site concrete, paving & softscape 2,550 SF 15.00 38,250 38,250 Site Utilities Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Water mains, UG drainage piping, gas piping 4,590 SF 7.50 34,425 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:34,425 Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Landscaping: Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Demolition: Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: Page 2 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OVERALL COST PLAN SUMMARY GFA $/SF $,000 1. Essential Services Building Upgrades 37,881 232 8,779,656 2. ONE STORY E.O.C.3,583 423 1,513,919 4,066 415 1,686,394 4. Removed Civic Center Services 5,631 350 1,970,850 108 30,250 3,267,000 1 LS 350,000 7. Leased Office Space During Construction 7a. Lease Office Space - Class B for 17 Months @ $4/SF 23,000 68 1,564,000 7b. TI upgrades on Leased building 23,000 75 1,725,000 7c. Relocation costs 1 Allow 50,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 20,906,819 Program and Construction Management - 3% Allowance 359,399 Design and EngineeringArchitectural and engineering - 10% Allowance 1,197,997 Reimbursables - 1% Allowance 119,800 TOTAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 1,677,196 Permits and plan check fees 1% allowance 119,800 Haz Mat Test and analyze existing structure Allowance 0 Testing and Special Inspections Allowance 150,000 Parking in-lieu fee 92 Spaces 30250 2,087,250 FF&E Allowance 3,000,000 Misc Relocation Costs - Inc. radio infrastructure Allowance 1,750,000 Contingency 25.00%7,422,766 TOTAL Permits, testing, AND CONTINGENCY 14,529,816 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 37,113,831 New Building on green field site to replace "Level A" removed City Services 6. Parking Option: Redesign civic center for parking garage for police department 5. Replace city parking stalls lost from parking option on alternative site OPTION C6: TWO NEW ONE-STORY BUILDINGS AT DOWNTOWN LIBRARY May 5, 2010 3. ONE STORY DISPATCH Page 1 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 1% 3.01 114 Structure 8% 19.44 737 Exterior Enclosure 1% 1.32 50 Roofing 0%0.61 23 Sub-total - Shell & Core 11%24.39 924 Interior Walls 48% 110.99 4,204 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 0%0.00 0 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 48%110.99 4,204 Equipment & Specialties 3%7.92 300 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 3%7.00 265 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 6%14.92 565 Plumbing 0% 0.00 0 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%17.44 661 Electrical 6% 13.95 528 Fire Protection 2% 4.55 172 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 16%35.93 1,361 Sub-total - Construction 80%186.22 7,054 Site Preparation & Demolition 3%7.52 285 Landscaping 0%0.00 0 Site Utilities 2%3.96 150 Sub-total - Sitework 5%11.48 435 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%197.70 7,489 General Conditions 10.00%9% 19.77 749 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00% 5% 10.87 412 Bond & Insurance 1.50% 1% 3.43 130 Sub-total 100%231.77 8,780 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%231.77 8,780 May 5, 2010 May, 2010 GFA: 37,881 SF Page 2 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN SUBSTRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structural upgrades to exisitng foundationsNew Shear wall foundations 106 CY 750.00 79,200 Sawcutting, excavation, and misc.1 LS 35,000.00 35,000 Sub-Total for Substructure:114,200 STRUCTURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Vertical Structure Columns and posts 5500 1-1/2" Steel Pipe Columns 3.00 EA 2,500.00 7,500 Concrete Columns 24" Concrete Columns (12' height)6.00 EA 10,000.00 60,000 Column base plates, including bolts and grout 5500 Columns - 4"x4"3 EA 500.00 1,500 5500 Columns for misc.1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 Shear Walls 5,000 SF 55.00 275,000 Horizontal Structure Metal Decks3300Metal deck lay-out 120 MH 120 14,400 3300 Metal deck 3"9,600 SF 5.00 48,000 3300 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Cast in Place Concrete 3300 440 LF 18.00 7,920 3300 110 SF 18.00 1,980 3300 103 CY 325.00 33,511 3300 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 3300 80 HR 65.00 5,200 Fireproofing to metal deck 9,600 SF 4.00 38,400 Steel Structure - upgrades 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 6.2 TON 5,000.00 30,780 5500 W8 x 18 Beams 10.0 TON 5,000.00 50,220 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,550 5500 W8 x 31 Grider 0.3 TON 5,000.00 1,395 5500 L5x3x3/8 2.2 TON 5,500.00 11,858 5500 Misc Connections 2.8 TON 5,500.00 15,630 Fireproofing to steel 46.8 TON 400.00 18,715 3 1/2" Lt. Wt. Conc. On Mtl. Deck May 5, 2010 24" Concrete Shear Wall Pump, place, finish and cure Concrete clean-up Openings through metal deck - allowance for small Metal Deck Edge Form Edge Form at Deck Openings Page 3 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 5500 Misc structure and bracing 9,600 SF 2.50 24,000 5500 Misc Connections at perimeter & other walls 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 5500 Miscellaneous supports, structures, connections, 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000 5500 Piping supports not shown 1 ALLOW 10,000.00 10,000 6000 Bracing and hardware 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Structure:736,558 EXTERIOR ENCLOSURE Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Window upgrade allowance 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 50,000 ROOFING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Patch & repair exisiting for new penetrations 1 Allow 15,000.00 15,000 Caulking and sealing - allowance 1 Allow 8,000.00 8,000 23,000 INTERIOR WALLS Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 7200 Tenant Improvements - 40% office 60% open office mix 6000 Level A 18,681 SF 120.00 2,241,720 Level 1 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 8100 Leve 2 - Mezzanine 9,600 SF 100.00 960,000 Council Chamber RepairsFloors 4,080 SF 3.50 14,280Walls1,440 SF 3.50 5,040New paint 2,880 SF 1.00 2,880Ceiling4,080 SF 5.00 20,400 4,204,320 Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Page 4 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 FLOOR, WALL & CEILING FINISHES Unit Rate Total ($) See Interior Walls section for Tenant Improvement costs EQUIPMENT & SPECIALTIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 LEED - Gold Rated (3% Construction Costs)1 Allow 300,000.00 300,000 300,000 STAIRS & VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 11000 3 STOP 65,000.00 195,000 11000 2 EA 30,000.00 60,000 11000 2 EA 5,000.00 10,000 Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation:265,000 PLUMBING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Included with TI costs HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 37,881 SF 15.00 568,215 HVAC - P&E 1 Allow 50,000.00 50,000 HVAC - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.50 42,422 660,637 Elevator - 3 stop - hydraulic Add new Stairs Upgrade Existing Stairs Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: HVAC allowance to include piping, ductwork & controls, testing & commissioning Page 5 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 ELECTRICAL Unit Rate Total ($) Electrical allowance for infrastructure 37,881 SF 10.00 378,810 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 Electrical - Safe off & demo 28,281 SF 1.75 49,492 528,302 FIRE PROTECTION Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 37,881 SF 4.55 172,283 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:172,283 SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Demolition Works Interior Walls Remove wall, gypsum wall board, metal stud 8,325 SF 1.25 10,406 12" Concrete walls 1,200 SF 12.00 14,400 CMU wall 4,800 SF 10.00 48,000 Flooring Remove resilient flooring 25,781 SF 0.50 12,891 Remove tile 2,500 SF 1.00 2,500 Council Chambers Carpet 4,080 SF 0.25 1,020 Ceiling Remove ceiling, suspended grid - Assume 70%19,797 SF 1.50 29,695 Remove ceiling, hard lid -Assume 30%8,484 SF 1.50 12,726 Council Chambers Suspended Hard lid 4,080 SF 2.00 8,160 Miscellaneous Salvage existing furniture and relocate 400 MH 60.00 24,000 Core-drilling 1 Allow 20,000.00 20,000 Remove office cubicles 1 Allow 10,000.00 10,000 Abatement & asbestos removal 1 Allow 40,000.00 40,000 Protect Finishes in Council Chambers 1 Allow 5,000.00 5,000 Protection of existing facilities 1 Allow 25,000.00 25,000 Demolition Accessories Debris bin, chute, dump charges 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 Palo Alto Green Building recycling Program Premium 1 LS 6,000.00 6,000 284,798 Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Demolition: Page 6 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1. ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING UPGRADES SECTION 1 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 LANDSCAPING Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticipated in this section NIC SITE UTILITIES Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Upgrade site utilities at Civic Center 1 Allow 150,000.00 150,000 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:150,000 Sub-Total for Landscaping: Page 7 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. ONE STORY E.O.C. SECTION 2 - SUMMARY %$/SF $,000 Substructure 6%25.00 90 Structure 15%65.00 233 Exterior Enclosure 8%35.00 125 Roofing 3%12.00 43 Sub-total - Shell & Core 32%137.00 491 Interior Walls 6% 25.00 90 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 3%12.00 43 Sub-total - Internal Finishes 9%37.00 133 Equipment & Specialties 7%27.91 100 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 0%0.00 0 Sub-total - Equipment and Stairs 7%27.91 100 Plumbing 4% 15.00 54 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 8%32.00 115 Electrical 17%72.91 261 Fire Protection 1%5.00 18 Sub-total - Mechanical and Electrical 30%124.91 448 Sub-total - Construction 77%326.82 1,171 Demolition 1% 3.60 13 Site Preparation & Landscaping 3%12.00 43 Site Utilities 4% 18.00 64 Sub-total - Sitework 8%33.60 120 Total - Construction and Sitework 85%360.42 1,291 General Conditions 10.00%9%36.04 129 Overhead & Profit or Fee 5.00% 5% 19.82 71 Bond & Insurance 1.50% 1% 6.24 22 Sub-total 100%422.53 1,514 Contingency - Construction 0.00%0%0.00 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100%422.53 1,514 May 5, 2010 September, 2009 GFA: 3,583 SF Page 8 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. ONE STORY E.O.C. SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN Substructure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Substructure for Essential Service Building 3,583 SF 25.00 89,575 Sub-Total for Substructure:89,575 Structure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Structure - Horizontal & Vertical 3,583 SF 65.00 232,895 Sub-Total for Structure:232,895 Exterior Enclosure Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Includes glazing, exterior walls & stucco 3,583 35.00 125,405 125,405 Roofing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Built up roof 3,583 12.00 42,996 42,996 Interior Walls Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Wall insulation, interior walls, partitions & doors 3,583 25.00 89,575 89,575 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) . Floors, Bases, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 3,583 SF 12.00 42,996 42,996 Equipment & Specialties Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) 10000 Miscellaneous equipment 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 100,000 Stairs & Vertical Transportation Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) No work anticipated in this section Sub-Total for Stairs & Vertical Transportation: Sub-Total for Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes: Sub-Total for Equipment & Specialties: Sub-Total for Roofing: Sub-Total for Interior Walls: May 5, 2010 Sub-Total for Exterior Enclosure: Page 9 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 2. ONE STORY E.O.C. SECTION 2 - BREAKDOWN May 5, 2010 Plumbing Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Fixtures, piping & accessories 3,583 SF 15.00 53,745 53,745 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) HVAC including piping, ductwork and controls 3,583 SF 32.00 114,656 114,656 Electrical Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Power, lighting, FA, telephone & communications 3,583 SF 45.00 161,235 250 kW Generator 1 Allow 100,000.00 100,000 261,235 Fire Protection Unit Rate Total ($) Fire protection Ordinary Hazard System 3,583 SF 5.00 17,915 Sub-Total for Fire Protection:17,915 Demolition Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Existing paving, landscaping etc.4,300 SF 3.00 12,899 12,899 Site Preparation & Landscaping Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Grading, site concrete, paving & softscape 2,866 SF 15.00 42,996 42,996 Site Utilities Quantity Unit Rate Total ($) Water mains, UG drainage piping, gas piping 4,300 SF 15.00 64,494 Sub-Total for Site Utilities:64,494 Sub-Total for Site Preparation & Landscaping: Sub-Total for Plumbing : Sub-Total for Electrical: Sub-Total for Demolition: Sub-Total for Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning: Page 10 PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING OPTION D: NEW ESSENTIAL SERVICES BUILDING OVERALL COST PLAN SUMMARY GFA $/SF $ 1. Option D: New Essential Services Building 118,998 270 $32,132,673 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $32,132,673 Program and Construction Management - 3% Allowance 963,980 Design and Engineering Architectural and engineering - 10% Allowance 3,213,267 Reimbursables - 1% Allowance 321,327 TOTAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 4,498,574 Permits and plan check fees 1% Allowance 321,327 Testing and Special Inspections Allowance 150,000 FF&E Allowance 3,000,000 Misc Relocation Costs Allowance 2,250,000 Contingency 15.00%6,015,386 TOTAL Permits, testing, AND CONTINGENCY 11,736,713 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 48,367,960 April 3, 2010 Page 1 Palo Alto Public Safety Building Feasibility Study Page 36 of 36 Hohbach-Lewin, Inc. May 18, 2010 8.0 Appendix -Palo Alto City Hall Police Project WDI # 09069 February 12,2010 Page 2 of2 Option 1: Keep the proposed location ofthe secure parking the same but keep Bryant St. exit available for the public. Since the proposed location of the secure police parking area only takes over the inbound ramp from level A to B and circulation to the inbound ramp on level A we believe that only the outbound ramp from level B to A and the circulation to this ramp needs to be converted to two way traffic. Once the cars are on the B level it is possible to keep the rest of the circulation system exactly as it is now. The cars would then flow to the existing circulation system and use the one way ramps in place to get from B to C level. This would minimize the amount of restriping necessary and minimize the amount of lost spaces due to converting the end bay circulation. In reviewing the parking ordinance and the existing building dimensions, we believe that a solution which avoids the use of two-way angled parking is feasible. We propose that the stalls at the first two parking bays along Ramona St. at Level A, which is the access to the ramp and the ramp from level A to B, be converted to 10 foot wide by 17.5 foot long spaces with a 23 foot drive aisle. In addition this option requires the public lobby that goes up through the city hall building above be the second exit from the public parking area on Level A. The disadvantage of this is that all the inbound and outbound traffic is forced to use one ramp. This is not desirable Option 2: Split the location ofthe secure parking into a quick response zone and a storage type zone and keep Bryant St. exit available for the public. This Option would put the quick response zone on Level A and the storage area in Level B. This maintains the existing ramp circulation of having a dedicated down ramp and up ramp for the public. It also maintains access to the core on the Bryant St. side for public fire exiting. It also only require changing one section of the parking to two way parking, where we suggest it being converted to 10 foot wide by 17.5 footlong spaces with a 23 foot drive aisle. This minimizes the areas where cars must be funneled down to one location. The original option called for a stall loss of approximately 150 (we did not validate this in detail but determined from the report; and review of drawings) Option 1 would have a stall loss of 108 and Option 2 would have a stall loss of73. We would recommend Option 2 for the stall loss and for maintaining better circulation for the public. However, we recognize that the police parking needs to be compromised by not having dedicated access to the street and by having to split the operations into two zones. We would be happy to discuss this with you at a meeting or provide any clarifications to our recommendations. Sincerely yours, WATRY DESIGN, INC. Michelle Wendler, AlA Principal Enclosure Redwood City, CA 650.298.8150 • www.watrydesign;com.NewportBeach.CA 949.955.7922 ATTACHMENT C POLICE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL ISSUES Split Facility -Relocation of Dispatch Center and EOC For maximum efficiency, the Communications Center should be located in the main police facility. A separate Communications Center and EOC facility raises a number of issues. The relationship between the dispatcher and the police officer is an essential to an effective response and follow up. A split facility will reduce face to face communication between dispatchers and police officers and cause the duplication of efforts in a number of areas. Police contacts and suspects will be run through databases multiple times and printouts will be duplicated. There will be travel time between the station and the dispatch center for officers to pick up printed information for their case work. Parking requirements at the remote facility will need to be considered particularly if the training/multipurpose room is located remotely. Staffing the EOC could be delayed in an emergency due to travel time and accessibility issues. Split Levels -Patrol Function As identified by the consultant, the more complex adjacency requirements revolve around the patrol function. Patrol officers are required to have direct access to the secured parking, detention, and property and evidence, as well as their lockers where much of their gear is stored. Due to the constraints of the existing building foot print, the consultant was unable to house all of these programs on one floor and therefore was required to split the patrol program between the A Level and first floor. Without further design work, staff is unable to specifically identify the inefficiencies of splitting this essential function. Multi-Purpose Room The original architectural program for the public safety building included a community room and a training room for engaging the public, holding department-wide police events, department training and regional law enforcement meetings. Based on the Public Safety Building Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) study, and in an effort to reduce the size and cost of the project, these two rooms were incorporated into one multi-purpose room which would accommodate both functions. The consultant could not accommodate a multi-purpose room in any of the options other than Option D, in the new building. Under Options C, the Department would continue to utilize the Council Chambers for some department;"wide events and department training would continue to be provided at Cubberley and other remote locations. The relocation of the Council Chambers under Option B would require the Department to identify a location away from the Police Department to conduct large events. Secure Parking Due to the nature of police work, a secured parking area with quick and safe ingress and egress for emergency response vehicles is critical. As identified by the consultant, 1 emergency response vehicles should be located to allow efficient transfer of gear and equipment by the officers. A secure sally port is required for the safe transfer of suspects and property. Due in part to the seismic retrofits on the Police Department, the current secured parking facility can not accommodate the 54 emergency response vehicles and motorcycles or any of the specialty vehicles such as the SWAT Van or the approved Crime Scene Vehicle and regional Mobile Command Vehicle. It is anticipated that a secure sally port and vehicle evidence processing area will be constructed in the current police garage, eliminating additional parking spaces for police vehicles. All the options outlined in the Study will provide additional secured police parking in the existing public parking areas on A and B Levels. While the additional spaces do provide secure parking for all immediate response vehicles, it will not accommodate parking or staging of over sized vehicles (SWAT, Crime Scene, Mobile Command Vehicles) which may increase the time these can be deployed. The nature of a split parking facility garage for police vehicles would present some inherent inefficiencies. The transfer of equipment to and from the vehicles located in these new areaS are some distance from the locker rooms where much of the officers' gear is stored and the elevators would be shared with the public. The proposed two way circulation of vehicles and the shared ingress and egress ramps presents significant traffic safety issues for officers and citizens. The potential would exist, as it does now, for civilian vehicles to delay patrol vehicles from exiting from the garage in case of an emergency, major incident or natural disaster such as an earthquake. As identified by the consultant, greater attention is being paid to blast vulnerability of government facilities, specifically as it relates to improvised car bombs. Although a majority of the building will be built to essential facility standards and remain operational in the event of a major earthquake it would be easy to damage significant portions of the police department and possible collapse of the entire structure by a major blast set off in the public garage directly beneath the building. Parking and Traffic Circulation All three Civic Center options range in reducing the garage's public parking from 100- 113 spaces on the A, B, C levels and on Forest Avenue to accommodate structural upgrades, new parking circulation, and parking for some secured storage and first responder vehicles on Level-A. The Study suggests maintaining the existing secured parking area under the police wing and changing the Bryant street entrance for the Police Department use to access an additional secured parking area on A-level. This will create the need for a two-way drive aisle at the Ramona Street entrance for public use. The City also contracted with Watry Design, Inc. to provide a supplementary parking study. This analysis shows secured parking for police vehicles on A-level while maintaining the Bryant and Ramona Street entrances and changing the parking from angled to perpendicular stalls. Closing the Bryant Street entrance from the public would create 2 more congestion on Ramona Street. In addition, the proposed garage circulation from the one way to two way travel lanes 11.5 feet wide would create the potential for head-on collisions and more congestion as vehicles in both directions must wait for a parked vehicle to back out. The Transportation Division believes these proposals create a dangerous situation compared to existing conditions. Other Issues Environmental studies would be required to assess the impacts related to expanding the police wing on or fronting Forest Avenue for Options C 1,2 and 3. Option C-3 requires closing Forest Avenue from Ramona to Bryant Street and could provide an opportunity for a pedestrian plaza while vehicles would be diverted to surrounding streets. Environmental studies would be required to assess the impacts to the downtown library such as preventing further expansion, removal of oak trees and variances required for Options C-4,5 and 6 only. Any options to build on the library property would be contrary to past Council direction. There are potentially higher operational costs of moving the Council Chambers, print shop and mailroom away from City Hall to another city owned facility for all options. There are potentially higher operational costs of building a separate EOC/911 dispatch center that splits services from City Hall for Option A only. 3 TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DATE: JUNE 7,2010 CMR:252:10 REPORT TYPE: CONSENT SUBJECT: Adoption of an Ordinance Repealing Chapter 1().09 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.09 (Sewer Use Ordinance) Establishing Regulations to Reduce Discharges of Pollutants to the Sanitary Sewer and Storm Drainage Systems RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached Ordinance (Attachment A) repealing Chapter 16.09 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and adopting a new Chapter 16.09 (Sewer Use Ordinance). BACKGROUND The City of Palo Alto operates the Regional Water Quality Control Plant, a wastewater treatment plant, for the East Palo Alto Sanitary District, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Palo Alto, and Stanford'University. Wastewater from these jurisdictions is treated by the Regional Water Quality Control Plant prior to discharge to the Bay. Storm water runoff in Palo Alto flows directly to the Bay without treatment. Wastewater and storm water discharges are both regulated by the United Stated Environmental Protection Agency via National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Given the strict permit requirements, Palo Alto is continually exploring methods for reducing pollutant discharges to San Francisco Bay, including new storm water and industrial pretreatment and pollution prevention requirements. The attached Ordinance contains a number of amendments and additions to the current Sewer Use Ordinance. The changes fall into the following categories: 1. Clarification and reorganization of existing language; 2. Incorporation of standard language from the United Stated Environmental Protection Agency model Ordinance; 3. Incorporation of new language from the United Stated Environmental Protection Agency Pretreatment Streamlining Rule; 4. Incorporation of changes required to correct deficiencies identified during Regional Water Quality Board audits; 5. New or expanded requirements. The majority of the changes fall into the first four categories. They are administrative in nature and do not significantly change the policies or implementation of the program. The following table lists some of the key proposed changes. Key Changes Proposed Ordinance Change Cyanide Lower discharge limit for cyanide changed from 1.0 to 0.5 mgIL Zinc, Molybdenum Prohibits cooling tower chemicals containing zinc or molybdenum Non-Compliance and Spill Expand this section to include storm drain violations in addition to Reporting and Actions sanitary sewer violations. Facility Closure Requirements for cleaning, inspection and testing of sewer system upon closure of industrial facilities are expanded to include commercial facilities. Certain carwash facilities Carwash facilities to storm drain prohibited for multi family prohibited. residential units and residential developments expanded to include existing facilities as well as new ones. Food Service Create the requirement to use grease control device maintenance Establishments services provided by City permitted vendors. Expands and codifies Best Management Practices. General Modified language to group related topics, use consistent language in all sections and delete past implementation dates. Staff have conducted outreach and solicited comments regarding the proposed Ordinance changes from permitted commercial and industrial facilities in the service area, City of Palo Alto departments, the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce, and other interest groups. Copies of the proposed Ordinance were provided to each Food Service Establishment and each permitted facility. A public meeting was held to review the proposed changes with the Regional Water Quality Control Plant's permitted facilities and the Food Service Establishments in 2009. In addition, staff attended a meeting of the Environmental Health and Safety Forum Group, and held a meeting with Stanford University representatives. Comments were received from several permitted facilities and from the Environmental Health and Safety Forum group. A small number of changes have been incorporated into the proposed Ordinance language as a result of public involvement in the Ordinance adoption process. DISCUSSION A summary of the key proposed Ordinance provisions is provided below. The key provisions are those that are expected to have the most significant impact on the regulated community, and which have been reviewed and discussed most extensively in our public outreach process. The majority of the additional modifications are not substantive in nature. Due to the large scale of the amendment to the existing Ordinance a redline version is not practical and thus not provided. However, the attached Ordinance Change List (Attachment B) lists the key provisions as well as all other changes that have warranted less attention and those that are mainly administrative in nature. Finally, the attached Ordinance contains all of the provisions. Cyanide Discharge Limit (16.09.040(q)) The proposed Ordinance section would lower the cyanide concentration limit for industrial waste discharges from 1.0 milligrams per liter (mg/L) to 0.5 mg/L. The Regional Water Quality Control Plant conducted a local limits evaluation in 2006. The change in the cyanide limit is CMR:252:10 Page 2 of4 based upon the attached memorandum (Attachment C), which describes the process utilized to derive the new limit. The new limit would apply to all industrial waste discharges to the sanitary sewer. The Sunnyvale and San Jose treatment plants, which together with Palo Alto comprise the three lower South San Francisco Bay dischargers, already have cyanide limits of 0.5 mg/L. Zinc or Molybdenum Containing Cooling Tower Chemicals (16.09.205) The proposed Ordinance provision addressing zinc and molybdenum containing cooling tower chemicals would reduce zinc and molybdenum loading to the sanitary sewer system from cooling tower activities. The majority of cooling towers are located in industrial and commercial facilities that are regulated by the Public Works Department's Environmental Compliance Division. Zinc is a pollutant of concern, due to its identification as a source of toxicity in the Regional Water Quality Control Plant's treated effluent to the Bay. Molybdenum is a pollutant of concern due to its presence in the Plant's incinerator ash which restricts its use for application as a fertilizer to pasture land and ruminant feed crops. Molybdenum and zinc-free cooling tower treatment chemicals are available. Spill Reporting (16.06.140) The proposed Ordinance modification would expand existing spill reporting and corrective measures for sanitary sewer discharges to include spills that threaten the storm drain system. The section includes requirements for notification as well as taking immediate steps to stop, contain, and clean spills. Closure Requirements (16.09.110) The proposed Ordinance provision is intended to address contaminated treatment equipment, broken sewer lines and contaminated sediments in sewer lines at industrial and commercial facilities during the facility closure process. The provision would allow the Regional Water Quality Control Plant to require testing of sewer lines to ensure their integrity in cases where the facility had a history of pH violations or other discharges that could affect sewer lines. Testing to determine the quantity and pollutant content of sediments could be required based upon the type of operation at a facility and the historical pollutant discharges from the facility. Where broken. sewer lines are identified, facilities would be required to repair or replace them. Where contaminated equipment or sediments are identified, facilities would be required to remove them in an approved manner. Covered Vehicle Washpad Areas (16.09.106(f) Starting in 2003 all new residential buildings with 25 or more units were required to provide a vehicle wash pad to reduce discharges of pollutants from vehicle washing to the storm drain system. Each new building subject to the provision is required to provide a covered vehicle wash pad area for use by residents. The areas are designed to prevent water runon and runoff. The drains for the areas are connected to an oil/water separator with a minimum 100 gallon capacity, and to the sanitary sewer. This section of the Ordinance has been modified to clarify that the requirement applies to residential development projects as well as to residential buildings with 25 or more units. This section has been modified to prohibit existing buildings or developments from providing a vehicle wash pad that discharges to the storm drain system. Food Service Establishment Requirements (16.09.075) The new requirements for Food Service Establishments expand and clarify existing Food Service Establishment regulations and codify best management practices and other measures that have CMR:252:10 Page 3 of4 been established to protect storm water and to reduce the amount of Fats, Oils and Grease (Grease) discharged to the collection system. Grease in the collection system can lead to blockages and discharges of untreated wastewater. The section also requires Food Service Establishments to use a City permitted grease hauler, if available, for cleaning and grease removal from grease control devices. Staff is considering development of a program that would permit one or more grease haulers. This program may be presented to Council for consideration in the near future. The hauler program would reduce green house gasses by minimizing truck trips, would help ensure compliance by providing standardized service, and will allow for better tracking of the collection and ultimate disposal of grease waste. RESOURCE IMPACT There are no anticipated incremental resource impacts. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommended. Ordinance adoption is consistent with the goals and policies stated in the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The applicable policies are as follows: Natural Environment Policy N-21: Reduce non~point source pollution in urban runoff from residential, commercial, industrial, municipal, and transportation land uses and activities. Natural Environment Policy N-25: Reduce pollutant levels in City wastewater disch,arges. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT The adoption and implementation of this Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Guideline 15308 (actions by regulatory agencies for the protection of the environment). ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Ordinance Attachment B: Ordinance Change Summary Attachment C: Limit Development Memorandum PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD: ][, E]mnJlJl pro~s GLENN S. ROBERTS Director of Public Works CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR:252:1O Page 4 of4 follows: ATTACHMENT A NOT YET APPROVED Ordinance No. --- Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Repealing Chapter 16.09 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.09 (Sewer Use Ordinance) Establishing Regulations to Reduce Discharges of Pollutants to the Sanitary Sewer and Storm Drainage Systems The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as (A) In order to protect the public health and environment, including the City's sanitary sewer collection system, the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant, and San Francisco Bay, the City has developed and implemented a water quality control program; (B) Protection of the sanitary sewer collection system, the treatment plant, and San Francisco Bay also requires strict control of industrial wastewater discharges and all types of contaminated water which would otherwise flow to the storm drain system, creeks, and San Francisco Bay; (B) The adoption of this Sewer Use Ordinance is a component of the City's water quality control program and supports the City's authority to implement state and federally mandated storm water, pollution prevention, and industrial waste pretreatment programs; (C) The City desires to maintain and enhance its leadership position in reducing pollutant loadings to natural water bodies to the maximum extent practical, while still maintaining a heathy and vibrant business community; and (D) In order to continue to address new pollutants of concern and pollutant sources, City staff shall inform the Council of the need for further controls on industrial, commercial and residential wastewater and storm water discharges. SECTION 2. Chapter 16.09 (Sewer Use Ordinance) of Title 16 (Building) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and restated as follows: 1 100520 syn 6051181 Sections: 16.09.005 16.09.010 16.09.015 16.09.020 16.09.025 16.09.030 16.09.035 16.09.040 16.09.045 16.09.050 16.09.055 16.09.060 16.09.065 16.09.070 16.09.075 16.09.080 16.09.085 16.09.090 16.09.095 16.09.100 16.09.105 16.09.110 16.09.115 16.09.120 16.09.125 16.09.130 16.09.135 16.09.140 16.09.145 16.09.150 16.09.155 16.09.160 16.09.165 16.09.170 16.09.175 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED Chapter 16.09 SEWER USE ORDINANCE Purpose and Applicability Definitions Responsibility of the Superintendent Confidentiality Alternative Materials and Methods Limitationws on Point of Discharge Prohibitions Standards Additional Copper Limitations for Industrial Waste Grease disposal Prohibited Unpolluted Water Standards for Other Industrial Wastes Best Management Practics (BMPs) Trucker's Discharge Permit Food Service Establishments Industrial Waste Discharge Permit Industrial Wastes Discharge Permit Procedures Requirements for Facilities Affected by National Pretreatment Standards Modification, Suspension or Revocation of Industrial Wastes Discharge Permit Issuance, Denial, Modification, Revocation, or Suspension Hearing Waste Sampling Locations Discharger Monitoring Prohibition against Dilution Discharger Self-Monitoring Maintenance and Operation of Pollution Control and Monitoring Equipment Compliance with the Pretreatment Requirements Reporting Requirements for all Permitted Dischargers Requirments for Reporting Noncompliance, Increased Loading, Slug Discharges, Accidential Discharges Certification of Reports Falsification of Information Date of Receipt of Reports Retention of Records Storm Drain System: Prohibited Discharges Requirements for Construction Operations General Prohibitions and Practices 2 16.09.180 16.09.185 16.09.190 16.09.195 16.09.200 16.09.205 16.09.210 16.09.215 16.09.220 16.09.225 16.09.230 16.09.235 16.09.240 16.09.245 16.09.250 16.09.255 16.09.260 16.09.265 16.09.270 16.09.275 16.09.280 16.09.285 NOT YET APPROVED Requirements for Newly Constructed, Remodeled or Converted Multi- Residential, Commercial and Industrial Facilities Personnel Orientation Accidental Discharges Prevention Storage of Hazardous Materials Above Sinks Zinc-Containing Floor Finishes Requirements for Cooling Systems, Pools, Spas, Fountains, Boilers and Heat Exchangers Root and Pest Control Chemicals Requirements for Photographic Materials Processing Requirements for Dental Facilities that Remove or Place Amalgam Fillings Requirements for Vehicle Service Facilities Requirements for Machine Shops Annual Publication of Significant Noncompliant Dischargers Enforcement: Warning Enforcement: Notice of Noncompliance Enforcement: Administrative Compliance Order Enforcement: Criminal Penalties Enforcement: Administrative Citation Enforcement: Administrative Civil Penalties Enforcement: Judicial Civil Penalties Damage to Facilities City Right to Terminate Discharge Enforcement: Remedies Nonexclusive 16.09.005 Purpose. The overall goal of this Chapter and the City's water quality control program is to prevent and control pollution and protect and foster human health and the environment. The specific purpose of this Chapter is to prevent the discharge of any pollutant into the sanitary sewer system, the storm drain system, or surface waters, which would: 1) obstruct or damage the sanitary sewer or storm drain system; 2) interfere with, inhibit or disrupt the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant (the "plant"), or its treatment processes, or operations, or its sludge processes, use or disposal; 3) pass through the treatment system and contribute to violations of the regulatory requirements placed upon the plant; or 4) result in or threaten harm to or deterioration of human health or the environment. It is the intent of the City to update and modify this Chapter as needed to continue to provide a program for protection of the storm drain system and pretreatment of industrial wastes which is approved by federal and state regulatory agencies. Therefore this Chapter is designed to be no less stringent than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency "General Pretreatment Requirements for Existing and New Sources of Pollution" published at Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 403 and The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.c. section 1251, as applicable, and as such 3 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED requirements may be amended from time to time (hereinafter the "Pretreatment Requirements" and "Clean Water Act"). 16.09.010 Definitions. The following words and phrases, whenever used in this Chapter, shall be as defined herein. Words, terms and phrases used in this Chapter not otherwise defined shall be as defined or interpreted or used in the Pretreatment Requirements. Terminology for analytical testing shall be that contained in "Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants," published at Title 40 CFR, Part 136. "Annual average concentration" means the average concentration of a substance measured over any twelve-month period of time. "Authorized Representative" means an authorized or duly authorized representative as defined below: (a) If the discharger is a corporation: (1) The president, secretary, treasurer, or a vice-president of the corporation in charge of a principal business function, or any other person who performs similar policy or decision-making functions for the corporation; or (2) The manager of one or more manufacturing, production, or operating facilities, provided the manager is authorized to make management decisions that govern the operation of the regulated facility including having the explicit or implicit duty of making major capital investment recommendations, and initiate and direct other comprehensive measures to assure long-term environmental compliance with environmental laws and regulations; can ensure that the necessary systems are established or actions taken to gather complete and accurate information for discharge permit requirements; and where authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the manager in accordance with corporate procedures. (b) If the discharger is a partnership or sole proprietorship: a general partner or proprietor, respectively. (c) If the discharger is a federal, state, or local governmental facility: a director or highest official appointed or designated to oversee the operation and performance of the activities of the government facility, or their designee. (d) The individuals described in paragraphs (a) through (c), above, may designate a Duly Authorized Representative if the authorization is in writing, the authorization specifies the individual or position responsible for the overall operation of the facility from 4 1005208yn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED which the discharge originates, or with overall responsibility for environmental matters for the organization, and the written authorization is submitted to the Superintendent. "Average concentration" of a substance means the total daily discharge weight of the substance divided by the total daily wastewater volume at the point of discharge. "Berm" means a ridge, lip or other raised barrier to the flow of liquid which is not rendered ineffective by the liquid and is sufficiently high to contain anticipated fluid amounts, or which causes sufficient grade to prevent migration of anticipated fluid amounts. "Best Management Practices!! or "BMPs" means schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures and other management practices to implement the prohibitions in this Chapter. BMPs include treatment requirements, operating procedures and practices to control plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal or drainage from materials storage. "Biochemical Oxygen Demand" or "BOD" means the quantity of oxygen utilized in the bio<;:hemical oxidation of organic matter under standard laboratory procedures. "Categorical Pretreatment Standard!! means any regulation containing pollutant discharge limits promulgated by EPA that apply to a specific category of dischargers and that appear in 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N, Parts 405 -471. "Categorical Discharger" shall mean any discharger subject to categorical Pretreatment Standards. "Cesspool" means a lined or partially lined underground pit into which raw sanitary sewage is discharged. "City" means City of Palo Alto "Collection system" means the pipes, junction boxes, channels and other conveyance apparatus used to move storm water or sewage. "Cooling system blowdown" means water routinely discharged from a cooling water system to maintain efficient operation of the system. "Cooling water" means water which is used to cool fluids or equipment in commercial or industrial processes or air conditioning systems. "Cooling water system" means the pipes, heat exchangers and other appurtenances used to convey cooling water in cooling towers, direct contact cooling systems and similar fixed ) cooling systems. Multiple units of a cooling water system serving a building or piece of 5 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED equipment are considered as one system if the cooling water distribution system units are physically connected. "Contaminated groundwater" means water found beneath the earth's surface which does not meet State or Federal standards for drinking water supplies or other specified beneficial uses. "Contaminated. water" means water that does not meet State or Federal standards for discharge to navigable waters. "County" shall mean the County of Santa Clara. "Cycles of concentration" means the flow rate of water added to a cooling tower water system divided by the flow rate of water discharged from the cooling tower. "Discharge" means the introduction of any pollutant or of any industrial, commercial or domestic waste into the sanitary sewer system or storm drain system. "Dischargertt means any person or entity who has the potential to or who discharges, causes, or permits the discharge of any pollutant or of any industrial, commercial or domestic waste into the sanitary sewer system or storm drain system. "Domestic waste" means the liquid and waterborne wastes derived from the ordinary living processes, free from industrial wastes and of such character as to permit satisfactory disposal, without special treatment, into the sewer system. "Enforcement Response Plan" or "ERP" means the document describing the guidelines for identifying violations of and enforcing specific local limits; Pretreatment Standards and requirements; and the requirements of this Chapter. "EPA" means the United States Environmental Protection Agency,. "Exceptional waste" means that subset of industrial waste specified m Section 16.09.080(c)(2) ofthis Chapter. "Fail-safe valve" means a gravity, spring loaded or electrically driven valve that is normally closed. The valve can be opened by continuously applying pressure or depressing a switch mechanism that automatically closes the valve when not in use or depressed. ttGrease" means, and includes, fats, oils, waxes or other related constituents. Grease may be of vegetable or animal origin, including butter, lard, margarine, vegetable fats and oils, and fats in meats, cereals, seeds, nuts and certain fruits. Grease may also be of mineral origin, including kerosene, lubricating oil, and road oil. Grease in the sanitary sewer system is generally present as, but need not be, a floatable solid, a liquid, a colloid, an emulsion, or in a solution. 6 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED "Hazardous material" means any material so designated by Title 17 of this code. "Hazardous waste" means a material designated as a hazardous waste by either State or Federal regul~tions. "Industrial waste" means the waste or wastewater from any production, manufacturing or processing operation of whatever nature including institutional and commerciaL "Industrial waste" shall not include domestic waste. "Industrial waste" shall include contaminated water from construction operations, contaminated water from erosion of disturbed land, and contaminated water from irrigation runoff. "Interference" means a discharge that, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, inhibits or disrupts the Plant, its treatment processes or operations, or its sludge processes, use or disposal, or exceeds the design capacity of the sanitary sewer system. "Loading dock" means that area of a facility intended for the loading and unloading of trucks, plus an additional radius of ten feet. "Machine shop" means a fixed facility which cuts, grinds, polishes, deburrs, or machines metal parts but does not conduct metal finishing as that term is defined by the EPA in 40 CFR part 433. "Metal fabrication facility" means a fixed facility that forms, welds and assembles metal pieces, but does not conduct metal finishing as that term is defined by the EPA in 40 CFR part 433. "New source" means a new or modified building, structure, facility or installation as defined in EPA 40 CFR part 403.3(m) from which there is or may be a discharge subject to proposed or existing Pretreatment Standards. IIOil-water separator" means a receptacle designed and constructed to intercept, separate, and prevent the passage of oils and sediments into the sanitary sewer system. "Once-through cooling system" means a cooling system through which water passes through only once before discharge to a drain, including laboratory bench top cooling systems. "Organic solvent" means any solvent which contains carbon in its molecular structure. IIPass-throughll means a discharge that exits the Plant into a water of the United States in quantities or concentrations that, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from 7 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED other sources, is a cause of a violation of any requirement of the Plant's NPDES permit (including an increase in the magnitude or duration of a violation). "Person" means any individual, partnership, firm, association, corporation, or public agency. "Plant" means the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant. "Point of discharge" means the point or points designated as such in the permit. Where no designation is made it shall mean the point where the private sewer joins a public sewer. "Pretreatment Standards" means prohibited discharge standards, categorical Pretreatment Standards and local limits. "Pretreatment requirement" means any substantive or procedural requirement related to pretreatment imposed on a discharger, other than a Pretreatment Standard. "Pretreatment system" means a treatment system at an industrial or commercial facility that is designed to reduce the amount of pollutants, eliminate pollutants, or alter the nature of the pollutant properties in the waste water prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer system. "Root control chemicals" means any chemical introduced into pipes in order to inhibit or kill roots in the pipe. "Sampling location" means an access box, valve, spigot or similar structure from which samples representative of an industrial wastewater discharge from a particular process or processes, piece of equipment, activity, building, or facility are collected. "Sanitary sewage" or "sewage" means water-carried wastes from residences, business buildings, institutions, and industrial establishments, excluding ground, surface and storm waters, subsurface drainage and also excluding industrial waste. "Sanitary Sewer Overflow" or "SSO" means any overflow, spill, release, discharge or diversion of untreated or partially treated wastewater from the sanitary sewer system. SSOs include: (a) Overflows or releases of untreated or partially treated wastewater that reaches waters of the United States; (b) Overflows or releases of untreated or partially treated wastewater that do not reach waters of the United States; and 8 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (c) Wastewater backups into buildings and on private property that are caused by blockages or flow conditions within the sanitary sewer system. "Secondary containment" means and shall have the meaning specified by the Hazardous Materials Storage ordinance (Title 17, Palo Alto Municipal Code). "Seepage pitt! means a device comprised of one or more pits extending into porous strata, lined with open-jointed masonry or similar walls, capped and provided with a means of access such as a manhole cover and into which wastewater disposal system effluent is discharged. "Sewage treatment plant" means any arrangement of devices and structures used for treating sanitary sewage. "Sewer" means a pipe or conduit for carrying sewage. "Sewer system" or "sanitary sewer system" means the collection system, all sewers, treatment plants and other facilities owned or operated by the City of Palo Alto for carrying, collecting, storing, treating, reclaiming and disposing of sanitary sewage and industrial wastes. "Significant Industrial User" (SIU) means, except as provided in (c ) and (d): (a) A discharger subjecHo categorical Pretreatment Standards; or (b) A discharger that: (1) Discharges an average of twenty-five thousand (25,000) gpd or more of process wastewater to the sanitary sewer system (excluding sanitary, noncontact cooling and boiler blowdown wastewater); (2) Contributes a process waste stream which makes up five (5) percent or more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic capacity of the sanitary sewer system; or (3) Is designated as such by the Superintendent on the basis that it has a reasonable potential for adversely affecting the sanitary sewer system's operation or for violating any Pretreatment Standard or Requirement. (c) The Superintendent may determine that a discharger subject to categorical Pretreatment Standards is a Non-Significant Categorical Industrial User (Non-SCIU) rather than a Significant Industrial User on a fmding that the discharger never discharges more than 100 gallons per day (gpd) of total categorical wastewater (excluding sanitary, non-contact cooling and boiler blowdown wastewater, unless specifically included in the Pretreatment Standard)and the following conditions are met: (1) The discharger, prior to Superintendent's finding, has consistently complied with all applicable categorical Pretreatment Standards and Requirements; 9 100520syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (2) The discharger annually submits the certification statement required in 16.09.135(a)(3), together with any additional information necessary to support the certification statement; and (3) The discharger never discharges any untreated concentrated wastewater. (d) Upon a fmding that a discharger meeting the criteria in Subsection (b) of this part has no reasonable potential for adversely affecting the sanitary sewer system's operation or for violating any Pretreatment Standard or Requirement, the Superintendent may at any time, on its own initiative or in response to a petition received from a discharger, determine that such discharger should not be considered a Significant Industrial User. "Significant noncompliance" means a violation or series of violations by a discharger of one or more criteria set forth in 40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(viii). "Simple payback period" means the number of,years required to allow the dollar value of an investment in water pollution control to be exceeded by cost savings resulting from the investment. "Single Toxic Organic" or "STO" shall mean the highest quantifiable value for any individual toxic organic compound. "Slug discharge" means any discharge of a non-routine, episodic nature, including but not limited to an accidental spill or a non-customary batch discharge of wastewater, material or waste of high volume or pollutant concentration which violates any of the specific prohibitions listed in 40 CFR 403.5(b )or Sections 16.09.045 or 16.09.050 of this code or that has a reasonable potential to cause Interference or Pass-Through or in any other way violate the Plant's regulations, Local Limits, or Sanitary Sewer System requirements or NPDES Permit conditions .. "Storm drains" or "storm drain system" means the system of pipes, gutters, surface conveyance and channels used to collect and convey storm water. "Superintendent" means the manager of the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant, his or her designee or such other person as may be designated by the city manager. "Total Toxic Organics" or "TTon shall mean the sum of all quantifiable toxic organic compound concentrations greater than 0.010 mg/liter . . "Toxic organic compound" shall mean any organic pollutant contained in 40 CFR Part 433.11(e). "Unpolluted water" means water to which no constituent has been added, either intentionally or accidentally, that would render such water unacceptable for disposal to the storm drain system or natural drainage or directly to surface waters. 10 100520 syn 6051181 \. NOT YET APPROVED "Wastewater" the liquid and water-carried wastes generated by a domestic, commercial and or industrial facility, whether treated or untreated, discharged into or permitted to enter the sewer system. "Wet sanding" means the use of water and sandpaper for the removal of paint. 16.09.015 Responsibility of the superintendent. The Superintendent shall be responsible for the administration and enforcement of the provisions of this Chapter, for conducting an industrial waste source control program, and for promUlgating such orders, rules and requirements as are necessary to accomplish the purpose of this article in accordance with the requirements that are or may be promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency, the state of California Water Resources Control Board, the State Department of Health Services, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board for the San Francisco Bay Region or other duly authorized boards or agencies. 16.09.020 Confidentiality . (a) Any information submitted to the Superintendent pursuant to this Chapter may be claimed as confidential by the submitter. Any such claim must be asserted at the time of submission by stamping the words IIconfidential business information" on each page containing such information. Information submitted prior to the inclusion of this section in the Chapter may be withdrawn and replaced by submittals stamped "confidential business information. II If no such claim is made at the time of submission the information may be made available to the public without further notice. Upon receipt of a request for the release of information to the public which includes information which the discharger has notified the Superintendent is claimed to be a trade secret or sensitive as provided herein, the Superintendent shall notify the discharger in writing of the request by certified mail, return receipt requested. The Superintendent shall release the information to the public, but not earlier than thirty days after the date of mailing the notice of the request for information, unless, prior to the expiration of the thirty-day period, the discharger files an action in an appropriate court for a declaratory judgment that the information is subject to protection under the laws of the state of California or for an injunction prohibiting disclosure of the information to the public and promptly notifies the Superintendent of that action. This section does not permit a discharger to refuse to disclose the information required pursuant to this Chapter to the Superintendent. (b) Information and data provided to the Superintendent pursuant to this section which constitutes effluent or flow data, as defined at 40 CFR 2.302, shall be available to the public without restriction. 11 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED ( c) A discharger may be prohibited from discharging a substance unless its composition is made known to the Superintendent. 16.09.025 Alternate materials and methods. (a) Practical Difficulties. The Superintendent is authorized to modify any of the provisions of this Chapter upon application in writing by the owner, a lessee or an authorized representative where there are practical difficulties in the way of carrying out the provisions of this Chapter, provided that the purpose of this Chapter, as set forth in Section 16.09.005, shall be complied with, and substantial justice done. The particulars of such modification and the decision of the Superintendent shall be entered upon the records of the plant and a signed copy shall be furnished to the applicant. (b) Alternate Materials. The Superintendent, upon application in writing by the owner, a lessee or an authorized representative, and on notice to the chief building official, is authorized to approve alternate materials or methods, provided that the Superintendent finds that the proposed design, use or operation satisfactorily complies with the intent of this Chapter and that the material, method of work performed or operation is, for the purpose intended, at least equivalent to that prescribed in this Chapter in quality and effectiveness in meeting the purposes of this Chapter. Approvals under the authority herein contained shall be subject to the approval. of the chief building official whenever the alternate material or method involves matters regulated by any code administered by the chief building official. The particulars of any approval made by the Superintendent under this subsection shall be entered upon the records of the plant and a signed copy shall be furnished to the applicant. 16.09.030 Limitations on point of discharge. No person shall discharge any substances directly into a manhole or other opening in a city sewer or storm drain system, other than through an approved building sewer, or other location approved by the Superintendent. 16.09.035 Prohibitions. Wastes discharged into the sewer system shall not have characteristics which by themselves or by interaction with other wastes may: (a) Endanger the health and safety of the public or city personnel; (b) Cause corrosion or other damage to the sewer system; ( c) Create nuisance such as odors or coloration; 12 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (d) Result in extra cost of collection, treatment, or disposal; (e) Interfere with, inhibit or disrupt any wastewater treatment process of the plant, its treatment processes, sludge processes, or operations in such manner to cause violations of the plant's NPDES permit, or any regulatory requirement, or result in the use of sludge in noncompliance with any applicable requirements. This shall include instances due to flow rate and/or pollutant concentration, including oxygen-demanding pollutants (BOD, etc.) and applies to increases in magnitude or duration of violation by the plant; (f) Pass through or exit the plant into waters of the United States in quantities or concentrations which contribute to a violation of any regulatory requirement applicable to the plant. This shall include increases in magnitude or duration of any violation or period of noncompliance; (g) Cause the temperature of the influent flow to the plant to exceed 40°C (l04°F); (h) Prevent, hinder, delay, or impede compliance with effluent quality requirements established by regulatory agencies, or exceed the same; (i) Cause wastewater quality to fall outside reclamation feasibility limits. G) Obstruct flows within the sewer system or otherwise cause or contribute to sanitary sewer overflows. 16.09.040 Standards. (a) The following standards shall apply to all discharges to the sewer at a designated sampling location determined by the Superintendent to be consistent with the dilution prohibition contained in Section 16.09.115. (b) Maximum allowable limitations at the point of sampling shall be specified in each discharge permit, based on flow and waste stream information supplied in the discharger's permit application, applicable National Pretreatment Standards for process wastewaters, and other pertinent information. Maximum allowable limitations may be expressed both in terms of total mass discharged and maximum allowable limits. (c) The National Pretreatment Standards set forth in 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N, Parts 405-471 shall apply to all applicable sources. The definitions and procedures for establishing individual effluent limitations shall be as specified therein. Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed as allowing less stringent limitations. (d) Local limitations, in addition to those specified in this section, shall be developed by the Superintendent based upon the prohibitions contained in Section 16.09.035. These 13 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED limitations will be imposed on appropriate dischargers via industrial waste discharge permits or modifications to existing permits. (e) In addition to the requirements of (c) and (d) above, the following requirements shall apply where they are more stringent: Parameter Dissolved sulfides Fluoride Mercaptans Oil & grease** Oil & grease (total) Maximum Limits* mglliter 0.10 65 0.10 20 200 * Apply to both instantaneous and composite samples ** Gravity separation at a temperature of 20°C. and a pH of 4.5. Para meter Minimum limit Maximum Limit pH* *no units Parameter 5.0 Suspended solids Total dissolved solids Maximum Limits* mglliter 3000 5000 * Apply to instantaneous samples only ** Apply to composite samples only 11.0 Maximum Limits** mg/liter 6000 10000 (f) Dyes. Wastes showing excessive coloration shall not be discharged into the sewer system. Excessive coloration shall be defined as any coloration in a waste which, for any wave length, displays less than sixty percent of the light transmissibility of distilled water under the following conditions: (1) After filtration, through a 0.45 micron membrane filter; (2) In the pH range of 5.5 to 11.0; (3) Through a one centimeter light path; (4) A maximum spectrum band width of 10 nanometers; (5) Through the wave length range from 400 to 800 nanometers. (g) Oil and/or grease shall not be discharged into the sewer system if the average concentration of floatable oil and/or grease (defined as that which is subject to gravity separation at a temperature of 20° C. and at a pH of 4.5) exceeds twenty mglliter; nor shall the total oil and/or grease concentration exceed two hundred mglliter. In addition, the discharge of petroleum oil, non-biodegradable cutting oil, or products of mineral origin in amounts that cause interference or pass-through shall be prohibited. (h) Hazardous, Noxious or Malodorous Substances. No industrial waste shall be discharged which alone or in combination with other wastes may create a public nuisance or 14 100520syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED hazard, make human entry into the sewers unsafe, or which constitutes a discharge of hazardous waste. (i) Permitted dischargers shall be required to certify at least every six months in their Periodic Report of Continued Compliance (PRCC) that their discharged waste does not constitute a hazardous waste and that during the previous six months no discharge of hazardous waste has occurred. Dischargers shall be required (as a condition to permission to discharge) to file with the Palo Alto fire department a current hazardous materials business plan (HMBP) pursuant to Title 17 of this code and to have on site copies of material safety data sheets for all hazardous materials stored, generated, or used at the discharger's site. Should any discharge of a hazardous waste occur, the discharger shall immediately verbally notify the Superintendent and shall also verbally notify the EPA and the Regional Water Quality Control Board as soon as possible, but in no event later than twenty-four hours after such discharge. The discharger shall also notify the Superintendent, EPA and the Regional Water Quality Control Board in writing no longer than 21 days after such discharge. G) Records of hazardous waste disposal manifests, inventories of stored virgin and used hazardous materials, and other documentation required by the HMBP shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in 16.09.160. (k) Explosives. No solids, liquids, or gases which by themselves or by interaction with other substances may create fire or explosion hazards, including waste streams with a closed cup flashpoint of less than 140°F. (60°C) shall be discharged to the sewer system. Flammable substances including, but not limited to, acetone, alcohols, benzene, gasoline, xylene, hexane and naphtha, shall not be discharged into the sanitary sewer system except where present in contaminated groundwater discharges being discharged under an exceptional waste permit issued by the Superintendent. Where groundwater discharges contain such contaminants, the discharger shall monitor the sewer atmosphere for explosivity and flammability using a properly calibrated meter designed for this purpose. The frequency of such monitoring shall be defined in the permit. Whenever ten percent of the lower explosive level is exceeded, the discharger shall immediately notify the Superintendent of the potential hazard in the sewer once the determination of threatened explosivity has been made. The discharger shall follow verbal notification within five days with a written explanation of the cause of the explosive hazard, corrective actions taken to alleviate the situation, and measures taken to prevent,reoccurrence. The discharger shall not recommence discharge without prior written approval of the Superintendent. Where flammable substances are used in processes, separate collection and disposal outside the sanitary sewer system shall be provided. (1) Organic Solvents. Except as permitted by other sections of this Chapter, the sewer shall not be used as a means of disposal for organic solvents. Wastewater discharged to the sanitary sewer system shall not contain a sum total greater than 1000 mg/liter of acetone, ethanol, methanol, or isopropyl alcohol, in any combination. Dischargers having organic solvents on site or using same shall provide and use a separate collection and disposal system outside the sewer system and shall provide safeguards against their accidental discharge to the sewer. An 15 100520syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED approved toxic organic management plan (TOMP) that ihcludes control measures to prevent entry of toxic organics and other solvents into the sanitary sewer system shall be filed by the discharger as a condition of permission to discharge to the sanitary sewer. The TOMP shall be updated whenever any significant change in the inventory, usage, or management of toxic organic compounds occurs. The updated TOMP shall be submitted to the City for approval within (30) days. Records documenting appropriate disposal and handling of organic solvents shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in 16.09.160. Organic solvents shall include, but shall not be limited to those used in dry cleaning establishments, and shall also include separator water generated by dry cleaning equipment. Neither the organic solvent nor the separator water may lawfully be discharged to the sewer or storm drain system. (m) Toxic Organics. The prohibition against disposal of organic solvents contained in 16.09.040(1) may be replaced by a specific limitation on Single Toxic Organics (STO) and Total Toxic Organics (TTO). Any such limitation must be contained in an industrial waste permit. The maximum allowable limit for TTO shall be 1.0 mg/liter. The maximum allowable limit for STO shall be 0.75 mg/liter. Additionally, dischargers subject to a National Pretreatment Standard shall comply with any toxic organics standard defined by the applicable National Pretreatment Standards. The maximum allowable limit for phenols shall be 1.0 mg/liter. (n) Radioactivity. The discharge of radioactive wastes or isotopes into the sewer system is prohibited except when in conformance with all applicable state and federal regulations. (0) Solids or Viscous Substances. No material shall be discharged to the sanitary sewer system that will obstruct or damage the sanitary sewer system. Specific prohibitions are as follows: (1) Inert Solids. The discharge of inert solids including, but not limited to sand, glass, metal chips, bone, plastics, etc., into the sanitary sewer system is prohibited. Settling chambers or treatment works shall be installed where necessary to prevent the entry of inert solids into the sanitary sewer system. (2) Solid Particles. Industrial wastes shall not contain particulate matter that will not pass through a one-half-inch screen; this subsection shall not apply to domestic sewage from industrial establishments. (P) Stored Liquid Wastes. Liquid aqueous-based wastes that have been collected and held in tanks or containers shall not be discharged into the sanitary sewer system except at 16 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED locations authorized by the Superintendent to collect such wastes. Wastes of this category include but are not limited to: (1) Chemical toilet wastes; (2) Pleasure boat wastes; (3) Septic tank pumping; (4) Trailer, camper, house car, or other recreationru vehicle wastes; (5) Industrial wastes collected in containers or tanks. (q) Toxicity. The following is a nonexclusive list of toxic substances and the maximum allowable limit for each discharge: Toxicant Maximum Allowable Limits mglliter Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Cadmium Chromium, Hexavalent Chromium total Cobalt Copper Cyanide Formaldehyde Lead Manganese Mercury Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) Nickel Phenols Selenium Silver Zinc 0.10 5.0 0.75 1.0 0.10 1.0 2.0 1.0 0.25 0.50 5.0 0.50 1.0 0.010 0.75 0.50 1.0 1.0 0.25 2.0 All limits for metallic substances are for total metal unless indicated otherwise. For discharges with annual average flows greater than fifty thousand gallons per day through any single sampling location, the maximum allowable limits shall be one-half the values listed in the table, with the exception of copper, mercury, MTBE, nickel, and silver, for which the limits shall remain 0.25 mg/liter, O.OlD mg/liter, 0.75 mg/liter, 0.50 mg/liter, and 0.25 mglliter, respectively, regardless of flow. The maximum allowable limit for mercury set forth in this section shall not be applicable to dental facilities using mercury-containing amalgam. Dental facility requirements are set forth in Section 16.09.220. 17 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED The maximum allowable limit for silver set forth in this section shall not be applicable to photographic materials processing. Silver limitations for photoprocessors are set forth in Section 16.09.215. The maximum allowable limit for zinc set forth in this section shall not be applicable to vehicle service facilities. Zinc limitations for vehicle service facilities are set forth in Section 16.09.225. The maximum allowable limit for copper set forth in this section shall apply to all discharges except where maximum allowable limitations are specified in Section 16.09.045. 16.09.045 Additional copper limitations for industrial waste. (a) Industrial waste discharges to the sanitary sewer system are subject to the copper limitations contained in Section 16.09.040(q) except for industrial waste from the following facilities, including facilities that are components of larger facilities, which are subject to specific limitations set forth in other provisions of this Chapter. (1) Cooling systems, pools, spas, fountains, boilers and heat exchangers as specified in Section 16.09.205; (2) Photo processing facilities as specified in Section 16.09.215; (3) Dental facilities as specified in Section 16.09.220 and; (4) Vehicle service facilities as specified in Section 16.09.225; (6) Machine shops as specified in Section 16.09.230 and; (5) Non-process, non-domestic waste as specified in Section 16.09.045(c). (b) Industrial waste discharges to the sewer from metal finishing facilities, as defined by the EPA in 40 CFR part 413 and part 433, shall meet either subdivision (1) or (2) of this subsection. These requirements shall apply to process wastes containing copper or nickel prior to dilution by non-metal finishing process wastes, domestic waste, and cooling water. (1) The annual average copper limit for any twelve month period shall not exceed 0.40 mg/liter. In addition, all reasonable control measures specified in accordance with standards published by the Superintendent shall be installed and implemented; or (2) The annual average mass of copper shall not exceed an amount specified by the Superintendent in the industrial waste discharge permit, which is based upon a pollution prevention review conducted or approved by the Superintendent. The limitation shall be based upon those control measures having a simple payback period of five years or less. The annual average mass per day shall be a "rolling" measurement, calculated by multiplying the flow- weighted average copper concentration for all samples taken during any twelve month period by the total flow for that twelve month period. The annual average mass per day limit may be increased by the Superintendent in proportion to increases in production at the discharger's facility to the extent that such production increases are within the growth allocation specified in 18 100520syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED the document prepared by Montgomery Watson, and published by the City of Palo Alto, entitled "City of Palo Alto-Local Limits Development -Proposed Local Limits -April, 1994." (c) The maximum allowable limit for discharge of copper from non-process, non- domestic waste discharges to the sanitary sewer other than those covered by subsections (a) or (b) shall be 2.0 mg/liter. These waste discharge sources shall be designated by the Superintendent upon request and typically consist of infrequent, low volume, or exceptional wastes that are generated during maintenance, repair and cleaning activities. 16.09.050 Grease disposal prohibited. No person shall dispose of any grease, or cause any grease to be disposed, by discharge into any drainage piping, by discharge into any public or private sanitary sewer, by discharge into any storm drainage system, or by discharge to any land, street, public way, river, stream or other waterway 16.09.055 Unpolluted water. (a) Unpolluted water shall not be discharged through direct or indirect connection to the sanitary sewer system unless a permit is issued by the City. As used in this section, unpolluted water shall include storm water from roofs, yards, foundation or under-drainage, which meets all state and federal requirements for discharge to surface waters of the United States. The Superintendent may approve the discharge of such. water to the sewer system only when no reasonable alternative method of disposal is available. If a permit is granted for the discharge of such water into the sewer system, the user shall pay the applicable charges and fees and shall meet such other conditions as required by the Superintendent. (b) Non-emergency once-through cooling water from systems using potable water as a coolant shall not be discharged to the sanitary sewer system; provided that the Superintendent may approve an exception in the following instances: (1) For once-through cooling water used for bench top reflux or distillation or other similarly sized activity; or (2) For short term use only, upon the determination that the use is for a research activity for which another source of cooling is not easily available. 16.09.060 Standards for other industrial wastes. The Superintendent may establish standards for any industrial wastes not specifically referred to in this Chapter. These standards shall be published and shall be made available to any person requesting a copy of the standards. 16.09.065 'Best Management Practices (BMPs). 19 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED The Superintendent may require the implementation of BMPs. The Superintendent may require submission of information to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of BMPs. 16.09.070 Trucker's discharge permit. (a) All persons operating vacuum or pump trucks or other liquid waste transport trucks desiring to collect or discharge septic tank, seepage pit, chemical toilet, cesspool contents, or other similar liquid wastes shall be permitted by the County and meet the requirements in Santa Clara County Code, Title B Regulations, Chapter X. All such trucks discharging to the City sanitary sewer system shall first acquire a trucker's discharge permit from the City. Discharges in the City samtary sewer system shall be only at the locations specified by the Superintendent. (c) Truck transported industrial wastes discharged to the City sanitary sewer system shall be only at the locations specified by the Superintendent for the specific waste. The City shall require payment for treatment and disposal costs or may refuse permission to discharge certain prohibited wastes in accordance with City of Palo Alto's utilities rules and requirements. Denial, suspension, or revocation of such permit shall be in accordance with Sections 16.09.095 and 16.09.100 of this Chapter. (d) Trucks transporting waste shall not combine loads from the different waste types described in (a), (b) or (c). (e) Records of all wastes collected or disposed pursuant to this section shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in Section 16.09.160. 16.09.075 Food service establishments. (a) Definitions "Black Grease" means any contents within or removed from a grease control device, generally consisting of brown grease combined with wastewater from toilet plumbing associated with the sanitary sewer. "Brown Grease" means any contents within or removed from a grease control device, generally FOG combined with non-restroom FSE wastewater. "Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG)" means any substance such as a vegetable or animal product that is used in, or is a by product of, the cooking or food preparation process, and that turns or may turn viscous or solidifies with a change in temperature or other conditions. "Food Service Establishment (FSE)" means a facility defined in California Uniform Retail Food Service Establishments Law (CURFFL) Section 113785, and any commercial entity within the boundaries of the City, operating in a permanently constructed structure such as a 20 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED room, building, or place, or portion thereof, maintained, used, or operated for the purpose of storing, preparing, serving, or manufacturing, packaging, or otherwise handling food for sale to other entities, or for consumption by the public, its members or employees, and which has any process or device that uses or produces FOG, or grease vapors, steam, fumes, smoke or odors that are required to be removed by a Type lor Type II hood, as defmed in CURFFL Section 113785. "Grease Control Device (GCD)" means a grease interceptor, grease trap or other grease removal device designed, constructed and intended to remove, hold or otherwise prevent the passage of FOG to the sanitary sewer. "Grease Waste Hauler Service Contract" means a contractual agreement between the City and a City selected and managed GCD service provider to be used by FSEs. "Lateral" means the drainage piping and appurtenances that constitute the building'S connection to the City's sanitary sewer system. "Tallow Receptacle" means a tallow bin or equivalent waste oil/grease receptacle. "Twenty-five Percent (25%) Rule" means the requirement for grease control devices to be maintained such that the combined FOG and solids accumulation does not exceed 25% of the design hydraulic depth in any location of the grease control device. This is to ensure that the minimum hydraulic retention time and required available hydraulic volume is maintained to effectively intercept and retain FOG. IIWaste Hauler" means any person permitted with the County of Santa Clara and meeting County of Santa Clara Code, Title B Regulations and carrying on or engaging in vehicular transport of waste as part of, or incidental to, any business for that purpose. "Yellow Grease or Tallow" means any waste FOG material generally generated as a byproduct from cooking. (b) Prohibitions. The following prohibitions shall apply to all FSEs: (1) No person shall dispose of any FOG, or cause any FOG to be disposed, by discharge into any drainage piping, public or private sanitary sewer, storm drain system, or onto any land, street, public way, river, stream or other waterway. (A) Discharge of any GCD contents or materials released during sewer pipe or lateral cleaning is prohibited. (B) Disposal of waste cooking oil into drainage pipes is prohibited. 21 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (c) FSE staff shall not remove the contents of GCDs. The contents of GCDs shall only be removed by permitted waste haulers. (d) No FSE shall install, have installed, or use a food waste disposer (grinder). (e) No FSE shall connect any high temperature discharge lines or drainage fixtures that are not a source of FOG to a GCD. Such shall include, but not be limited to, the following: (1) Dishwashers; (2) Steamers; (3) Pasta cookers; (4) Hot discharge lines from buffet counters and kitchens; (5) Hand washing sinks; (6) Ice machine drip lines; (7) Soda machine drip lines; (8) Discharge lines in bar areas. (f) No FSE shall operate a GCD where FOG and solids accumulation exceed 25% of the design hydraulic depth of the GCD (25% rule). (g) No FSE shall introduce any additives into GCDs and/or FSE wastewater systems to biologically/chemically treat FOG, for FOG remediation, to emulsify FOG, or as a supplement to GCD maintenance, unless the Superintendent grants prior written consent. Biological or chemical treatment of FOG includes, but is not limited to, systems or additives, such as solvents or enzymes that dissolve or mobilize FOG. (h) No FSE shall discharge wastes from toilets, urinals, ash basins, and other fixtures containing sanitary sewage materials to sewer lines draining to a GCD. (i) No FSE shall allow soap or soapy water to flow to the storm drain system. G) No FSE shall allow wastewater generated from cleaning of equipment or outside surfaces containing FOG or food residue to flow to the storm drain system. (k) Best Management Practices (BMPs). FSEs shall implement BMPs to prevent FOG discharge to the sanitary sewer and to prevent non-storm water discharges to the storm drain system. All FSEs shall implement and incorporate BMPs into their operations in accordance with the Superintendent's guidelines, requirements and directives. The Superintendent may require submission of information to evaluate the implementation of BMPs. At a minimum the following BMPs shall be implemented by FSE's: 22 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (1) Dishwashing. FSE's shall remove food from preparation and service items prior to washing. Food waste shall not be disposed in sinks or drains. The FSE shall dispose of all food waste directly into the trash or food scrap container by physically removing the food waste with scrapers, towels, paper towels, rubber spatulas, or other effective methods prior to using water to rinse off plates, dishes, pots, pans, containers, utensils, etc. (2) Equipment Cleaning. (A) Drain Screens. Screens shall be installed in all sinks, drains, floor drains, floor sinks, dishwashers, etc. The screens shall be frequently inspected and cleaned by disposing waste into the trash or food scrap container to prevent FOG and food buildUp. (B) Cleaning Wastewater. Wastewater generated from cleaning FOG contaminated items such as large kitchen equipment, floor mats, floors, exhaust hoods and filters, grills, trash, recycling, and food scrap containers, and tallow receptacles; or from any washing of items such as plates, dishes, pots, pans, containers or utensils that occurs other than in an automatic dishwasher shall not be discharged to the sanitary sewer unless it flows through a GCD. (C) Exhaust hood and vent grease collection devices. All such collection devices, including but not limited to grease cups on roofs, in hoods and removable filters, shall be properly maintained at a frequency sufficient to prevent spills and overflows. Collected waste oil/grease shall be disposed of in a tallow receptacle. (3) Storm water pollution prevention. (A) Routinely inspect and dry sweep as necessary outside areas such as walkways, dining areas and waste storage areas to prevent storm water pollution. (B) Routinely inspect waste collection containers to verify that covers are in place and that container and surrounding areas are clean and free of FOG and food residue, debris and leaks. Such containers include, but are not limited to, trash, recycle, food scrap and tallow receptacles. If FOG or food residue, debris, or leaks are found the FSE shall immediately take action to correct the noncompliance. This may include, placing cover(s) on containers and receptacles, Cleaning up FOG or food residues or spills in the surrounding areas or contacting the appropriate vendor for container or receptacle repair/replacement. (C) If any outdoor surfaces with FOG or food residue require cleaning, first sweep or physically remove excess residue, next use a mop and bucket, then discharge waste mop water through a GCD. (D) Any wastewater generated from outdoor cleaning of equipment and outdoor surfaces with FOG or food residue shall be captured and disposed of into the sanitary sewer. If the wastewater contains FOG, it shall be disposed through a GCD prior to release to the sanitary sewer system. (4) FOG Transporting. FSEs shall properly dispose of waste oil and grease into a tallow receptacle. Waste FOG shall be transported in a covered container. Appropriate 23 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED measures shall be taken to prevent spills. Any spills shall be immediately cleaned using methods described in this Section. (5) Cleaning with Dry Methods. Dry cleaning methods shall be used inside and outside to clean up FOG spills. Pick up liquids or FOG with rags or absorbent materiaL Sweep up absorbent material and dispose of it in the trash. Regularly use dry methods to clean near fryers and other locations where FOG may spill or drip. Clean up all FOG spills prior to moppmg. (6) Drain Fixture Identification. All non-restroom drainage fixtures shall be labeled with their discharge location. Fixtures draining to GCDs shall be clearly labeled "drains to grease control device" or equivalent. Fixtures draining to the sanitary sewer that do not drain through a GCD shall be labeled "drains to sanitary sewer" or equivalent. A list of all non- restroom drainage fixtures and their discharge locations shall be maintained onsite. (1) Training. (1) All FSEs shall take necessary steps to inform appropriate personnel employed by such FSEs of the provisions of this Section. (2) Such personnel shall include workers and supervisors whose duties pertain in any manner to the production, treatment or disposal of waste discharges regulated by this Section. (3) Steps to inform such personnel shall include but not be limited to: (A) Orientation of newly employed or assigned personnel; (B) Quarterly training of all appropriate personnel; (C) Posting of signs or posters in work areas indicating BMPs. (4) All training/orientation shall be documented and employee signatures retained indicating each employee's attendance and understanding of the regulations reviewed. These records shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in Section 16.09.160. (m) FOG Pretreatment Required. FSEs shall install, operate and maintain an approved type and adequately sized GCD sufficlent to maintain compliance with the objectives of this Section. The GCD shall be adequate to separate and remove FOG contained in wastewater from the FSE prior to discharge into the sanitary sewer system. Fixtures, equipment, and drain lines located in food preparation and cleanup areas of FSEs that are sources of FOG shall be connected to GCDs. Compliance shall be established as follows: (1) GCD Requirements. (A) GCD shall be sized equal to or greater than the minimum size set forth in the following table based on the number of Drain Fixture Units (DFU) draining to the GCD. Sizing Criteria: 24 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED Grease Control Device (GCD) Sizing DFUs 8 21 35 90 172 216 Drain Fixture Pre-Rinse Sink GCD Volume (gallons) 500 750 1,000 1,250 1,500 2,000 DFUNumber 4 3 Compartment Sink 2 Compartment Sink Mop Basin 3 3 3 Prep Sink 3 Floor Drain 2 Floor Sink 2 (B) GCDs smaller than 500 gallons may be allowed with written approval by the Superintendent, provided that the proposed design satisfactorily complies with the intent of this Chapter. (C) All in-ground GCDs greater than 750 gallons shall have a minimum of three manholes to allow visibility over inlet piping, baffle (divider) piping and outlet piping, and to ensure accessibility for inspection, cleaning and removal of all contents. The Supenntendent may permit deviance from this requirement in writing prior to GCD installation, provided that the proposed design satisfactorily complies with the intent of this Chapter. (D) FSEs shall install GCDs in a suitable location to allow easy access for inspection, cleaning and maintenance. (E) Sample boxes shall be installed downstream of all gravity grease interceptors as defined in the 2007 California Plumbing Code. (F) Laterals installed between a FSE and GCD, and GCD and the sanitary sewer system sewer main shall include installation of two way (double) clean outs to allow access points for sewer line maintenance and inspection. (2) GCD Connections (A) All drainage fixtures where FOG may be discharged shall drain to a GCD. Such fixtures include, but are not limited to: (i) Pre-rinse (scullery) sinks; (ii) Three compartment sinks (pot sinks); (iii) Drainage fixtures in dishwashing room except for dishwashers; 25 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (iv) Trough drains (small drains prior to entering a dishwasher), small drains on busing counters adjacent to pre-rinse sinks or silverware soaking sinks; drainS/sinks; (v) Floor drains in dishwashing area and kitchens; (vi) Prep sinks; (vii) Mop Ganitor) sinks; (viii) Drains in outside areas designated for equipment washing. These drains must be covered; (ix) Drains in trash/recycling enclosures; (x) Wok stoves, rotisserie ovenslbroilers or other FOG generating cooking equipment with drip lines; (xi) Kettles and tilt/braising pans and associated floor (B) FSEs shall have a sink or other area connected to a GeD for cleaning floor mats, containers, exhaust hood filters and equipment. The sink or cleaning area shall be large enough to clean the largest mat or piece of equipment. (n) Grease control device maintenance requirements. (1 ) GeD and sewer line maintenance requirements. (A) GeDs shall be maintained in efficient operating condition by periodic removal of the full contents of the GeD which includes wastewater, accumulated FOG, floating materials, sludge and solids. (B) All GeDs shall be kept in good repair, functioning properly and maintained in continuous operation according to manufacturer's guidelines and the Superintendent's requirements and directives. (e) If a FSE utilizes automatic or mechanically cleaned GeDs its staff shall perform daily cleaning and maintenance. (D) All existing and newly installed GeDs shall be maintained in a manner consistent with a maintenance frequency approved by the Superintendent pursuant to this Section. (E) Sewer lines to and from GeDs shall be kept in good repair and clear of any FOG accumulation. (F) No FOG that has accumulated in a GeD shall be allowed to pass into any sewer lateral, the sanitary sewer system, storm drain system, or public right of way during maintenance activities. (G) All FOG discharged during GeD or FSE sewer line cleaning and maintenance shall be captured. Any FSE that has their kitchen grease waste lines, GeD exit lines and or laterals cleaned by jetting or hydro-flushing shall capture the contents prior to discharge. Such contents shall be contained, removed and disposed of by a waste hauler. 26 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (H) All GCDs shall be completely cleaned out and left empty by a City pennitted waste hauler prior to the closure of a FSE, the associated building or a change in ownership. In the event the tenant cannot be located the building owner shall assume responsibility for cleaning the GCDs. (I) Logs shall be kept for all GCD cleaning and maintenance activities. The required records shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in 16.09.160. (2) GCD Maintenance Frequency. (A) The GCD maintenance frequency shall be set so as to ensure that the minimum hydraulic retention time and required available hydraulic volume is maintained to effectively intercept and retain FOG and minimize the passage of FOG to the sanitary sewer system. All GCDs shall be maintained to achieve compliance with this Section. When the cleaning frequency to comply with the 25% rule has not yet been established, unless otherwise directed by the Superintendent, the following minimum cleaning frequencies shall be implemented: (i) Grease interceptors (gravity grease interceptors) greater than 100 gallons shall have all their contents removed at a minimum once every three months; (ii) Grease traps (hydro-mechanical grease interceptors) shall have their contents removed at a minimum once every month; (iii) Automatic or mechanical self cleaning GCDs shall have their contents completely removed at a minimum once every six months. (B) The Superintendent may modifY GCD maintenance frequencies at any time to reflect changes in operating conditions. (i) The owner/operator of a FSE may at any time submit a request to the Superintendent requesting a change in the maintenance frequency. The FSE has the burden of demonstrating that the requested change in frequency reflects actual operating conditions based on the average FOG accumulation over time and meets the requirements of this Section. Upon determination by the Superintendent that the requested revision is justified, the FSE shall adjust its GCD maintenance frequency accordingly. (C) If the GCD, at any time, contains FOG and solids accumulation that does not meet the requirements described in this Section, the FSE shall have the GCD serviced immediately such that all wastewater, FOG, solids, and other materials are completely removed from the GCD. (3) Grease waste hauler. (A) All grease waste haulers servicing GCDs in the City shall comply with the requirements set forth in the Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.09.070, Trucker's discharge permit. 27 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (B) If the Grease Waste Hauler Service Contract program has been implemented, FSEs shall use the Grease Waste Hauler Service Contract service provider for routine cleaning and maintenance of their onsite GCDs. Grease waste haulers not selected as service providers for the contract may not provide routine cleaning and maintenance of GCDs. (C) If the Grease Waste Hauler Service Contract program has not been implemented, the FSE shall retain the services of a permitted grease waste hauler. (D) Waste haulers disposing at the RWQCP shall not mix brown grease loads with different types of wastes such as septic, yellow grease, black grease, or any other waste. Each waste hauler vehicle shall be dedicated to each type of liquid waste. If a GCD is found to contain black grease, the waste hauler shall immediately notify the Superintendent. Its entire contents shall be collected and disposed of at the RWQCP, exact disposal location shall be determined by the Superintendent. (E) Waste haulers servicing GCDs shall remove the entire contents of the GCD including all FOG, water, and solids. The sides and structures shall be scrapped or otherwise cleaned sufficiently to restore capacity and allow inspection of the device. (F) Waste haulers servicing GCDs within the R WQCP service area shall not reinsert or discharge into a GCD, manhole, cleanout, or other sanitary sewer appurtenance any materials that the waste hauler has removed from a GCD or cause those materials to be so handled. The waste hauler shall obtain prior written approval from the Superintendent to decant when using appropriate equipment for the separation of water from the FOG waste. (G) Waste hauler manifest shall contain at a minimum the following: (i) Name and address of site serviced; (ii) Service date and time; (ii) Hauler name and truck ID; (iv) Volume collected; (v) GCD observations and comments; (vi) Disposal site and date; (vii) Driver signature. (0) Tallow Receptacles. (1) Collection of waste cooking oil and grease. (A) Tallow receptacles shall be in place at the location of any FSE that generates waste oil or grease. Waste oil or grease generation includes, but is not limited to, the following equipment or activities: (i) Fryers (ii) Rotisserie ovens not connected or draining to a GCD; (iii) Any other type of oil and grease waste created by cooking; (iv) Cleaning of FOG contaminated equipment; (v) Waste FOG from automatically or mechanically cleaned GCDs which require FSE staff maintenance. 28 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (B) At the Superintendents request, the FSE shall relocate tallow receptacles to an indoor or covered location to mitigate storm water pollution. (2) Tallow hauler. (A) Tallow haulers servicing FSEs shall immediately clean up any spills occurring during service. (B) Tallow receptacles delivered for service shall be free of exterior FOG. (P) Requirements for Recordkeeping. Records shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in Section 16.09.160. Such records shall include, but not be limited to, the following: (1) GCDs: (A) Waste hauler manifests (B) Logbook documenting all GCD maintenance and monitoring a9tivities including FOG and solids accumulation measurements. (2) Tallow Receptacles: (A)Maintenance records indicating servIce, cleaning, repaIr, and/or replacement. (B) Spill log indicating date and time of any spills and cleanups. (3) Plumbing: (A)Any sewer line maintenance and monitoring records including cleaning and videos of facility sewer pipes or laterals. (B)Records of any sanitary sewer overflows, backups or spills. (4) All training/orientation records .. (5) Any other information deemed appropriate by the Superintendent to ensure and document compliance with this Section (q) Requirements for remodeled and newly constructed FSEs. (1) Dischargers of FSE wastewater from newly constructed or converted commercial and industrial facilities shall be in full compliance with the provisions of this Section at the time of commencement of discharge. (2) Buildings that house FSEs shall include a covered area for all receptacles, dumpsters, bins, barrels, carts or containers used for the collection of trash, recycling, food scraps and waste cooking FOG or tallow. The areas shall be designed to prevent water run-on to the area and runoff from the area. Drains that are installed within waste storage areas are 29 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED optional. Any drain installed shall be connected to a GCD. If tallow receptacle(s) are to be stored outside then an adequately sized, segregated space for tallow receptacle(s) shall be included in the covered waste storage area. These requirements shall apply to remodeled or converted facilities to the extent that the portion of the facility being remodeled or converted is related to the subject of the requirement. (r) Accidental or threatened storm drain system discharges. For all unauthorized or prohibited releases to the storm drain systems including sanitary sewer overflows and threatened discharges to the storm drain system, the responsible party shall comply with Section 16.09.165. (s) FSE Inspection and Monitoring. All FSEs shall be subject to the regulations contained in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.09.110. 16.09.080 Industrial waste discharge permit. (a) It is unlawful for any person or organization to discharge or cause to be discharged any industrial waste whatsoever directly or indirectly into the sanitary sewer system without first obtaining a permit for industrial waste discharge pursuant to this Section. Appropriate fees for such permits are specified in a utility rate schedule of the Palo Alto utilities rates and regulations. Furthermore, it shall be unlawful for any person or organization to discharge any industrial waste in excess of the quantity or quality limitations or to violate any other requirement set forth in this Chapter or in a permit for industrial waste discharge. (b) A discharger may submit an advance written request to discharge prohibited wastes not in conformance with this Chapter or wastes containing concentrations of substances or characteristics in excess of those permitted by this Chapter. Discharge of such wastes shall not be allowed without an exceptional waste permit duly issued. (c) The Superintendent may authorize a discharger by permit to discharge "exceptional wastes" when the permit will neither result in a violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter nor cause any of the effects described in Section 16.09.035 of this code nor any violation ofthe Pretreatment Requirements. The City shall be compensated for any costs it incurs in authorizing such discharge including any expense in determining whether such discharge is compatible with the sanitary sewer system and is in compliance with the Pretreatment Req uirements. (1) Permission to discharge exceptional waste may either be given as an addendum to a current permit or by a separate permit. In the case of third parties requesting permission to discharge waste generated by another party, or the products of treating waste generated by another party, the waste generator or responsible party must submit a "designation of authorized representative" (DOAR) form to the Superintendent to authorize the third party to conduct business and sign reports on their behalf. However, certification that the waste as 30 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED discharged does not constitute a hazardous waste and the permit and permit application must be signed by such waste generator or responsible party. (2) Exceptional wastes are aqueous wastes that may include but are not limited to: (A) Construction site dewatering where soil or groundwater contamination is present; (B) Groundwater contaminated with organic solvents generated as a result of pump tests in preparation for a groundwater cleanup or water generated during sampling events; (C) Aqueous wastes generated by either permanent or mobile hazardous waste treatment units used to treat hazardous waste at the generator's site; (D) Or aqueous wastes generated as a result of site cleanup activities. (3) A pennit must be obtained prior to commencement of discharge, and requests for such permits shall be submitted no later than twenty working days prior to intended discharge. The letter of application shall include the name, address, phone number and title of the responsible party, on-site contact person's name, address, and twenty-four-hour contact phone number, analytical data on the contaminants and characteristics of the intended discharge, the intended point of discharge, the duration and volume, dates of intended discharge, and a site plan. (4) A separate charge for processing such requests shall be established by the Superintendent to recover the City's costs in processing and administering such permits. (d) The permit for any industrial waste discharge may include, but is not limited to: (1) A specific date upon which it will expire, not to exceed five years from the effective date of the permit; (2) Requiring installation and maintenance of pretreatment technology, pollution control, or construction of appropriate containment devices, designed to reduce, eliminate, or prevent the introduction of pollutants into the sanitary sewer system or storm drain system and compliance schedules for meeting these requirements; (3) Effluent limitations; (4) Self monitoring, sampling, reporting, notification and record keeping requirements; (5) Prohibition of discharge of certain wastewater components; (6) Installation and maintenance of inspection, sampling and flow measurement equipment and facilities; (7) Limits on average or maximum rate of discharges; (8) Restriction of discharge to certain hours of the day; (9) Requiring payment of additional charges to defray increased costs to the City created by the wastewater discharge; 31 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED' (10) Implementation of BMPs or specific investigations or studies to determine methods of reducing toxic constituents in the discharge; (11) Other conditions as may be required to meet the purpose of this Chapter. (e) No permit for industrial waste discharge is transferable without the prior written consent of the Superintendent. A change of ownership (incfuding a transfer of the majority of shares in a corporate discharger) of the waste generating facility requires a new permit application. (f) Any person or organization desiring to change the quantity or quality of waste discharged to the sanitary sewer system or to discharge wastes or use facilities which are not in conformance with their industrial waste permit shall apply for and obtain an amended permit prior to any such discharge or use. An application for an amended permit must be filed sixty days in advance of the proposed commencement of such discharge or use of such facilities. (g) Compliance with the discharger's permit does not relieve the discharger of responsibility for compliance with all applicable Federal and State Pretreatment Standards, including those which become effective during the term of the discharge permit. 16.09.085 Industrial wastes discharge permit procedure. (a) An applicant for a permit for any industrial waste discharge shall complete and submit an application form established by the Superintendent. The Superintendent may require information in addition to that required on the application form as deemed reasonable or necessary to evaluate the application. Interested parties shall be notified of the filing of the application via posting at city hall or on the city web page. (b) All wastewater discharge permit applications, user reports and certification statements must be signed by an authorized representative. ( c) Completed application forms shall be filed by the discharger not less than sixty days in advance of commencing discharge. The discharger shall not commence discharge prior to permit approval without specific, interim approval from the Superintendent to discharge during the permitting process. (d) Determination of National Pretreatment Category according to the Pretreatment Requirements. Prior to approval of a discharge permit, the Superintendent shall determine whether the discharge is subject to the National Pretreatment Standards provided in the Pretreatment requirements. The determination will be made by the Superintendent following the guidelines and procedures of that subpart. (e) The Superintendent may impose terms and conditions on the permit which the Superintendent deems reasonable or necessary to carry out the purposes ofthis Chapter. 32 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (f) The application shall be approved if: (1) The applicant has complied with all requirements of this Chapter and all applicable city ordinances, state and federal requirements; (2) The applicant has furnished all requested information; (3) The Superintendent determines that there are adequate devices, equipment, chemicals, and other facilities to sample, meter where desirable, convey, treat, and dispose of the industrial wastes; and (4) The person(s) to be responsible for treatment and control are adequately trained and capable of consistently meeting permit requirements. (g) Interested parties shall be notified of the issuance of permits via posting at city hall or on a city web page. Interested parties and other members of the public may appeal the issuance of a permit within forty-five days of issuance and request a hearing on the matter. The hearing procedures contained in Section 16.09.100 shall be followed. The permit effective date shall not be postponed solely because of the filing of an appeal. 16.09.090 Requirements for facilities affected by National Pretreatment Standards. In the event that an industrial waste discharge permit holder or applicant is determined to be affected by a newly promulgated National Pretreatment Standard or an existing discharge permit holder is reclassified as being subject to the National Pretreatment Standards provided in the Pretreatment Requirements due to process changes, or an inspection reveals the presence of regulated processes, or new information becomes available that justifies or requires a reclassification, the discharger shall: (a) File a Baseline Monitoring Report (BMR) per the requirements specified in 40 CFR 403.12(b) within ninety days of the effective date of a National Pretreatment Standard or reclassification. (b) If additional pretreatment, operational, or maintenance procedures, or installation of facilities, equipment or improvements will be required to comply with the National Pretreatment Standard, the discharger shall include a compliance time schedule per the requirements specified in 40 CFR 403.12(c) which specifies the shortest feasible schedule by which the discharger shall provide such additional pretreatment procedures or facilities, equipment or improvements to attain compliance. For purposes of Pretreatment requirements, the completion date in this schedule shall not be later than the established compliance date provided by the applicable Pretreatment Requirements. (c) File a Compliance Report per the requirements specified in 40 CFR 403.l2(d) within ninety days of the date for final compliance with applicable National Pretreatment Standards or in the case of a New Source within ninety days following the date commencement 33 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED of the introduction of wastewater into the sanitary sewer system. The Compliance Report shall state the average and maximum daily flow in gallons per day to the sanitary sewer system and shall contain sampling results from National Pretreatment waste streams and shall contain a certification statement prepared according to the requirements specified in 40 CFR 403 .12(b)( 6). 16.09.095 Modification, suspension or revocation of industrial wastes discharge permit. (a) Any permit for industrial wastes discharge may be revoked, made subject to additional terms or conditions, modified or suspended by the Superintendent in addition to other remedies provided by law, for good cause, including, but not limited to, the following: (1) To incorporate any new or revised federal, state, or local Pretreatment Standards or requirements; (2) To address significant alterations or additions to the discharger's operation, processes, or wastewater volume or character since the time of the individual wastewater discharge permit issuance; (3) To address a change in the plant that requires either a temporary or permanent reduction or elimination of the authorized discharge; (4) To stop a discharge or a threatened discharge which presents a hazard or a threat of hazard to the sanitary sewer system, plant, personnel, public health, safety, welfare, natural environment, the receiving waters or which violates this Chapter; (5) For violation of any terms or conditions of the discharge permit; (6) For misrepresentations or failure to fully disclose all relevant facts in the discharge permit application or in any required reporting; (7) For revision of or a grant of variance from categorical Pretreatment Standards; (8) To correct typographical or other errors in the individual wastewater discharge permit; (9) To reflect a transfer of the facility ownership or operation to a new owner or operator where requested in accordance with Section 16.09.080(e); or (10) To implement programs or policies required or requested of the City by appropriate state or federal regulatory agencies. (b) Any discharger notified of the Superintendent's intent to revoke, make subject to additional terms or conditions, modify, or suspend the discharger's permit shall immediately comply with directives of the Superintendent or cease and desist the discharge of all industrial wastes or such portion of said wastes as will eliminate the wrongful discharge to the sanitary sewer system pending any hearing that the discharger may request as set forth in Section 16.09.100 of this Chapter. (c) The Superintendent shall reissue or reinstate any industrial wastes permit or modified permit upon proof of satisfactory ability to comply and/or compliance' with all discharge requirements, and the payment of any costs, fines, or penalties which may be assessed. 34 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED The Superintendent may require any permit holder to develop and implement a compliance schedule for any proposed modification to permit terms and conditions. 16.09.100 Permit issuance, denial, modification, revocation, or suspension hearing. (a) The discharger shall have at its request, a hearing before the city manager, or their designee, before the industrial wastes permit application is issued, denied, or the permit is revoked, made subject to additional terms or conditions, modified or suspended. (b) The Superintendent shall give the industrial waste discharger applicant or permit holder ten calendar days' written notice of intent to issue or deny the application or to revoke, make subject to additional terms or conditions, modify or suspend the discharger's permit. The Superintendent shall post a copy of such notice at city hall or on the city web site for interested persons. The notice shall set forth specifically the grounds for the Superintendent's intention to deny, revoke, or suspend and shall inform the applicant or permit holder or members of the public that they have ten days from the date of receipt of the notice to file a written request for a hearing. The application shall be issued or denied or the permit shall be revoked, modified or suspended if a hearing request is not received within the ten day period. (c) If the applicant or permit holder or interested party or parties file(s) a timely hearing request, the city manager, or their designee, shall within ten calendar days from the receipt of the request, set a time and place for the hearing. All parties involved shall have the right to offer testimonial, documentary, and tangible evidence bearing on the issues and to be represented by counsel. The decision of the city manager, or their designee, whether to issue or deny the application or revoke, make subject to additional terms and conditions, modify or suspend the permit shall be final. 16.09.105 Waste sampling locations. When directed by the Superintendent, establishments from which industrial wastes are discharged to the sanitary sewer system shall provide and maintain one or more sampling locations or metering devices or volume and flow measuring methodologies or other sampling and measuring points approved by the Superintendent which will allow the separate measuring and sampling of industrial and domestic wastes. Unless otherwise approved by the Superintendent, domestic and industrial waste shall be kept completely separated upstream of such sampling locations and/or measuring points. Establishments that are billed for sewer service on the basis of sewage effluent constituents shall provide a suitable means for sampling and/or measurement of flow to determine billing constituents in accordance with the utilities rules and requirements. Sampling locations shall be so located that they are safe and accessible to the Superintendent at any reasonable time during which discharge is occurring. 16.09.110 Discharger monitoring. 35 100520syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (a) The Superintendent may conduct all inspection, surveillance, and monitoring procedures necessary to assure compliance with applicable sections of this Chapter or with federal or state requirements. (b) The Superintendent shall be authorized to enter, without unreasonable delay, any premises of any discharger to carry out inspections, surveillance and monitoring to assure compliance with this Chapter and applicable federal, state and local requirements. Records shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in Section 16.09.160. (c) In addition to any other remedy available to the City, the Superintendent may issue a Notice of Non-Compliance at the time of the inspection to require the discharger to implement actions that will correct violations of this Chapter or the permit. Such directive shall be considered as an additional condition on the dischargers' permit and may be reviewed as provided in Section 16.09.100. (d) Prior to final closure of any industrial or commercial facility, the Superintendent may require cleaning, inspection andlor testing of the facility's sanitary sewer lines, appurtenances and/or devices to ensure that the integrity of the sewer lines has not been compromised and to determine the quantity and pollutant content of sediments. Inspection and/or testing to ensure the integrity of sewer lines may be required when the facility's discharge history includes pH fluctuations, or when past discharges may have compromised or call into question the integrity of the sewer lines. Inspection and/or testing to determine the quantity and pollutant content of sediments may be required when the facility's type of operations and pollutant content of discharges make the presence of contaminated sediments likely. Inspection and testing may include, but not be limited to, pressurized testing, smoke testing, video camera inspection, and/or analytical testing of sediments for pollutants regulated by the facility's discharge permit. Where contaminated sediments or compromised sewer lines are identified, responses may include, but not be limited to, requiring replacement of compromised sewer lines and requiring removal of contaminated sediments from sewer lines. In lieu of analytical testing, facilities may elect to remove sediments from sewer lines in a manner approved by the Superintendent. For the purposes of this section, "final closure" means closure of an industrial or commercial facility when an entire builliing is being vacated by the current operator, or when the uses of an entire building will no longer include use of hazardous materials. 16.09.115 Prohibition against dilution. Except where expressly authorized to do so by the Superintendent or an applicable National Pretreatment Standard provided in the Pretreatment requirements, no discharger shall increase the use of process water, combine waste streams or in any other way, dilute a discharge. In addition, no discharger shall dilute process waste streams as a partial or complete substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with such National Pretreatment Standard or any other requirement of this Chapter. 36 l00520syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED 16.09.120 Discharger self-monitoring. (a) The Superintendent may require the discharger to conduct a wastewater sampling and analysis program of a frequency and type sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this Chapter. The discharge permit shall specify the minimum frequency and type of samples, flow monitoring, measuring, and analyses to be conducted by the discharger. Additional monitoring may be required by the Superintendent for violation follow-up or as part of a notice of noncompliance or other enforcement response. If a discharger subject to reporting requirements monitors any regulated pollutant at a designated sampling location more frequently than required, the results of this monitoring shall be reported. (b) The Superintendent may specify the type of sampling equipment and flow monitoring equipment that must be installed and used. Flow monitoring equipment installed at a permitted discharger's sampling locations shall be calibrated at a frequency of at least once per year or at the frequency recommended by the manufacturer. pH monitoring equipment installed at a permitted discharger'S sampling locations shall be calibrated at a frequency of at least once every six months or more frequently if recommended by the manufacturer. (c) Information submitted to satisfy reporting requirements shall be based on data obtained through appropriate sampling and analysis performed during the period covered by the report, based on data that is representative of conditions occUrring during the reporting period. (d) All pollutant sampling techniques, analyses, and information to be included in self-monitoring reporting, submitted as part of a BMR, wastewater discharge permit application, or report, shall be performed in accordance with 40 CFR Part 136, 40 CFR 403.l2(g) and amendments thereto, unless otherwise specified in an applicable categorical Pretreatment Standard. If 40 CFR Part 136 does not contain sampling or analytical techniques for the pollutant in question, or where the EPA determines that the Part 136 sampling and analytical techniques are inappropriate for the pollutant in question, sampling and analyses shall be performed using validated analytical methods or any other applicable sampling and analytical procedures suggested by the Superintendent or other parties approved by the EPA. Samples shall be analyzed at the discharger's expense, by a laboratory accredited by the State of California Department of Public Health for such analysis. (e) The detection limit used by the discharger for those substances reported as non- detectable shall be no greater than one-tenth the lowest applicable effiuent limit. (f) The discharger shall monitor for the toxic organic compounds specified in the National Pretreatment requirements applicable to the discharger. (g) The Superintendent may determine which additional toxic organic compounds shall be monitored based on those toxic organics that are representative and expected to be present. Permitted dischargers who file a toxic organic management plan, per the guidelines 37 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED established by the Superintendent, may analyze a subset of the additional toxic organic compounds to demonstrate compliance with the local limits for Single Toxic Organic (STO) and Total Toxic Organics (TTO) when specified in a discharge permit issued by the Superintendent. (h) The Superintendent may require self-monitoring for facilities for which a permit has not been issued. (i) All records generated pursuant to this section shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in Section 16.09.160. 16.09.125 Maintenance and operation of pollution control and monitoring equipment. (a) The discharger shall, at all times, properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of treatment, disposal, monitoring and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the discharger to achieve compliance with this Chapter and/or its wastewater discharge permit. All required procedures shall be described in an Operations and Maintenance Manual. The discharger shall keep in a state of readiness all systems necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of this Chapter andlor its wastewater discharge permit. All systems, both those in service and reserve, shall be inspected and maintained on a regular basis. (b) Inspection and maintenance records for process and pollution control and monitoring systems shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in Section 16.09.160. (c) It shall be unlawful to tamper with or render inaccurate or divert flow from any monitoring device or equipment installed or operated to comply with the Pretreatment requirements, this Chapter or a discharge permit. Doing so constitutes falsification of information as described in Section 16.09.150. 16.09.130 Compliance with the Pretreatment requirements. All industrial dischargers subject to the Pretreatment requirements shall be in conformance with such, including but not limited to, effluent standards, monitoring requirements, and reporting requirements. In the event of any apparent conflicts between the requirements established in this Chapter and federal EPA requirements, the most restrictive limitation shall apply. 16.09.135 Reporting requirements for all permitted dischargers. (a) All permit holders shall be required to submit periodic reports to the Superintendent. Specific reporting requirements shall be specified in the permit, in notices of noncompliance or other directives. All industrial discharge permit holders are required to submit at a minimum periodic reports of continued compliance (PRCC) every six months. The due dates 38 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED for the PRCC submittals are July 15th and January 15th for the fIrst and second half of the calendar year respectively. SpecifIc requirements for periodic reports of continued compliance are listed below: (1) Certification Statement. Periodic reports of continued compliance for zero discharge permit holders shall require the permit holder to certify that no process wastewater was discharged to the sanitary sewer system during the reporting period; (2) CertifIcation Statement. Periodic reports of continued compliance for BMP regulated dischargers shall require the discharger to certify that the BMPs have been implemented during the reporting period; (3) CertifIcation Statement. Periodic reports of continued compliance for Non-Significant Categorical Industrial Users shall require the permit holder to certify that the discharger has met the criteria for a Non-SCIU; (4) Periodic reports of continued compliance for all permit holders not covered in (1), (2) or (3) above shall include documentation indicating if applicable federal, state, or local Pretreatment Standards, including those specifIed in the permit holder's discharge permit, have been exceeded during the reporting period. (b) If a discharger subject to reporting requirements monitors any regulated pollutant at a designated sampling location more frequently than required the results of this monitoring shall be included in the report. (c) Failure to submit required reports by the specifIed due date shall be considered a violation of the provisions of this Chapter. 16.09.140 Requirements for reporting noncompliance, increased loading, slug discharges, accidental discharges. (a) Reporting Noncompliance. Noncompliance with the provisions of this Chapter that is known to the discharger shall be reported verbally as soon as possible but no later than twenty-four hours of the discharger's knowledge of the noncompliance. A written report to the Superintendent shall be submitted within fIve days of knowledge of the noncompliance explaining the nature, volume and duration of the noncompliance, and the mitigation measures taken to correct the noncompliance and to prevent reoccurrence. Such notifIcations will not relieve any discharger of liability for any expense, including but not limited to, costs for countermeasures; loss or damage to the storm drain system, sanitary sewer system and/or treatment plant or treatment process; or liability to reimburse any fInes imposed on the City on account thereof; or for damages incurred by any third party. If the noncompliance is related to any violation of the discharge standards specifIed in the Pretreatment requirements, this Chapter, or in a discharge permit the discharger shall repeat the sampling and analysis of the violated pollutant(s) and shall submit the results to 39 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED the Superintendent no later than thirty (30) days from the discharger's knowledge of the noncompliance. (b) Reporting Increased Loading. The reporting requirements of subsection (a) above shall also apply to any short tenn, large or unusual increase in flow or concentration of waste constituents regardless of whether noncompliance has resulted. Notices shall be posted in process areas (or other equally effective notification procedures used) giving instruction on reporting such increases. (c) Reporting accidental or slug discharges and treatment system upsets, failures, or bypasses or discharge of hazardous wastes. The following requirements apply to all releases to the sanitary sewer system caused by spills; slug discharges; pretreatment system upsets, failures, or bypasses; or any other accidental discharges: (l) The discharger shall immediately take action to stop, contain, and cleanup unauthorized discharges or otherwise stop the noncompliance, and correct the problem. (2) The discharger shall immediately verbally notify the Superintendent upon becoming aware of such incidents. (3) As soon as practicable and throughout the incident the discharger shall collect representative samples at the point of release and at any impacted sampling location(s). (4) The discharger shall submit a written report to the Superintendent within five days of the discharger's knowledge of the incident explaining: the nature, volume, and duration of the discharge; and mitigation measures taken to correct the noncompliance and prevent recurrence. (d) The discharger shall notify the Superintendent in advance of any significant change in the volume or characteristics of discharge from the facility or any significant operational, process, or pretreatment system changes. (e) The discharger shall immediately notify the Superintendent of changes that occur at the facility affecting the potential for a spill or slug discharge. 16.09.145 Certification of reports. Permit applications, periodic reports of continued compliance, baseline monitoring reports, and user reports submitted shall be certified and signed by an authorized representative with the following statement: I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the infonnation submitted. Based on my inquiry of the 40 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. 16.09.150 Falsification of information. It shall be unlawful for a discharger, person or their agents to knowingly make any false statements, representations, or certifications in any application, record, report, plan, or other documentation filed, or required to be maintained, pursuant to this Chapter, a wastewater discharge permit, or an order issued by the Superintendent, or to falsifY, tamper with, or knowingly render inaccurate any monitoring device or method required under this Chapter or in a wastewater discharge permit. 16.09.155 Date of receipt of reports. Written reports will be deemed to have been submitted on the date postmarked. For reports which are not mailed, postage prepaid, into a mail facility serviced by the United States Postal Service, the date of receipt of the report by the Superintendent shall govern. 16.09.160 Retention of records. Dischargers or persons subject to the reporting requirements of this Chapter shall retain, and make immediately available for inspection and copying upon request, all records of information obtained pursuant to this Chapter, including but not limited to any monitoring activities required by this Chapter, any additional records of information obtained pursuant to monitoring activities undertaken by the discharger independent of such requirements, and documentation associated with Best Management Practices. These records shall remain available for a period of at least three (3) years. This period shall be automatically extended for the duration of any litigation concerning the discharger or the City, or where the discharger has been specifically notified of a longer retention period by the Superintendent. 16.09.165 Storm drain system: prohibited discharges. (a) It shall be unlawful to discharge any domestic waste or industrial waste into the storm drain system, creeks, surface waters or San Francisco Bay. Unlawful discharges shall include, but not be limited to, discharges from toilets; sinks; industrial processes; cooling systems; boilers; fabric cleaning; equipment cleaning; vehicle cleaning; construction activities, including, but not limited to, painting, paving, concrete placement, saw cutting and grading; swimming pools; spas; and fountains, or substances added to the storm drain to control root growth, unless specifically permitted by a discharge permit or unless exempted pursuant to guidelines published by the Superintendent. 41 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (b) It shall be unlawful to cause hazardous materials, domestic waste or industrial waste to be deposited in such a manner or location as to constitute a threatened discharge into the storm drain system, creeks, surface waters or San Francisco Bay. Domestic or industrial wastes that are not contained in a pipe, tank or other container are considered to be threatened discharges unless the discharge has been controlled, the flow has been blocked and the material is actively being cleaned up. (c) For all unauthorized or prohibited releases to the storm drain system including sanitary sewer overflows and threatened discharges to the storm drain system, the responsible person shall: (1) Immediately take action to stop, contain, and cleanup unauthorized or threatened discharges or otherwise stop the noncompliance, and correct the problem; (2) Immediately notify 'the Superintendent upon becoming aware of releases that result in discharge into the storm drain system, creeks, surface waters or San Francisco Bay. (d) Interior floor drains shall not be connected to the storm drain system. (e) Exterior drains located in the following areas shall not be connected to the storm drain system: (1) (2) (3) materials that are contained; Equipment or vehicle washing areas; Areas where equipment fluids are routinely changed; Areas where hazardous materials, chemicals or other uncontained easily transported by wind or water are stored and are not secondarily (4) Loading docks: See 16.09.175(k) (f) Multi-family residential units and residential developments shall be prohibited from providing a designated vehicle washing area that would cause wash water to be deposited in such a manner or location as to constitute a threatened discharge into the storm drain system. (g) Secondary containment shall be provided for any rooftop equipment, tanks or pipes containing other than potable water, cooling water, heating system hot water, steam, water condensate or equivalent substances, which the Superintendent determines will otherwise cause a probable discharge to the storm drain system. (h) Storm drain inlets shall be clearly marked with the words "No dumping -Flows to Bay," or equivalent. 16.09.170 Requirements for construction operations. (a) A spill response plan for hazardous waste, hazardous materials and uncontained construction materials shall be prepared and available at the construction sites for all projects where the proposed construction site is equal to or greater than one acre of disturbed soil and for 42 l00520syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED any other projects for which the city engineer determines that a plan is necessary to protect surface waters. Preparation of the plan shall be in accordance with guidelines published by the city engineer. (b) A storm water pollution prevention plan shall be prepared and available at the construction sites for all projects equal to or greater than one acre of disturbed soil and for any other projects for which the city engineer determines that a storm water management plan is necessary to protect surface waters. Preparation of the plan shall be in accordance with Chapters 16.28 and 16.11 of this code and with guidelines published by the City engineer. (c) Prior approval shall be obtained from the city engineer or designee to discharge water pumped from construction sites to the storm drain system. The city engineer or designee may require gravity settling and filtration upon a determination that either or both would improve the water quality of the discharge. Contaminated groundwater or water that exceeds State or Federal requirements for discharge to navigable waters may not be discharged to the storm drain system. Such water may be discharged to the sanitary sewer system, provided that the requirements of Section 16.09.040 are met and the approval of the Superintendent is obtained prior to discharge. The City shall be compensated for any costs it incurs in authorizing such discharge, at the rate set forth in the Municipal Fee Schedule. (d) No cleanup of construction debris from the streets shall result in the discharge of water to the storm drain system; nor shall any construction debris be deposited or allowed to be deposited in the storm drain system. 16.09.175 General prohibitions and practices. (a) Interior (indoor) floor drains to the sanitary sewer system may not be placed in areas where hazardous materials, hazardous wastes, industrial wastes, industrial process water, lubricating fluids, vehicle fluids or vehicle equipment cleaning wastewater are used or stored, unless secondary containment is provided for all such materials and equipment. The Superintendent may allow an exception to this requirement under the following circumstances: (1) When the drain is 'connected to a wastewater treatment unit approved by the Superintendent; (2) When the drain is protected from spills by a berm system; (3) For safety showers: When the drain is installed with a temporary plug which remains closed except when the shower is in use, or when the drain is protected from spills by either a covered sump or berm system. If a sump is used, the capacity shall be at least as large as the largest chemical container in the laboratory; (4) For industrial process equipment: If the equipment does not contain hazardous materials or hazardous waste and if all floor drains are equipped with fail-safe valves which shall be kept closed during periods of operation. 43 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (b) Exterior (outdoor) drains may be connected to the sanitary sewer system only if the area in which the drain is located is covered or protected from rainwater run-on by berms and/or grading, and appropriate wastewater treatment approved by the Superintendent IS provided. For additional information regarding loading docks,see section 1 6.09.1 75(k) (c) Interior floor drains shall not be connected to the storm drain system. (d) Exterior drains shall be connected to the storm drain system. Such connections shall not be permitted within the following areas: (1) Equipment or vehicle washing areas; (2) Areas where chemicals, hazardous materials, or other uncontained materials are stored unless secondary containment is provided; (3) Equipment or vehicle fluid changing areas; (4) Loading docks: See l6.09.175(k) (e) Roof drains may discharge to the storm drain system, provided that all roof equipment, tanks, and pipes containing other than potable water, cooling system water, or heating system hot water have secondary containment. (f) Boiler drain lines shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system and may not be connected or allowed to drain to the storm drain system. (g) Secondary containment shall be provided for exterior work areas where motor oil, brake fluid, gasoline, diesel fuel, radiator fluid or other hazardous materials or hazardous wastes are used or stored. Drains shall not be installed within the secondary containment areas. The Superintendent may allow a drain for work areas (but not for hazardous storage areas) if the secondary containment area is covered and if the drain is connected to a wastewater treatment facility approved by the Superintendent. (h) Aspirators connected to laboratory sink faucets are prohibited. Aspirators designed and used for transferring acids and bases from stationary, permanent laboratory sinks to treatment facilities shall be allowed. (i) Laboratory countertops and laboratory sinks shall be separated by a berm which prevents hazardous materials spilled on the countertop from draining to the sink. G) Sewer traps below laboratory sinks shall be made of glass or other approved transparent materials to allow inspection and to determine frequency of cleaning. Alternatively, a removable plug for cleaning the trap may be provided, in which case a cleaning frequency shall be established by the Superintendent. In establishing the cleaning frequency, the Superintendent shall consider the recommendations of the facility. The Superintendent will grant an exception to this requirement for areas where mercury will not be used; provided, that in the event such an 44 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED exception is granted and mercury is subsequently used in the area, the sink trap shall be retrofitted to meet this requirement prior to use of the mercury. i (k) Loading docks. (1) This paragraph covers loading docks constructed prior to August 8, 1994. In cases where chemicals, hazardous materials, grease, oil, or waste products are handled or used within the loading dock area, a drain to the sanitary sewer system or storm drain system may be allowed only if equipped with a fail-safe valve or equivalent device that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during periods of loading dock operation. For drains connected to the sanitary sewer system the area in which the drain is located shall be covered or protected from rainwater run-on by berms and/or grading. Appropriate wastewater treatment approved by the Superintendent shall be provided for all rainwater contacting the loading dock site. (2) For loading docks constructed after August 8, 1994: (i) Loading dock drains to the storm drain system may be allowed if equipped with a fail-safe valve or equivalent device that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during periods of loading dock operation. (ii) Where chemicals, hazardous materials, grease, oil, or waste products are handled or used within the loading dock area, a drain to the storm drain system shall not be allowed. A drain to the sanitary sewer system may be allowed if equipped with a fail-safe valve or equivalent device that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during periods of loading dock operation. The area in which the drain is located shall be covered or protected from rainwater run-on by berms and/or grading. Appropriate wastewater treatment approved by the Superintendent shall be provided for all rainwater contacting the loading dock site. 16.09.180 Requirements for newly constructed, remodeled or converted multi- residential, commercial and industrial facilities. (a) Dischargers of industrial waste from newly constructed, remodeled or converted commercial and industrial facilities shall be in full compliance with the provisions of this Chapter at the time of commencement of discharge. Dischargers from newly constructed, remodeled, or converted commercial and industrial facilities, upon request of the Superintendent, shall complete a waste minimization study in accordance with guidelines published by the Superintendent, and shall certify that measures have been taken to minimize toxic constituents in the discharge. (b) The owner of every newly constructed, remodeled, or converted commercial or industrial facility shall comply with the following requirements. These requirements shall apply to remodeled or converted facilities to the extent that the portion of the facility being remodeled or converted is related to the subject of the requirement: 45 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (1) Segregated Industrial Waste Plumbing. The owner of every new commercial and industrial building or portion thereof shall cause the building to be constructed so that industrial waste is segregated, by means of separate plumbing, from domestic waste prior to converging with other waste streams in the sanitary sewer system. For the purposes of this section only, the term "new" shall also include change to a use that requires plumbing for industrial waste; (2) (3) Exterior drains shall be connected to the storm drain system; Loading docks: See I6.09.I75(k). (4) Fueling areas shall have impermeable floors and rain covers that extend a minimum of ten feet in each direction from each pump. Fueling areas shall be designed to prevent water run-on to the covered area; (5) Condensate lines shall not be connected or allowed to drain to the storm drain system; (6) Copper, copper alloys, lead and lead alloys, including brass, shall not be used in sewer lines, connectors, or seals coming in contact with sewage except for domestic waste sink traps and short lengths of associated connecting pipes where alternate materials are not practical; (7) Sacrificial zinc anodes are not permitted to be in contact with the water supply in a water distribution system; (8) Discharge drains for swimming pools, spas and fountains shall not be connected directly to the storm drain system or to the sanitary sewer system. When draining is necessary the discharge will be allowed by way of either: (A) A hose or other temporary system shall be directed into a sanitary sewer (not storm drain system) clean out. A sewer clean out shall be installed in a readily accessible area; (B) A fixed pipe with an air gap and receiving sink directed to the sanitary sewer. (9) If installed, parking garage floor drains on interior levels shall be connected to an oil/water separator prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system. The oil/water separator shall be cleaned at a frequency of at least once every twelve months or more frequently if recommended by the manufacturer or the Superintendent. Oil/water separators shall have a minimum capacity of 100 gallons; (10) New buildings and residential developments providing centralized solid waste collection, except for single-family and duplex residences, shall provide a covered area for a dumpster. The area shall be adequately sized for all waste streams and designed with grading or a berm system to prevent water run-on and runoff from the area; (11) New Multi-family residential units and residential development projects with 25 or more units shall provide a covered area for occupants to wash their vehicles. A drain shall be installed to capture all vehicle wash waters and shall be connected to an oil/water separator prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer system. The oil/water separator shall be cleaned at a frequency of at least once every six months or more frequently if recommended by the manufacturer or the Superintendent. Oil/water separators shall have a minimum capacity of 100 46 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED gallons. The area shall be graded or bermed in such a manner as to prevent the discharge of storm water to the sanitary sewer system; (12) Mercury switches shall not be installed in sewer or storm drain sumps; (13) Fire sprinkler system flush, test or drain water shall not be discharged to the storm drain system. Discharges to the sanitary sewer system shall not exceed 30 gallons per minute (GPM). Higher discharge rates shall be diverted to a detention tank to achieve the 30 GPMflow; (14) Copper Roofing Materials. On and after January 1, 2003, copper metal roofing, copper metal gutters, copper metal down spouts, and copper granule containing asphalt shingles shall not be permitted for use on any residential, commercial or industrial building for which a building permit is required. Copper flashing for use under tiles or slates and small copper ornaments are exempt from this prohibition. Replacement roofing, gutters and downspouts on historic structures are exempt, provided that the roofmg material used shall be prepatinated at the factory. For the purposes of this exemption, the definition of "historic" shall be limited to structures designated as Category 1 or Category 2 buildings in the current edition of the Palo Alto Historical and Architectural Resources Report and Inventory. 16.09.185 Personnel orientation. (a) Holders of industrial waste discharge permits shall take necessary steps 'to inform appropriate personnel employed by such permit holders of the provisions of this Chapter. (b) Such personnel shall include workers, contractors, and supervisors whose duties pertain in any manner to the production, treatment or disposal of waste discharges regulated by this Chapter. (c) Steps to inform such personnel shall include but not be limited to: (1) Orientation of newly employed or assigned personnel prior to commencement of work and at least annually thereafter; (2) Posting of signs at 'work areas indicating approved methods for disposition of wastes and reporting requirements and instructions for accidental spills and increased loadings; and (3) Posting of signs visible from each drainage area (sink, cup sink, floor drain) not connected to appropriate treatment indicating "NOTICE do not dispose of chemicals in this drain" or equivalent. ( d) All signs shall be translated into the appropriate language unless the primary language of all personnel is English. 16.09.190 Accidental discharge prevention. 47 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (a) Each discharger shall provide adequate protection to prevent accidental discharge of hazardous or prohibited materials, slugs, or other wastes regulated by this Chapter. Where directed by the Superintendent the discharger shall install retention basins, dikes, storage tanks, or other facilities in conformance with Chapter 17.12 designed to eliminate, neutralize, offset or otherwise negate the effects of prohibited materials or wastes which may be accidentally discharged in violation of this Chapter. (b) When directed by the Superintendent, the discharger shall complete and implement a slug control plan per the guidelines issued by the Superintendent in accordance with the requirements contained in 40 CFR. 403.8(f)(2)(vi). The discharger shall notify the City of any changes to facilities, plans or operations that would necessitate a change in the slug control plan. 16.09.195 Storage of hazardous materials above sinks. No person shall store hazardous materials above a sink that is connected to the sanitary sewer system in a commercial or industrial facility. 16.09.200 Zinc-containing floor finishes. No person shall discharge or dispose to the sanitary sewer system any zinc-containing floor finish or a stripper solution that has been used for the stripping of a zinc-containing floor finish, except when the solutions have been treated in a wastewater treatment unit approved by the Superintendent for removal of zinc. For the purposes of this section, zinc-containing floor finishes shall be defined as floor finish solutions containing greater than 0.01 % zinc by weight. 16.09.205 Requirements for cooling systems, pools, spas, fountains, boilers and heat exchangers. (a) It shall be unlawful to discharge water from cooling systems, pools, spas, fountains boilers and heat exchangers to the storm drain system. (b) No person shall discharge or add to the sanitary sewer system or storm drain system, or add to a cooling system, pool, spa, fountain, boiler or heat exchanger, any substance that contains any of the following: (1) Copper in excess of2.0 mg/liter; (2) Any tri-butyl tin compound in excess of 0.10 mglliter; or (3) Chromium in excess of2.0 mg/liter. (4) Zinc in excess of2.0 mg/liter. (5) Molybdenum in excess of2.0 mg/liter 48 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED The above limits shall apply to any of the above-listed substances prior to dilution with the cooling system, pool, spa or fountain water. ( c) Cooling System Discharges. (1) For the purposes of this section the average daily flow shall be determined by dividing the total cooling system blowdown volume from April through October by the number of days of operation for the same period. (2) The maximum allowable limit for discharge of copper for cooling systems discharging an average daily flow ofless than 2000 gallons per day shall be 2.0 mglliter. (3) The maximum allowable limit for discharge of copper for cooling systems discharging an average daily flow of greater than 2000 gallons per day shall be 0.25 mg/liter. The Superintendent may impose a higher alternative maximum allowable copper limit when the cycles of concentrations routinely exceed ten. The alternative requirement may consist of an alternative limit, a mass limit or a specified maintenance program, or a combination of these. (4) New cooling systems commencing discharge with an estimated average daily flow greater than 2000 gallons per day shall comply with the maximum allowable copper limit of 2.0 mg/liter and shall not be required to comply with the 0.25 mg/liter maximum allowable copper discharge limit specified in subsection (c)(3), until one year after the date of such commencement. (d) Cooling System Cleaning. Wastewater from cleaning of cooling systems, boilers, heat exchangers and associated piping where a chemical cleaner or physical scouring is used in the cleaning process shall be sampled prior to discharge to the sewer. The maximum allowable limits for discharge of copper shall be 2.0 mg/liter. For purposes of this section, "physical scouring" does not include the use of water at typical water supply pressure; and "associated piping" shall mean piping associated with a heating or cooling system through which water or another heat transfer fluid passes during operation of the system. The wastewater shall be analyzed for copper and any other constituents specified by the Superintendent. The results of such analysis shall be reviewed by the cooling system operator prior to discharge. (e)Devices using electricity to dissolve copper or silver into water distribution systems, cooling systems, pools, spas or fountains are prohibited. 16.09.210 Root and pest control chemicals. (a) No person shall discharge, dispose of or add to the sanitary sewer system any substance intended to control roots, pests, or for any other purpose without first acquiring a root control application permit. (1) Applicants for a permit shall complete and submit an application form. The Superintendent shall establish the contents of said form and may require additional information on the characteristics of the root control chemical and application methods beyond 49 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED that required on the application form. Completed application forms shall be filed by the root or pest control applicator not less than sixty days in advance of commencing discharge. The discharger shall not commence discharge prior to permit approval. (2) The Superintendent may impose terms and conditions on the permit which the Superintendent deems reasonable or necessary to carry out the purposes of this Chapter. (b) No person shall discharge, dispose of or add to the sanitary sewer system any substance containing greater than five percent copper by weight, to control roots or for any other purpose. (c) No person shall discharge, dispose or add to the storm drain system any substance to control roots or pests. 16.09.215 Requirements for photographic materials processing. (a) All photoprocessors shall comply with either subdivision (2) or subdivision (3) of this subsection (a). Persons who fully comply with subdivision (3) shall not be required to obtain an industrial waste discharge permit pursuant to Section 16.09.080, unless required to do so pursuant to other sections of this Chapter, but shall be required to meet applicable maximum allowable limits for wastewater discharge and other requirements. (1) Definitions. For the purposes of this section the following words and phrases shall be as defined herein. (A) "Photographic materials processing" means developing silver- bearing film, including x-ray film, or photographic paper. (B) "Photoprocessor" means any person who owns a photographic materials processing system including a business that does photographic materials processing or any person who engages in photographic materials processing. (C) "Spent solutions" means spent fixer, bleach fix, stabilizer from washless systems, silver-bearing cleaning solutions and functionally similar solutions other than washwater. (D) "Regeneration" means the treatment of washwater, fix, or bleach fix for re-use. (E) "Washwater" means water that has been used to rinse fix or bleach fix from photographic film or paper. (2) Silver Removal System. Persons who comply with this subdivision (2) shall install and operate in their facilities a silver removal system, in a manner which shall insure consistent compliance with the following effluent standards: (A) The maximum allowable limit for silver shall be 1.0 mg/liter. The maximum allowable limit for copper shall be 2.0 mglliter. 50 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (B) All spent solutions and wash water that are not sent off site shall be treated to insure consistent compliance with the effluent standards set forth in this subsection (a)(2). Silver removal from wash water shall be conducted in a manner that does not reduce the effectiveness of the treatment of spent solutions. (C) The photoprocessor shall sample the discharge at a frequency determined by the Superintendent based upon the flow rate from the facility. However, in no event shall sampling be done less frequently than once a month. A duplicate of each sample collected shall be kept until the next sampling event. The duplicate sample shall be immediately relinquished to the Superintendent upon request. A sampling port shall be installed in accordance with specifications set forth in the wastewater discharge permit. (D) Every person owning or operating a silver removal system shall cause such system to be serviced at least once per year by the manufacturer, equipment distributor, or qualified consultant who shall certify that all equipment in the system is functioning in accordance with the manufacturer's standards for such equipment. Records of system service shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in Section 16.09.160. (E) Every person intending to comply with the provisions of this subsection (a)(2), shall submit a completed permit application to the Superintendent, per Section 16.09.085 of this Chapter, at least forty-five days prior to commencing operation of such system. Every person intending to comply with the provisions of this subsection (a)(2) shall submit an annual report to the Superintendent on or before February 1 of each calendar year. The annual report shall contain the following information for the preceding calendar year: (i) regeneration systems employed; (ii) (iii) (iv) operation; and Type and description of silver removal processes and any Amount of spent solutions generated; Dates of equipment servicing; Description of any major changes in equipment or (v) All wastewater sampling data. (3) Off-Site Disposal. Persons who comply with this subsection shall ship or cause to be shipped off site, for recovery or appropriate disposal, all spent solutions or shall regenerate all spent solutions on site. Storage, shipment and disposal of spent solutions shall be in accordance with all state, federal and local requirements. (A) Every person who complies with this subsection (a)(3) shall maintain, or cause to be maintained, records that detail the purchase date and quantity of all new fixer, bleach-fix, stabilizer and functionally similar solutions kept or used by such person. Such person shall also maintain, or cause to be maintained, detailed disposal records that include the 51 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED date, type and amount of waste solution disposed of; the name, address and identification number of the shipper; and the ultimate destination of each batch of waste solution shipped off site. Such person shall also. maintain, or cause to be maintained, a record of the amount of spent solutions regenerated on site. (B) Every photoprocessor intending to comply with the provisions of this subsection (a)(2) shall submit an annual report to the Superintendent on or before February 1 of each calendar year. The annual report shall contain for the preceding calendar year a summary of the required records maintained by such person relating to purchase and disposition of photographic solutions. The summary shall be on a form provided by the Superintendent. Along with the summary, the photoprocessor shall submit a statement certifying that it is in compliance with this subsection and that the required records shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in 16.09.160. (C) Photoprocessors that comply with this subsection need not meet the silver discharge limitations set forth in subsection (a)(2)(A) of this section, nor the silver discharge limitations set forth in 16.09.040(q) with respect to the photographic materials processing portion of their operations; provided, however, that those photoprocessors generating a total of one hundred gallons or more per month of spent solutions shall be required to meet the silver limitations of subsection (a)(2) of this section with respect to washwater, even if all spent solutions are shipped off site. (b) The maximum allowable limit for copper for photographic materials processing shall be 2.0 mg/liter. 16.09.220 Requirements for dental facilities that remove or place amalgam Idlings. (a) Definitions. For the purposes of this section the following words and phrases shall be as defined herein: (1) "Amalgam separator" is a device that employs filtration, settlement, centrifugation, or ion exchange to remove amalgam and its metal constituents from a dental office vacuum system before it discharges to the sanitary sewer system. (2) "Amalgam waste" means and includes non-contact amalgam (amalgam scrap that has not been in contact with the patient); contact amalgam (including, but not limited to, extracted teeth containing amalgam); amalgam sludge captured by chair-side traps, vacuum pump filters, screens, and other amalgam trapping devices; used amalgam capsules; and leaking or unusable amalgam capsules. (3) "ISO 11143" is the International Organization for Standardization's standard for amalgam separators. (b) All owners and operators of dental facilities that remove or place amalgam fillings shall comply with the following waste management practices: 52 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (1) No person shall rinse chair-side traps, vacuum screens, or amalgam separators equipment in a sink or other connection to the sanitary sewer system. (2) Owners and operators of dental facilities shall ensure that all staff members who handle amalgam waste are trained in the proper handling, management and disposal of mercury-containing material and fixer-containing solutions. Training records shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in Section 16.09.160. (3) Amalgam waste shall be stored and managed in accordance with the instructions of the recycler or hauler of such materials. (4) Bleach and other chlorine-containing disinfectants shall not be used to disinfect the vacuum line system. (5) The use of bulk mercury is prohibited. Only pre-capsulated dental amalgam is permitted. (c) All owners and operators of dental vacuum suction systems, except as set forth in subsection (d) of this section, shall comply with the following: (1) An ISO 11143 certified amalgam separator device shall be installed for each dental vacuum suction system. The installed device must be ISO 11143 certified as capable of removing a minimum of 95 percent of amalgam. The amalgam separator system shall be certified at flow rates comparable to the flow rate of the actual vacuum suction system operation. Neither the separator device nor the related plumbing shall include an automatic flow bypass. For facilities that require an amalgam separator that exceeds the practical capacity of ISO 11143 test methodology, a non-certified separator will be accepted, provided that smaller units from the same manufacturer and of the same technology are ISO-certified. (2) Amalgam separators shall be maintained in accordance with manufacturer recommendations. Installation, certification, and maintenance records shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in Section 16.09.160. (d) The following types of dental practice are exempt from Section 16.09.220, provided that removal or placement of amalgam fillings occurs at the facility no more than 3 days per year: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Orthodontics; Periodontics; Oral and maxillofacial surgery; Radiology; Oral pathology or oral medicine; Endodontistry; Prosthodontistry. (e) All owners and operators of dental facilities shall submit an annual report for each facility to the Superintendent on or before February 1 of each calendar year. The annual report shall contain information on the dental facility's amalgam separator and its maintenance, and 53 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED shall require the dental facility to certify that it is in full compliance with this section. The annual report shall be on a form provided by the Superintendent. (f) The maximum allowable limit for copper for dental facilities shall be 2.0 mg/liter. 16.09.225 Requirements for vehicle service facilities. (a) Definitions. For the purposes of this section the following words and phrases shall be as defined herein: (1) "Commercial vehicle washing facility" means a commercial facility where vehicle washing is a primary business activity. Commercial vehicle washing facilities include, but are not limited to, mobile washing rigs. (2) "Fleet washing facility" means a facility for washing vehicles, at a location where a business maintains six or more vehicles. (3) "Ground surfaces" means and includes dirt, gravel, or other unpaved surfaces. (4) "Vehicle" means a mode of transporting people or things. Vehicles include, but are not limited to, automobiles, trucks, recreational vehicles, tractors, airplanes and boats. (5) "Vehicle fluid!1 means a liquid used in or drained from a motor vehicle. Vehicle fluids include, but are not limited to, gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, brake fluid, radiator fluid, hydraulic fluid, transmission fluid, and coolant. (6) "Vehicle service facility" means a commercial or industrial facility that conducts one or more of the following operations with respect to vehicles or components of vehicles: vehicle repair, fuel dispensing, vehicle fluid replacement, engine and parts cleaning, body repair, vehicle salvage and wrecking, or vehicle washing. (b) All vehicle service facilities shall be operated in accordance with the following standards: (1) No person shall dispose of, nor permit the disposal, directly or indirectly, of vehicle fluids, hazardous materials, or rinse water from parts cleaning operations into storm drains; (2) All owners and operators of vehicle service facilities shall ensure that any vehicle fluid, hazardous material, or rinse water from parts cleaning operations that comes into contact with any floor, pavement or ground surface is cleaned up immediately from such surface; (3) No person shall dispose of vehicle fluids or rinse water from parts cleaning operations into the sanitary sewer system except pursuant to an industrial waste discharge permit obtained in accordance with this Chapter; (4) No vehicle service facilities shall contain floor drains, excepting only such floor drains as are connected to wastewater pretreatment systems for which an industrial waste discharge permit has been obtained in accordance with this Chapter; 54 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (5) No tanks, containers or sinks used for parts cleaning or rinsing shall be connected to the storm drain system, or to the sanitary sewer system except pursuant to an industrial waste discharge permit obtained in accordance with this Chapter; (6) No person shall perform vehicle fluid removal outside a building, nor on asphalt or ground surfaces, whether inside or outside a building, except in such a manner as to ensure that any spilled fluid will be in an area of secondary containment; (7) Leaking vehicle fluids shall be contained or drained immediately; (8) No person shall leave unattended drip parts or other open containers containing vehicle fluid, unless such containers are in use or in an area of secondary containment; (9) No person shall discharge wastewater from vehicle washing operations or wash racks to the storm drain system or onto the ground. Discharge to the sanitary sewer system may be allowed pursuant to an industrial waste discharge permit obtained in accordance with this Chapter. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit the proper reuse of wastewater; (10) No person shall discharge into the storm drains water from vehicle washing operations, except from rinsing of vehicle exterior surfaces, with water only, to remove atmospheric dust that deposited on a vehicle when not in use. This exception does not apply to commercial vehicle washing facilities or fleet washing; (11) Vehicle service facilities shall be cleaned using only those methods of cleaning that ensure that no materials are discharged to the storm drain system or to the sanitary sewer system, except for wastewater which is discharged to the sanitary sewer system pursuant to an industrial waste discharge permit obtained in accordance with this Chapter; provided, however, that a permit shall not be required for facilities that use the following three-step sequence for cleaning floors: (A) Clean up spills with rags or other absorbent materials; (B) Sweep floor using dry absorbent material; (C) Mop floor. Mop water must be discharged to the sanitary sewer via a toilet or sink. (12) All owners and operators of vehicle service facilities shall ensure that spill prevention and clean-up equipment and absorbent materials are kept in stock at all times and are readily available for use; (13) No acid-containing batteries shall be stored except within secondary containment; (14) All owners and operators of vehicle service facilities shall ensure that all employees of such facilities are trained, upon hiring and annually thereafter, regarding best management practices in accordance with guidelines issued and published by the Superintendent. (15) All owners and operators of vehicle service facilities shall post or cause to be posted signs on all storm drain inlets located on the property of the facility with the words "No dumping Flows to Bay" or equivalent; (16) No person shall discharge to the sanitary sewer system solid materials from wet sanding. Vehicle service facilities using wet sanding processes shall have one or more containers to accumulate wet sanding wastewater and mop water from wet sanding areas. A 55 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED minimum of 48 hours shall be provided for the settling of solid materials from the water prior to the water's discharge to the sanitary sewer system. An alternative solids removal method may be utilized provided that the method has been demonstrated to be equally effective, and approved by the Superintendent. Settled solid materials shall be managed in accordance with all state, federal and local requirements. (c) The maximum allowable limit for zinc for vehicle service facility discharge shall be 4.0 mglliter. The maximum allowable limit for copper for vehicle service facility discharge shall be 2.0 mglliter (d) All records required to be kept pursuant to this subsection shall be maintained and made available for inspection as described in Section 16.09.160. 16.09.230 Requirements for machine shops. (a) All machine shops shall be operated in accordance with the following standards: (1) No person shall dispose of, nor permit the disposal, directly or indirectly, of machine shop fluids, hazardous materials, mop water, or rinse water from parts cleaning or deburringltumbling operations into storm drains; (2) No person shall dispose of machine shop fluids or rinse water from parts cleaning or deburringltumbling operations into the sanitary sewer system except pursuant to an industrial waste discharge permit obtained in accordance with this Chapter; (3) No machine shop shall contain floor drains, excepting only such floor drains as are connected to wastewater pretreatment systems for which an industrial waste discharge permit has been obtained in accordance with this Chapter; (4) Machine shops shall be cleaned using only those methods of cleaning which ensure that no materials are discharged to the storm drain system or to the sanitary sewer system, except for wastewater that is discharged to the sanitary sewer system pursuant to an industrial waste discharge permit obtained in accordance with this Chapter; provided, however, that a permit shall not be required for facilities that use the following three-step sequence for cleaning floors, or an approved equivalent: (A) Clean up spills with rags or other absorbent materials; (B) Sweep floor using dry absorbent material; and (C) Mop floor. Mop water shall be discharged to the sanitary sewer via a toilet or sink. (5) All owners and operators or machine shops shall ensure that spill prevention, clean-up equipment and absorbent materials are kept in stock at all times and are readily available for use. (6) All owners and operators of machine shops shall post or cause to be posted signs on all storm drain inlets located on the property of the facility with the words "No Dumping -Flows to Bay" or equivalent. . 56 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED (7) All owners and operators of machine shops shall ensure that all employees who work directly on machine operations or clean up of such facilities are trained, upon hiring and annually thereafter, regarding best management practices for machine shops in accordance with guidelines issued and published by the Superintendent. (b) mg/liter. 16.09.235 The maximum allowable limit for copper for machine shop discharge shall be 2.0 Annual publication of significant noncompliant dischargers. At least annually, notice shall be provided in the largest local daily newspaper listing those dischargers that were found to have been in significant noncompliance, as defined in this Chapter, during the previous twelve months. 16.09.240 Enforcement: Warning. The Superintendent may issue verbal or written warnings in response to minor violations or the potential for a discharger to cause violations of this Chapter. Compliance with warnings does not limit further enforcement action by the City. 16.09.245 Enforcement: Notice of non-compliance. (a) Unless the Superintendent fmds that the severity of the violation warrants immediate action under Sections 16.09.255, 16.09.265 or 16.09.270 or permit revocation or suspension, he or she shall issue a notice of noncompliance which: (1 ) Enumerates the violations found; and (2) Orders compliance by a certain date. If the violations are not abated in the time period identified further action may be taken by the Superintendent, including, but not limited to, suspension, revocation or modification of the discharger's permit pursuant to Section 16.09.095. (b) Subject to the following limitations, and in addition to the provIsIons of subsection (a), the Superintendent may require a discharger that has violated any discharge limits contained in this Chapter to install a temporary system for the capture, testing and release of wastewater: (1) The requirement will apply to facilities that have produced multiple violations for the same parameter at the same sampling point, when the Superintendent determines that appropriate corrective measures have proved difficult to identify or implement. (2) The requirement will apply only to those specific areas of a facility from which the Superintendent determines that the discharge may be originating, rather than to the 57 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED entire flow from the facility, unless there is no reasonable way to determine where the discharge may be originating. (3) The requirement will not be applied when the Superintendent determines that a capture system is impracticaL If the Superintendent determines that a capture system is impractical, the Superintendent may require an alterpative compliance measure of equivalent effectiveness. (4) The requirement will be terminated following a demonstration of compliance as determined by the Superintendent. The sampling required to demonstrate compliance for violations of discharge limits shall be set by the Superintendent and may be up to twenty-one consecutive, violation-free calendar days of sampling by the discharger followed by up to four days of violation-free sampling by the Superintendent. 16.09.250 Enforcement: Administrative compliance order. Any person who violates any provision of this Chapter or any provision of any permit issued pursuant to this Chapter shall be subject to the administrative compliance order provisions contained in Chapter 1.16 of this code. 16.09.255 Enforcement: Criminal penalties. As provided in 1.08 of Title 1 of this code, violations of the provisions of this title shall be subject to criminal penalties. The following designated employee positions may enforce the provisions of this Chapter by the issuance of citations. Persons employed in such positions are authorized to exercise the authority provided in Penal Code Section 836.5 and are authorized to issue citations for violations of this Chapter. The designated employee positions are: industrial waste inspector; industrial waste investigator; associate engineer; manager, environmental control programs; supervisor, industrial waste; and manager, environmental compliance division. 16.09.260 Enforcement: Administrative citation. Any person who violates any provision of this Chapter or any provision of any permit issued pursuant to this Chapter shall be subject to the administrative citation provisions contained in Chapter 1.12 of this code. 16.09.265 Enforcement: Administrative civil penalties. (a) Complaint. The Superintendent may serve an administrative complaint on any person who has violated any provision of this Chapter. The complaint shall state: (1) The act or failure that constitutes the violation; (2) The provisions of law authorizing the civil liability to be imposed; and (3) The proposed civil penalty. 58 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED The complaint shall be served by personal delivery or certified mail on the person subject to requirements that the Superintendent alleges were violated, and shall inform the person served that a hearing on the complaint shall be conducted within sixty days after service, unless the person charged with the violation waives his or her right to a hearing. (b) Hearing. Unless the person charged with the violation(s) waives his or her right to a hearing, the city manager or designee of the city manager shall conduct a hearing within sixty days. If the hearing officer finds that the person has caused a violation, he or she may assess administrative penalties against the person. In determining the amount of the civil penalty, the hearing officer may take into consideration all relevant circumstances, including, but not limited to, the extent of harm caused by the violation, the economic benefit derived through any noncompliance, the nature and persistence of the violation, the length of time over which the violation occurs and corrective action, if any, attempted or taken by the discharger. Civil penalties that may be imposed are as follows: (1) An amount not to exceed two thousand dollars per day for failing or refusing to furnish technical or monitoring reports; (2) An amount not to exceed three thousand dollars per day for failing or refusing to comply in a timely fashion with any compliance schedule established by the City; (3) An amount not to exceed five thousand dollars per day of violation for discharges in violation of any waste discharge limitation, permit condition or requirement issued by the City; and (4) An amount not to exceed ten dollars per gallon for discharges in violation of any suspension, cease and desist order or other orders, or prohibition issued, reissued or adopted by the City. (c) Appeal. Any person against whom penalties are assessed by the hearing officer may appeal the decision of the hearing officer within thirty days of notice of the decision. The city council may hear the appeal or deny review of the case. If the city council decides to hear the appeal, it shall conduct the appeal in accordance with procedures established by the council. The decision of the city council shall be in writing and shall be final. All civil penalties imposed in accordance with this section shall be payable within thirty days of the decision of the hearing officer; provided, that if the decision is appealed, all penalties shall be payable within thirty days after the city council decision on the appeal. (d) Lien. The amount of any civil penalties imposed under this section which have remained delinquent for a period of sixty days shall constitute a lien against the real property of the discharger from which the violation occurred resulting in imposition of the penalty. The Superintendent shall cause the amount of uncollected penalty to be recorded with the county recorder, in accordance with Section 54740.5 of the California Government Code, as the same from time to time may be amended. 16.09.270 Enforcement: Judicial civil penalties. 59 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED Any person who intentionally or negligently violates any provision of this Chapter or any provision of any permit issued pursuant to this Chapter shall be civilly liable to the City in a sum of not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars per day for each day in which such violation occurs. The City may petition the Superior Court pursuant to Government Code Section 54740 to impose, assess, and recover such sums. The remedy provided in this section is cumulative and not exclusive, and shall be in addition to the penalty provisions of Chapter 1.08 of this code and all other remedies available to the City under state and federal law. 16.09.275 Damage to facilities. When a discharge causes an obstruction, damage, or any other impairment to City facilities, the City may assess a charge against the discharger to reimburse the City for costs incurred to clean or repair said facility. 16.09.280 City right to terminate discharge. The City reserves the right to terminate sewer service for noncompliance with the provisions of this Chapter which reasonably appear to present an imminent endangerment to the health, safety, and welfare of persons. The discharger shall immediately cease discharge of any waste presenting such a hazard, upon verbal and/or written notice of the Superintendent. Such termination shall be effective immediately, but shall be reviewable pursuant to the hearing process provided in Section 16.09.100. 16.09.285 Enforcement: Remedies Nonexclusive. The remedies provided for in this ordinance are not exclusive. The Superintendent may take any, all, or any combination of these actions against a noncompliant discharger. Enforcement of Pretreatment violations will generally be in accordance with the City's enforcement response plan. However, the Superintendent may take other action against any discharger when the circumstances warrant. Further, the Superintendent is empowered to take more than one enforcement action against any noncompliant discharger. SECTION 3. The adoption and implementation of this Ordinance is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section 15308 (actions by regulatory agencies for the protection of the environment). II II 60 100520 syn 6051181 NOT YET APPROVED SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first day after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Deputy City Attorney 100520 syn 6051181 61 Mayor APPROVED: City Manager Director of Public Works Director of Administrative Services ATTACHMENTB Palo Alto list of2010 Sewer Use Ordinance Changes 1. General changes a. Pretreatment Regulations are now called Pretreatment Requirements. b. Deleted passed implementation dates where unnecessary. c. Used Superintendent to mean superintendent or designee throughout. d. Used Discharger throughout for both wastewater and storm water. e. Used Storm Drain System throughout. f. Used Sanitary Sewer System throughout. g. Referred to retention and inspection of records section instead of repeating. h. Added "or city web site" for required po stings where allowed. 2. Purpose 005 (005) a. Modified to include Clean Water Act. 3. Definitions 010 (010) a. Defined Authorized Representative. b. Defined Berm to include lips, ridges or other raised barriers. c. Defined Best Management Practices. d. Defmed Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD). e. Defined Categorical . f. Defmed City to mean City of Palo Alto. g. Defined Discharge. h. Defined Discharger to include industrial OR domestic waste into the sanitary sewer system or storm drain system. Added "potential" to include haulers and zero dischargers. 1. Defined Enforcement Response Plan. J. Defined Fail Safe Valve to include gravity or spring loaded in addition to electrically operated valves. k. Definitions of Grease Control Device and Food Service Establishment moved to Fat, Oil, and Grease (FOG) Rules and Regulations. 1. Defined Hazardous Waste to include both State and Federal requirements. m. Defmed Interference to include exceedance of capacity of sanitary sewer system n. Deleted Industrial User, Instantaneous Maximum and Instantaneous Minimum. These terms are not used. o. Defmed Pretreatment Standard. p. Defined Root Control Chemical. q. Defined Sanitary Sewer Overflows. r. Defined Significant Industrial User. s. Defined Single Toxic Organic (STO). t. Defined Storm Drain System to include gutter or surface conveyance. u. Defined Slug Discharge to clarify sources and circumstances. v. Defmed Total Toxic Organics (TTO). w. Defined Toxic Organic. 4. Prohibitions 035 (100) a. Modified pollutant prohibition to specifically include Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD). b. Prohibited discharges that obstruct flows or contribute to a sanitary sewer overflows. c. Removed prohibition against discharges greater than 120°F. 5. Standards 040 (110) a. Removed time limits for pH excursions 16.09.110(c). b. Removed limits on temperature. General prohibition against raising the temperature of the treatment plant influent remains. c. Required verbal and written reporting for discharge of hazardous waste 16.09.11O(g). d. Must keep hazardous waste manifests available for inspection 16.09.110(g). e. Must notify and update Toxic Organic Management Plan (TOMP) when changes occur 16.09.110(h). f. May allow a subset of toxic organics to be analyzed based on Toxic Organic Management Plan (TOMP) 16.09.110(i). g. Modified solids discharge prohibition to include viscous materials. h. Changed instantaneous limits to maximum allowable concentrations. 16.09.110(m). 1. Changed maximum allowable cyanide concentration from 1.0 to 0.5 mg/L 16.09.110(m). J. Clarified that metals limits are for total metals. 6. Best Management Practices 065 (new) a. May require submission of documentation demonstrating implementation. 7. Food Service Establishments 075 (103) a. Expanded requirements and codified best management practices. 8. Industrial waste discharge permit 080 (020) a. Compliance with permit doesn't ensure compliance with State and Federal requirements. " 9. Permit Procedure 085 (030) a. Changed "categorical" to "national pretreatment standards." b. All permits, reports and certifications must be signed by authorized representative. c. Notification may be posted on a City web page. 10. Requirements for facilities subject to national pretreatment standards 090 (031) a. Reporting requirements for new facilities amended to include critical Federal requirements and reference to the Federal requirements. 11. Modification of permit 095 (040) a. Clarification of circumstances leading to permit modifications. 12. Discharger Monitoring 110 (061) a. Required cleaning, inspection and testing of sewer and appurtenances for closing industrial and commercial facilities. 13. Dilution 115 (121) a. Expressly prohibited dilution without stipulation that the intent be to meet limits. 14. Discharger Self Monitoring 120 (095) a. Reorganized to group appropriate topics. b. Samples must be representative of conditions during reporting period. c. Analyses and sampling conducted using 40 CFR Part 136. d. Superintendent may specify subset of toxic organics appropriate for Single Toxic Organic (STO) and Total Toxic Organics (TTO) monitoring. 15. Maintenance and operation of pollution control equipment 125 (new) a. Equipment shall be maintained. b. Records of maintenance shall be kept for 3 years and available to inspectors. c. Unlawful to tamper with controls, monitoring equipment, or to divert flows. 16. Reporting 130 (150) a. Added reporting of any changes to process, discharge, treatment. b. Added reporting of any changes for potential for spills or slug loads. 17. Reporting Requirements 135 (033) a. Added semi-annual due dates. b. Added zero discharge certification. c. Added compliance certification. d. Added Best Management Practices (BMP) certification. e. Added that any additional monitoring must be reported. 18. Reporting Non-compliance 140 (155) a. Expanded to include storm drain system, not just sanitary discharges. b. Expanded to include/clarify increased loading, slug discharges, accidental discharges, treatment system failures, and hazardous waste discharges in addition to noncompliance with discharge limits. c. Added follow-up sampling required within 30 days. d. Added must take immediate steps to stop, contain and clean-up discharge. e. Added shall take samples representative of discharge or release. 19. Certification of reports 145 (new) a. All submissions accompanied by signed certification of accuracy. 20. Falsification of information 150 (new) a. Submission of false or misleading information is a violation. 21. Receipt of report 155 (new) a. Receipt date is postmark. 22. Retention of records 160 (new) a. Records retained for three years and available to inspectors. 23. Storm drain prohibited discharges 165 (106) a. Removed that a threatened discharge must demonstrate a "probability of harm" to be prohibited. b. Must take steps for containment and clean-up of a storm drain spill. c. Added reporting requirements for storm drain spills. d. Modified "threatened discharges" to exclude spills where discharge has been controlled and the flow has been blocked in addition to the material is actively being cleaned up. e. Carwash to storm drain prohibited for Multi-family residential units and residential development projects. f. Carwash provided for new multi-residential moved to 16.09.032 g. Carwash provided changed to more specifically include multi-single family home community projects. This will specifically now cover home development projects with more than 25 detached or shared wall units. h. Covered dumpster area provided for new multi-residential moved to 16.09.032. 24. General Prohibitions and Practices 175 (092, 032) a. No Interior (indoor) floor drains unless secondary containment is provided for chemicals, hazardous materials or waste. Exceptions: 1. Connected to a wastewater treatment; n. Protected from spills; 111. Safety showers with a temporary plug or protected from spills; iv. Industrial ifno hazardous waste and failsafe valve. b. Exterior (outdoor) drains if covered or protected. Reference to single Loading Dock section.Interior floor drains shall not be connected to the storm drain. c. Exterior drains to the storm drain. Except: i. Equipment or vehicle washing areas; n. Areas with chemicals unless secondary containment is provided; iii. Equipment or vehicle fluid changing areas; iv. Loading docks with chemicals (reference to single Loading Dock section). d. Roof drains may discharge to the storm drain if roof equipment, tanks, and pipes containing other than potable water, cooling system water, or heating system hot water have secondary containment. e. Boiler drain lines may not be discharged to the storm drain system. f. Condensate lines may not drain to the storm drain system. g. Secondary containment shall be provided for exterior work areas where hazardous materials or hazardous wastes are used or stored. h. Aspirators connected to laboratory sink faucets are prohibited. 1. Laboratory countertops and laboratory sinks shall be separated by a lip. J. Sewer traps below laboratory sinks shall be made of glass when there is use of elemental mercury. 25. New Construction 180 (032, 160) a. Floor drains allowed when equipped with berms. b. Copper drain line prohibition modified to allow copper traps and short length connection pipes only for domestic waste and where alternatives are not practical. 16.09.032(b )(9). c. Swimming pool discharge modified to allow fixed discharge point with air gap. 16.09.032(b )(15). d. Covered dumpster requirement clarified to cover residential developments providing centralized collection and requiring sizing adequate for all solids waste streams. Clarified use of berm system or grading to prevent runon and runoff. 16.09.032(b)(17) e. No mercury switches in sewer or storm drain sumps. f. Moved a number of items to 16.06.092 Prohibited Materials and Practices. These items are now standard in most industrial facilities. This was not the case at the time of the original ordinance. g. Clarified prohibition on copper roofmg and gutters to include downspouts. 16.09. 160(b) 26. Personnel Orientation 185 (035) a. Clarification of work area and sink signage requirements. 27. Accidental discharge prevention 190 (090) a. Preparation of Slug Control Plans may be required. 28. Fountains, pools, spas and cooling towers 205 (114) a. Added boilers and cooling systems. b. Prohibited discharge to storm drains. c. Prohibited addition of chemicals to fountains, pools, spas, cooling towers, storm drains or the sanitary sewer that contain greater than 2 ppm of Molybdenum or Zinc. d. Removed passed cooling tower compliance deadline for meeting 0.25 ppm Cu limit and replaced with one year compliance schedule for new cooling towers. 29. Root Control Chemicals 210 (101) a. Prohibition against use without permit. 30. Photographic Processing 215 (111) a. Records shall be maintained for three years and made available for inspection. b. Removed separate limit for photo processors with reduced water use. c. Removed passed compliance dates and compliance schedules. 31. Dental Requirements 220 (112) a.Removed past dental requirement implementation dates. b. Added record retention and availability requirements. c. Remove exemptions. d. Added annual reporting requirements. 32. Automotive 225 (113) a. Removed past automotive requirement implementation dates. b. Requirement to handle solids in accordance with State and Local regulations. c. Required labeling of storm drains. 33. Enforcement Remedies a. Rearranged in order of severity and consolidated all enforcement. b. Moved Damage to facilities 275 (130). c. Moved termination of discharge 280 (152). d. Added not exclusive to those listed in ordinance 280 (new). e. Added Warning 240 (new). 34. End Memorandum DATE: October 27, 2006 TO: SUBJECT: cc: Brad Eggleston, City of Palo Alto City of Palo Alto Local Limits Evaluation Betsy Elzufon, LWA Eric Zeigler, L WA INTRODUCTION ATTACHMENT C L A R R Y WALKER IA ASSOCIATES Gorman Lau, P.E. 250 Lafayette Circle, Suite 200 Lafayette, CA 94549 925.962.9700 (phone) 925.962.9701 (fax) gormanl@lwa.com The purpose of this technical memorandum is to evaluate recent monitoring data for the period 2004 through 2005 to determine if the City of Palo Alto's (City's) current local limits are adequate to protect the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) from upset, protect biosolids quality, meet current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) effluent limitations, and protect worker health and safety. The major elements of this technical memorandum include the following: • • • • • Background; Local limits evaluation; Local limits update strategy; Pretreatment Streamlining Rule; and Recommendations. City of Palo Alto 1 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant October 2006 Local Limits Evaluation ::::. . BACKGROUND Regional Water Quality Control Plant Treatment Process Description The City owns and operates the RWQCP, which provides treatment of domestic, commercial, and industrial wastewater from the cities of Los Altos Hills, Los Altos, Palo Alto, Mountain View, the service area of East Palo Alto Sanitary District, and Stanford University. The RWQCP is a tertiary wastewater treatment facility with a dry weather design capacity of 39 million gallons per day (MGD) and can treat up to 80 MGD during wet weather conditions. Wastewater treatment consists of screening, primary sedimentation, fixed film roughing filters, activated sludge, nitrification, secondary clarification, filtration, disinfection, and dechlorination. Approximately 95% of the treated effluent is discharged into a man-made channel (Latitude 3r27'30", Longitude 122°06'45"), which is tributary to Lower South San Francisco Bay. Approximately 5% of the treated effluent is discharged into the Renzel Marsh Pond, which is a reclamation project. A small percentage of the treated effluent is reused for irrigation and construction dust suppression. Biosolids are currently thickened, dewatered using belt presses, and incinerated. Ash is hauled offsite and used for soil augmentation on farm and ranch lands in the Central Valley. Development of Local Limits The development and implementation of local limits is a requirement of the National Pretreatment Program and the City's NPDES permit. As such, local limits are designed to protect the RWQCP against industrial discharges that may cause treatment process upset, cause violation of NPDES permit requirements, or create potential health and safety concerns for facility operators and the public. The City's existing local limits were generally derived according to the procedures and recommendations presented in the USEPA Guidance Manual on the Development and Implementation of Local Discharge Limitations Under the Pretreatment Program (1987). Since the development of City's local limits, USEPA developed its Local Limits Development Guidance (Local Limits Guidance) in July 2004, which updates the 1987 guidance. The evaluation of the City's local limits presented in this memorandum follows the guidance and recommendations of the Local Limits Guidance. Pollutants of Concern (POCs) The 1987 local limits guidance specified ten national POCs: arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, cyanide, lead, mercury, nickel, silver, and zinc. The 2004 Local Limits Guidance recommends that the initial ten national POCs be evaluated, as well as five new POCs: molybdenum, selenium, ammonia, 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), and total suspended solids (TSS). City of Palo Alto 2 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation The City currently has local limits for each of the 2004 national POCs except ammonia, BOD, and molybdenum. Additionally, the City has local limits for other constituents for which there are no local limits derivation driving factors or for which adequate data were not available to evaluate the need for a local limit. These constituents were not evaluated as part of this effort. For this local limits evaluation, updated maximum allowable headworks loadings (MAHLs) were calculated for each of the national POCs (including ammonia and BOD). Adequate data were not available to calculate an MAHL for molybdenum. The purpose of recalculating MAHLs for each POC is to account for updated information including the City's current NPOES permit, recent removal efficiency data, and other changes to RWQCP operations. City of Palo Alto 3 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation LOCAL LIMITS EVALUATION This local limits evaluation is divided into two tasks: • Compare current influent loadings with MAHLs for each POC; and • Review of compliance history. This local limits evaluation utilizes data collected between January 2004 and December 2005 for influent effluent, and biosolids. Biosolids data from 2004 and 2005 are evaluated to determine compliance with California Code of Regulations (CCR) and air emission standards. Comparison of Current Influent Loadings with MAHLs Evaluation Criteria Local Limits Guidance recommends that an MAHL be calculated for each POCo Afte r MAHLs are calculated for each POC, the MAHLs are compared to existing influent loadings. Local Limits Guidance suggests that local limits are necessary if any of the following criteria are satisfied: • Average influent loading of a toxic pollutant exceeds 60 percent of the MAHL, or • Maximum daily influent loading of a toxic pollutant exceeds 80 percent of the MAHL any time in the 12-month period preceding the analysis, or • Monthly average influent loading reaches 80 percent of the average design capacity for BOD, TSS, and ammonia during anyone month in the 12-month period preceding the analysis. Because the City's current local limits were derived according to the 1987 local limits guidance, the above criteria were not used to determine POCs for which local limits are necessary. As a result, there are existing local limits for POCs that do not meet the above-listed criteria. These constituents (listed below) are not included in the following local limits evaluation. • Barium; • Beryllium; • Boron; • Cobalt; • Fluoride; • Formaldehyde; • Manganese; • Phenols; • Single toxic organics (STOs); City of Palo Alto 4 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation • Total dissolved solids; and • Total toxic organics. For POCs that do not currently have an MAHL or local limit, the 2004 criteria listed above were used to evaluate the need for local limits or other actions for these POCs by the City. Local Limits Guidance recommends the following steps be taken to evaluate POCs for which local limits are not currently established: • If the current influent pollutant loading exceeds the MAHL, USEPA recommends that a local limit is established for the pollutant. The source of the elevated loading should be investigated, monitoring should be increased, and pollution prevention efforts should be considered. • If the current influent pollutant loading exceeds the established threshold value (criteria listed previously) for the first time, USEPA recommends increased monitoring for the pollutant. • If the current influent pollutant loading exceeds the established threshold value for the second time, USEPA recommends establishing a local limit and increasing pollutant monitoring. • If the current influent pollutant loading is below the established threshold, USE PA recommends reviewing the pollutant periodically. For pollutants that currently have local limits, USEPA recommends the following steps for evaluating each POC: • If the current influent POC loading exceeds the MAHL, USEPA recommends revising the local limit (unless an investigation reveals that the elevated loading is due to an unusual, one-time event), investigating the cause of the high loading, identifying any non-complying industries, increasing monitoring of industrial users, and considering adopting pollution prevention efforts. • If the current influent POC loading has increased significantly from the previous year (e.g. from 55% to 75% of the MAHL), USEPA recommends that the cause of the increased loading be investigated, monitoring for the POC be increased, or the local limit be revised. • If the current influent POC loading is below the established threshold, USEPA recommends reviewing the pollutant periodically. MAHL Calculations MAH Ls that were used to derive the City's existing local limits have changed over time due to changes to the RWQCP treatment process, changes to the City's NPDES permit upon renewal, and updates to effluent limitations. Six major factors serve as the basis for MAHL development. These include NPDES permit effluent limitations, California Toxics Rule and San Francisco Bay Region Basin Plan water quality criteria/objectives, biosolids disposal restrictions, air emission standards, treatment process inhibition levels, and treatment plant design capacity. City of Palo Alto 5 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation In this evaluation, MAHLs for each POC were recalculated based on the equations and derivation procedures outlined in the Local Limits Guidance. To calculate MAHLs based on water quality criteria/objectives, it is assumed that the receiving water hardness is 100 mg/L as CaC03 (as has been assumed in the existing NPDES permit) and that the receiving water is effluent-dominated. This leads to the direct application of water quality criteria/objectives as effluent limits using the pass-through MAHL derivation equations. Current treatment plant removal efficiencies have been calculated using influent and final effluent data collected between January 2004 and December 2005. Domestic collection system data are not available for ammonia, BOD, and TSS. Typical domestic collection system data from other municipalities are used for these three cons tituents. In this evaluation, the cyanide MAHL was calculated differently 'from Local Limits Guidance. Additionally, the cyanide MAHL calculation also used the proposed cyanide saltwater site-specific objective (SSO) for San Francisco Bay (draft August 18,2006), which increases the criterion maximum concentration (acute) from 1 ).!g/L to 9.4 ).!g/L and the criterion continuous concentration (chronic) from 1 ).!g/L to 2.9 ).!g/L. Under the proposed SSO, the City will also be granted an aUenuationfactorof2.25 in the derivation of effluent limits which accounts for dilution and degradation of cyanide in the receiving water. The projected NPDES permit effluent limitation calculation for cyanide is provided in Attachment A. Instead of using removal efficiencies to calculate the MAH L as described in the Local Limits Guidance, an average cyanide formation load is used to assume that cyanide is always formed during treatment. The average formation load is calculated according to the following equation: Where: LF = Average formation load [Ibs/day]; QIN = Influent flow rate [MGD]; CEFF = Average effluent pollutant concentration [mg/L]; and CIN = Average influent pollutant conGentration [mg/L]. (1 ) It is necessary to calculate allowable headworks loadings (AHLs), which are estimated loadings of a pollutant that can be received at the RWQCP headworks without causing the RWQCP to violate a particular operational restriction or environmental criterion. AHLs are calculated for each type of restriction (NPDES permit effluent limitations, RWQCP design capacity, treatment process inhibition levels, and biosolids disposal restrictions), and the most limiting (lowest) AHL is the MAHL. The cyanide MAHL is revised to account for the formation load according to the following equation: City of Palo Alto 6 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation MAHL AHL'vfIN -LF Where: MAHL = Maximum allowable headworks loading [Ibs/day]; AHLMIN = Minimum allowable headworks loading [Ibs/day]; and LF = Average formation load [Ibs/day]. The subsequent maximum allowable industrial loading (MAIL) and uniform concentration local limit are calculated according to Local Limits Guidance. The resulting MAHLs for each poe are presented in Table 1. MAHL calculations are presented in further detail in Attachment B. Table 1. Revised Maximum Allowable Headworks Loadings Ammonia 109,000 Arsenic 2.19 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) 69,100 Cadmium 1.43 Chromium 5.42 Copper 14.8 Cyanide with proposed SSO 1.04 Lead 9.38 Mercury 0.19 Molybdenuma Nickel 11.4 Selenium 1.44 Silver 5.04 Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 62,400 Zinc 72.3 aNo influent data available -no MAHL could be calculated. Influent Loading Analysis and MAHL Comparison (2) Influent loadings were calculated as the product of the measured pollutant concentration and influent flow on the day the pollutant sample was taken. Pollutant loadings for each year were statistically analyzed using regression on order statistics (ROS), which is a method that estimates summary statistics for data sets that have norKietect data. The ROS method develops probability plotting positions for each data point (detect and non- detect values) based on an ordering of the data. The log-transformation of the City of Palo Alto 7 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation concentrations is regressed and fit with a least squares line to probability plotting positions. Non-detect data points are assigned concentrations for calculation of summary statistics based on their probability plotting positions and regression line equation. Summary statistics are calculated based on detected data pOints and "filled- in" non--detect values. Variance summary statistics are calculated using a Tukey- Jackknife algorithm, which sequentially removes one point from the dataset, runs the analysis, and calculates the variance estimators as the average of each of the lin" runs of data. The ROS method cannot be used ifthere are insufficient detected data to perform the analysis «20% detected data), but yet is found to provide only small errors for important summary statistics parameters (mean, median, standard deviation, and interquartile range) when less than 100% of the data are detected. It should also be noted that unless 100% of the data set is detected, the ROS method is only an estimation of the data. In cases where the ROS method could not be used due to insufficient detected data, a surrogate was used to substitute for non--detect results. The three surrogates commonly used (per Local Limits Guidance) are the reporting limit, zero, and one-half the reporting limit. The most conservative approach is to select a surrogate equal to the reporting limit, which assumes that the pollutant concentration is the maximum possible value. On the other hand, if the surrogate is equal to zero, it assumes that the pollutant concentration is the lowest possible value. Using one-half the reporting limit as the surrogate attempts to compromise between the two extremes. For this local limits evaluation, one-half the reporting limit is used for non-detect data when there were insufficient detected data (e.g. cyanide) to use the ROS method. A summary of the statistical analyses used in calculating influent loadings is presented in Table 2. City of Palo Alto 8 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation Table 2. Summary of Statistical Methods Used for Calculating Influent Loadings Arsenic 100 OS 100 ROS Biochemical Oxygen Demand 100 ROS 100 ROS Cadmium 100 ROS 98 ROS Chromium 100 ROS 100 ROS Copper 100 ROS 100 ROS %MDL 100 ROS ROS ROS Selenium 100 ROS Silver 100 ROS Total Suspended Solids 100 ROS 100 ROS Zinc 100 ROS 100 ROS bNo influent data available., Daily maximum and annual average influent pollutant loadings are summarized in Table 3. A comparison of annual average and daily maximum influent pollutant loadings with the MAHLs are summarized in Table 4. City of Palo Alto 9 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation Table 3. Annual Average and Daily Maximum Influent Pollutant Loadings for 2004 and 2005 Cadmium 0.13 0.17 Chromium 1.52 1.91 Copper 17.9 22.9 Cyanide 0.20 0.21 Lead 0.93 1.12 1.97 1.92 Mercury 0.067 0.050 0.094 Molybdenuma Nickel 1.12 1.59 2.25 2.87 Selenium 0.15 0.18 0.26 0.24 Silver 0.42 0.39 0.93 1.06 Zinc 28.8 30.1 54.9 53.5 aNa influent data available. City of Palo Alto 10 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation Table 4. Comparison of Influent Pollutant Loadings to MAHLs Arsenic 9.6% 10.5% 19.~1o 21.0010 Cadmium 4.2% 4.9% 9.1% 11.9% Chromium 13.7% 18.5% 28.0% 35.2% r 77.7% 95.9% 121% 155% Cyanide with proposed SSO 15.4% 16.3% 19.2% 20.2% Lead 9.9% 11.9% 21.0% 20.5% Mercury 35.3% 26.3% 69.5% 49.5% Molybdenumb Nickel 9.8% 13.9% 19.7% 25.2% Selenium 10.4% 12.5% Silver 8.3% 7.7% Zinc 8% 41.6% 8Constituents in bold exceed the average 60% of MAHL influent loading and/or the maximum 80% of MAHL influent loading. bNo influent data available. Local Limits Guidance recommends using a monthly average comparison of influent loading to the MAHL because POTWs are expected to have capacity to consistently treat a specified amount of conventional constituent load to acceptable leve Is for discharge. Maximum monthly average influent loads for ammonia, BOD, and TSS and percentages of respective MAHLs are provided in Table 5. Table 5. Maximum Annual Monthly Average Influent Loads for Ammonia, BOD, and TSS Ammonia 5,704 5.2% 5,847 5.4% Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOb) 41,375 59.9% 50,634 73.3% Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 48,574 77.8% 51,831 83.1% aConstituents in bold exceed the maximum 80% of MAHL influent loading. City of Palo Alto 11 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation MAHL Evaluation Based on the evaluation of influent pollutant loadings, local limits should only be considered for several constituents according to Local Limits Guidance criteria previously listed. These constituents include the following: • Copper; and • Total suspended solids (TSS). These constituents trigger additional consideration for local limit development because average and/or maximum daily influent loadings exceed recommended threshold levels outlined in the Local Limits Guidance. The copper local limit needs to be examined further because there is a high influent loading to MAHL ratio. Additionally, it appears that the maximum monthly average influent loading incident for TSS was a one-time event and not consistent with typical conditions. Therefore, local limits for TSS is not necessary at this time according to Local Limits Guidance. The City will continue to monitor influent loadings for these constituents. Review of Compliance History Local Limits Guidance recommends that compliance records should also be examined to determine if existing local limits are providing sufficient protection from pass-through and treatment plant/process inhibition and/or upset. The following areas were reviewed to determine the City's compliance history: • RWQCP inhibition and/or upset; • NPDES permit effluent limitations; • Biosolids regulations/air emission standards; and • Pretreatment program standards. RWQCP Inhibition and/or Upset In 2002 and 2003, the RWQCP's nitrification process showed intermittent signs of inhibition. During these episodes, nitrification was not complete and ammonia in the RWQCP's effluent was at higher levels than usual. However, there were no discharge violations. In 2004, sLCh events were relatively minor and no events met the EPA definitions of upset or interference and no effluent limits were violated. In 2005, no periods of nitrification inhibition were noted and only a few minor indications of stress were found during close examination of operational data. The City is currently working with Stanford University, UC Irvine, and a consultant to develop gene-based nitrification testing protocols: The testing protocols will be used to evaluate ammonia oxidizing- related genes involved in nitrification in order to prevent nitrification inhibition. For now, there is no evidence that RWQCP inhibition or upset should trigger changes to existing local limits. . City of Palo Alto 12 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation NPDES Permit Effluent Limitations The City has effluent limitations in its current NPDES permit (CA0037834, adopted September 2003) for copper, mercury, nickel, cyanide, chlorodibromomethane, 4,4'- DDE, dieldrin, heptachlor epoxide, benzo(b)fluoranthene, and indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene. The City has been in compliance with its NPDES permit effluent limitations in 2004 and 2005. While daily copper sample results have exceeded the monthly average limitation for single samples, the City has not exceeded the average monthly effluent limitation between January 2004 and December 2005. Bioso/ids Regulations/Air Emission Standards With the exception of copper, a review of 2004 and 2005 biosolids and ash monitoring data shows that the City is in compliance with all applicable biosolids regulations and air emission standards. Influent copper mass loadings, and subsequent effluent mass loadings, have increased in recent years. In addition to increases in influent and effluent mass loadings, copper concentrations in the RWQCP's incinerator ash have occasionally exceeded the soluble threshold limit concentration (STLC) hazardous waste limit for copper. Ash is currently applied to pasture and feed crop land as a soil amendment and copper is desirable as a micronutrient for this use. The City has initiated the following steps to verify the apparent increased copper load and to identify causes: • Evaluate possible changes in industrial copper loading; • Determine effects of chloramine disinfection on copper corrosion in drinking water piping; • Investigate possible contamination in fluoride added to drinking water; • Explore impacts of additions of copper sulfate to drinking water reservoirs; • Examine effects of collection system line cleaning activities on copper influent; • Determine relationships between copper concentrations in collection system trunk lines and RWQCP influent; and • Identify factors influencing copper concentration variability in RWQCP incinerator ash. Following the completion of these activities, the City will be able to evaluate and implement source control measures to reduce copper in its biosolids. Pretreatment Program Standards The City has 20 categorical significant industrial users (SIUs), 48 non-categorical SIUs, and 35 other industrial users. The City conducts sampling of categorical industrial users twice per year, and the industries are required to conduct semi-annual sampling of their discharge as well. Water quality samples are collected and analyzed for compliance City of Palo Alto 13 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plartt Local Limits Evaluation with existing local limits and categorical limits. Inspection frequencies for industrial and commercial users are summarized in Table 6. Table 6. Pretreatment Program Inspection Frequency Categorical/SIUs Active 2 per year Categorical/SIUs Zero 1 per year Non-Categorical (potential toxic) Active 2 per year Non-Categorical (minor) Active 1 per year BMP Active 1 per year Non-permitted Acti..e 1 per year Groundwater Active Up Machine shops Active 1 per year Active 1 per year e facilities Active 2 per year Active As needed The City has observed inconsistent compliance with several industrial users with arsenic, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, silver, and zinc. The City enforces its local limits and categorical limits by requiring additional sampling and issuing notices of non- compliance. If these requirements are not met, then the City follows its Enforcement Response Plan and escalates penalties. City of Palo Alto 14 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation LOCAL LIMITS UPDATE STRATEGY The City currently does not have local limits for ammonia, BOD and molybdenum and the development of these local limits is discussed in this section. Additionally, local limits and strategies to manage copper, as well as cyanide and other POCs, are also discussed in this section. Ammonia, BOD, and Molybdenum Local limits for ammonia and BOD are not triggered based on the previously discussed influent loading analysis. However, ammonia and BOD are national POCs. Therefore, the City may consider adopting a uniform local limit for these constituents as a way to regulate industrial discharges and to prevent overloading of the RWQCP. Proposed MAILs and associated uniform concentration local limits for ammonia and BOD are presented in Table 7. Detailed MAIL calculations for these constituents are presented in Attachment B. Table 7. Maximum Allocation Industrial Loading and Uniform Local Limits Ammonia 92,500 9,700 Biochemical Oxygen Demand 21,500 2,300 aExpressed as a daily maximum concentration. The City currently does not have sufficient molybdenum data to calculate an MAHL or associated MAIL. It is recommended that the data necessary to develop a local limit be collected. Copper The City currently has a tiered approach for allocating copper local limits to its industrial users, which is presented in Table 8. Table 8. Current Copper Allocations Individual mass limit or Average Maximum Concentration Limit = Maximum Concentration Limit = Concentration Limit = 0.4 mg/L 0.25 mg/L 2.0 mg/L AND Maximum Concentration Limit >50,000 gpd = 1.0 mg/L <50,000 gpd = 2.0 mg/L City of Palo Alto 15 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant October 2006 Local Limits Evaluation The City's current.copper allocation has proven to be sufficient for protecting the RWQCP from treatment process inhibition/upset a nd meeting the City's NPDES permit final effluent limitation for copper. Although influent copper loadings are high compared to the MAHL, the City has completed mass balance studies of copper sources and determined that industrial users contribute only 2% of the total influent copper loadings, as presented in Table 9. Corrosion of piping contributes approximately 58% of the total influent copper loading. The City intends to maintain its current copper local limit allocation and focus on reducing copper loadings from corrosion sources. Table 9. 2005 Industrial Copper Loadings Metal Finishers 0.05 Hospitals 0.08 Laboratories 0.02 Other 0.04 Stanford 0.09 Total Industrial Process Load 0.29 Total Influent Load 14.2 Cyanide The City changed its influent sampling location in January 2006 because the previous influent sampling location included some amount of RWQCP process return flows, including incinerator scrubber return water, which is known to have high cyanide concentrations. Data collected prior to January 2006 showed periodically high influent cyanide concentrations. In comparison, typical raw influent wastewater contains little to no cyanide. For the influent loading analysis, it was assumed that the influent cyanide concentration was non-detect at a reporting limit of 1.6 J.!g/L, which were the results from influent monitoring data obtained after changing the influent sampling location in January 2006. Cyanide is generated through the chlorine disinfection process. As such, the cyanide MAHL was calculated using an average formation loading and completing a mass balance through the treatment process. This calculation method deviates from Local Limits Guidance. Additionally, the proposed cyanide sse is used in calculating projected NPDES permit effluent limitations that can be expected in the City's next NPDES permit. These assumptions result in a cyanide MAHL of 1.04Ibs/day, which may be uniformly distributed to all industrial users as a maximum daily concentration of 55 J.!g/L. The City's existing cyanide local limit is 1,000 J.!g/L. While the City currently does not have compliance issues with its interim cyanide effluent limitation, the City may consider adopting the more stringent cyanide local limit in anticipation of effluent limitations in its next NPDES permit. City of Palo Alto 16 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation Other poes This evaluation determined that existing local limits are sufficiently protective for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, zinc and total suspended solids according to Local Limits Guidance. To protect the RWQCP, the City intends to maintain the existing local limits for these constituents. City of Palo Alto 17 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation PRETREATMENT SlREAMLINING RULE In February 2006, USEPA adopted the Pretreatment Streamlining Rule (Streamlining Rule), which requires a publicly-owned treatment work (POTW) to modify certain provisions of its pretreatment program and provides the option to modify other aspects of its pretreatment program. The following changes are required by the Pretreatment Streamlining Rule: • Slug control requirements must be included in SIU control mechanisms [§403.8(f)(1 )(iii)(B)(6)] -POTWs must incorporate slug control requirements into their SIU control mechanism and must revise their approved program, if necessary, to ensure that they have the legal authority and procedures to modify control mechanisms as needed. • SIUs must be evaluated for the need for a plan or other action to control slug discharges within a year from the final rule's effective date or from becoming an SIU [§403.8(f)(2)(vi)] -The Streamlining Rule specifies that POTWs must evaluate all of their SIUs for the need for a slug control plan or other actions at least one time. If the POTW has not yet done so, it must complete evaluations before October 14, 2006 or within a year of the I U being designated as significant. • SIUs are required to notify the POTW immediately of any changes at its facility affecting the potential for a slug discharge [§403.8(f)(2)(vi)] -The Streamlining Rule requires SIUs to notify the POTW immediately of changes that occur at the facility affecting the potential for a slug discharge, thereby allowing the POTW to reevaluate the need for a slug control plan or other actions to prevent such discharges. • Significant noncompliance (SNC) definition is expanded to include additional types of Pretreatment Standards and Requirements [§403.8(f)(2)(viii)(A-C)] -The Streamlining Rule made several wording changes that expand the types of Standards and Requirements that are to be considered when determining whether an SIU's violations constitute SNC. These changes affect what USEPA considers "chronic violations" [§403.8(f)(2)(viii)(A)], ''Technical Review Criteria violations" [§403.8(f)(2)(viii)(B)], and "other" violations [§403.8(f)(2)(viii)(C)]. • SIU reports must include Best Management Practice (BMP) compliance information [§403.12(b),(e),(h)] -The Streamlining Rule requires SIUs to submit documentation as required by the Regional Water Board or applicable Pretreatment Standards and Requirements to determine compliance with BMP- based standards or local limits. • SIU control mechanisms must contain any BMPs required by a Pretreatment Standard, local limits, state, or locallaw[§403.8(f)(1 )(iii)(B)(3)] -The Streamlining Rule clari'fled that among effluent limits that mus t be contained in all SIU control mechanisms are BMPs that are required by a categorical Pretreatment standard, local limit, state or local law. City of Palo Alto 18 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation • Documentation of compliance with BMP requirements must be maintained as part of the SIU's and POTW's record-keeping requirements [§403.12(o}] -The Streamlining Rule clarified that the POTW and the SIU must maintain records of BMP compliance in the same way other records are maintained as part of §403.12(o}. • Control Authorities which perform sampling for SIUs must perform any required repeat sampling and analysis within 30 days of becoming aware of a violation [§403.12(g)(2)] -The Streamlining Rule provides that where a Control Authority has assumed responsibility for sampling in lieu of the SIU, it is the Control Authority which must repeat sampling and analysis within 30 days of becoming aware of an exceedance. The only exception to this requirement is if the Control Authority specifically requires the Industrial User to perform the repeat analysis. • Require periodic compliance reports to comply with sampling requirements, require Control Authority to specify the number of grab samples necessary in periodic and non-categorical SIU reports, and require non-categorical SIUs to report all monitoring results [§403.12(g}(3),(4),(6}] -SIUs are now required to follow sampling requirements in §403.12 for periodic compliance report [§403.12(e) and (h)], whereas they were previously only explicitly applicable to baseline monitoring reports and gO-day compliance reports. In addition, for the reports required in §403.12(e) and (h), the Streamlining Rule requires the Control Authority to indicate the number of grab samples necessary to assess and assure compliance by industrial users with applicable categorical Pretreatment Standards and Requirements. Also, non-categorical SIUs are required to report all monitoring results, whereas the previous regulations only made this requirement explicit for categorical SIUs. • Non-categorical SIUs are required to provide representative samples in their periodic monitoring report [§403.12(g)(3)] -The Streamlining Rule extends to the §403.12(b), (d), and (h) monitoring requirements that SIUs provide data which are representative of conditions during the reporting period. Prior to the adoption of the Streamlining Rule, there were no rules regarding whether a POTW could use BMPs in lieu of numeric local limits and industrial users were not explicitly required to report compliance data from BMPs. With regards to implementation of BMPs in the Pretreatment Program, the Streamlining Rule specifies: • BMPs developed by POTWs may serve as local limits; • Full categorical industrial user reporting is required where BMPs are required for categorical standards; • The necessity for POTWs to document the rationa Ie for specific BMPs; • The definitions of BMPs; and • What USEPA considers as the minimum elements that make BMPs enforceable. City of Palo Alto 19 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation RECOMMENDATIONS Local Limits Update It is recommended that the City adopt and implement the local limits presented in Table 10. Table 10. Proposed Local Limits for the City of Palo Alto Ammonia 92,500 9,700 Biochemical Oxygen Demand 21,500 2,300 aExpressed as a daily maximum concentration. The City intends to maintain its existing copper local limit and focus on reducing influent copper loadings to the RWQCP from other sources, particularly corrosion of piping. Because adequate RWQCP data are not a vailable for several constituents with existing local limits, and there are no driving factors for the development of local limits for many of these existing local limits constituents, only the 15 USEPA pollutants of concern (POCs) were considered in this evaluation. It is also recommended that the City collect molybdenum data so that a local limit can be developed. Pretreatment Streamlining Rule It is recommended that the City implement modi'fications to its pretreatment program as required by the Streamli ning Rule. The City may also want to consider optional aspects ofthe Streamlining Rule such as developing BMPs in lieu of local limits in the future. Ongoing Evaluation The local limits that were developed as part of this effort are part of a dynamic process that includes periodic review and update as necessary. The City currently has an effective ongoing monitoring program that collects data that are necessary for local limits evaluations and tracks trends in POC loadings. It is recommended that the City collect molybdenum data during its residential monitoring events as well as at the RWQCP influent so that a local limit for molybdenum can be developed. Additionally, it is recommended that the City periodically collect priority pollutant organics data at its residential monitoring locations. Future circumstances may again create a need to update the City's MAILs to allow for the compliance with environmental and operational restrictions. Such circumstances may include the following: • Significant changes in the City's industrial base; City of Palo Alto 20 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Local Limits Evaluation Significant changes in discharge characteristics of existing industries; • Significant changes in environmental and/or NPDES permit regulations applicable to City; • Future facility operational difficulties, discharge compliance difficulties, or biosolids disposal compliance difficulties from any constituents known or suspected to be significantly contributed from industrial sources; • Future facility infrastructure upgrades that can affect wastewater and/or biosolids treatment processes and quality; and • Difficulties in meeting local limits without any corresponding facility operational challenges, discharge compliance challenges, or biosolids disposal compliance challenges. City of Palo Alto 21 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Attachment A Projected NPDES Permit Effluent Limitation Calculation for Cyanide Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations Calculation "Calculations based on data collected from August 2003-August 2006. City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant A-1 October 2006 Attachment B Local Limits Derivation Worksheets Local Limits -Conventional H+= B I C I 0 I E , Ammonia Units Calculations Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 25.9 2005 Average Influent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration mg/L 24.3 January 2004-0ecember 2005 Data 7 Maximum Influent Concentration mg/L 34 January 2004-December 2005 Data 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration mg/L 23.2 January 2004-December 2005 Data 9 Average Effluent Concentration mg/L 0.1 January 2004-0ecember 2005 Oata 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration mg/L 0.52 January 2004-0ecember 2005 Oata 11 Average Oomestic Concentration mg/L 25.3 Reference Data 12 Existing Loading 13 Average Influent Loading Ibs/day 5,249 8.34*04*06 14 Maximum Influent Loading Ibs/day 7,344 8.34*04*07 15 Average Oomestic Loading Ibslday 5,108 8.34*(D4-05)*D11 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical % 99.6% (06-09)/D6 18 In-Plant Removal, Worst % 97.9% (06-010)/06 19 In-Plant Primary Removal % 4.5% (06-08)/06 20 Treatment/Discharge Lim its 21 Discharge Limit (Daily) mg/L 8 NPDES Permit 22 Discharge Limit (Monthly) mg/L 3 NPOES Permit 23 ·t mg/L 480 EPA Local Limits Guidance Manual mg/L -- ~y 419,916 8.34*04*021/(1-017) it Ibs/day 157,468 8.34*04*022/(1-D17) Ibslday 108,599 8.34*D4*D23/(1-D19) Ibs/day -- ng (MAHL) 31 Headworks Limit Ilbs/day I 108,599 I MIN{D26:D29) 32 Driving Factor Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit 33 Maximum Allowable Industrial Loading (MAIL) 34 Safety Factor 10% 10,860 C34*D31 35 Industrial Allocation Ibs/day 92,631 D31-D 15-D34 36 Equivalent Across-the-Board Limit mg/L 6,572 D35/D5/8.34 City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant B-1 October 2006 Local Limits -Conventional FI G H I J 1 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) 2 Units Calculations Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 25.9 2005 Average Influent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration mg/L 204 January 2004-December 2005 Data 7 Maximum Influent Concentration mg/L 290 January 2004-December 2005 Data 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration mg/L -- 9 Average Effluent Concentration mg/L 1.5 January 2004-December 2005 Data 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration mg/L 3.7 January 2004-December 2005 Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration mg/L 197 Reference Data 12 Existing Loading 13 Average Influent Loading Ibs/day 44,065 8.34*14*16 14 Maximum Influent Loading Ibs/day 62,642 8.34*14*17 15 Average Domestic Loading Ibs/day 39,777 8.34*(14-15)*111 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical % 99.3% (16-19)116 18 In-Plant Removal, Worst % 98.2% (16-110)/16 19 In-Plant Primary Removal % -- 20 Treatment/Discharge Limits 21 Discharge Limit (Daily) mg/L 20 NPDES Permit 22 Discharge Limit (Monthly) mg/L 10 NPDES Permit 23 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit mg/L -- 24 Plant Capacity mg/L 320 Design Capacity 25 Headworks Loading Limits 26 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day 587,536 8.34*14*121/(1-117) 27 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day 293,768 8.34*14*122/(1-117) 28 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 29 Plant Capacity Loading Limit Ibs/day 69,122 8.34*14*124 30 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 31 Headworks Limit Ibs/day 69,122 MIN(126:129) 32 Driving Factor I IPlant Capacity Loading Limit 33 Maximum Allowable Industrial Loading (MAIL) 34 Safety Factor 10% 6,912 H34*131 35 Industrial Allocation Ibs/day 22,433 131-115-134 36 Equivalent Across-the-Board Limit mg/L 1,592 135115/8.34 City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant 8-2 October 2006 Local Limits -Conventional KI L I M N 0 1 Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 2 Units Calculations Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 25.9 2005 Average Influent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration mg/L 209 January 2004-December 2005 Data 7 Maximum Influent Concentration mg/L 330 January 2004-December 2005 Data 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration mg/L 57 January 2004-December 2005 Data 9 Average Effluent Concentration mg/L 1.3 January 2004-December 2005 Data 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration mg/L 5.7 January 2004-December 2005 Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration mg/L 158 Reference Data 12 Existing Loading 13 Average Influent Loading Ibs/day 45,145 8.34*N4*N6 14 Maximum Influent Loading Ibs/day 71,282 8.34*N4*N7 15 Average Domestic Loading Ibs/day 31,902 8.34*(N4-N5)*N11 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical % 99.4% (N6-N9)/N6 18 In-Plant Removal, Worst % 97.3% (N6-N10)/N6 19 In-Plant Primary Removal % -- 20 Treatment/Discharge Limits 21 Discharge Limit (Daily) mg/L 20 NPDES Permit 22 Discharge Limit (Monthly) mg/L 10 NPDES Permit 23 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit mg/L -- 24 Plant Capacity mg/L 289 Design Capacity 25 Headworks Loading Limits 26 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day 694,542 8.34*N4*N21/(1-N17) 27 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day 347,271 8.34*N4*N22/(1-N17) 28 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 29 Plant Capacity Loading Limit Ibs/day 62,426 8.34*N4*N24 30 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 31 Headworks Limit Ibs/day 62,426 MIN(N26:N29) 32 Drivi ng Factor I Plant Capacity Loading Limit City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant B-3 October 2006 Local Limits -Priority Pollutant Metals AI B C I D E 1 Arsenic 2 Units I Calculations Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 25.9 2005 Average Influent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration ug/L 1.1 January 2004-December 2005 Data 7 Maximum Influent Concentration ug/L 2.2 January 2004-December 2005 Data 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration ug/L 0.9 January 2004-December 2005 Data 9 Average Effluent Concentration ug/L 0.8 January 2004-December 2005 Data 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration ug/L 1 January 2004-December 2005 Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration ug/L 0.94 March 2000-September 2005 Data 12 Existing Loadings 13 Average Influent Loading Ibs/day I 0.24 0.00834"D4"D6 14 Maximum Influent Loading Ibs/day I 0.48 0.00834*D4*D7 15 Average Domestic Loading Ibs/day I 0.19 0.00834"(D4-D5)*D11 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical % I 27.3% (D6-D9)/D6 18 In-Plant Removal, Worst % I -- 19 In-Plant Primary Removal % I 18.2% (D6-D8)1D6 20 Existing Conditions (Biosolids) 21 Biosolids Flow to Incinerator mgd 0.027 Average Flow to Incinerator 22 Biosolids Flow to Landfill mgd 0.0013 Average Flow to Landfill 23 Percent Solids to Incinerator % 26.9% January 2004-December 2005 Data 24 Percent Solids to Landfill % 58.3% January 2004-December 2005 Data 25 Biosolids Density to Incinerator kg/L 1.00 Local Limits Guidance 26 Biosolids Density to Landfill kg/L 0.88 Metcalf & Eddy 27 Average Ash Concentration, Wet mg/kg 3.14 January 2004-December 2005 Data 28 Treatment/Discharge/Disposal Limits 29 Water Quality Criteria/Objective (Lowest) ug/L 36 California Toxics Rule/Basin Plan 30 Discharge Limit (Daily) ug/L -- 31 Discharge Limit (Monthly) ug/L -- 32 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit ug/L 100 EPA Local Limits Guidance 33 Trickling Filter Inhibition Limit ug/L -- 34 Nitrification Inhibition Limit ug/L 1,500 EPA Local Limits Guidance 35 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Limit, Dry mg/kg 10 40 CFR 503.43 36 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Limit, Dry mg/kg -- 37 Biosolids CCR Limit, Wet mg/kg 500 CCR 22-66261.24 38 Headworks Loading Limits 39 Water Quality Loading Limit Ibs/day 10.7 0.00834 *D4 *D29/(1-D 17) 40 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 41 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 42 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 26.4 0.00834*D4*D32/(1-D19) 43 Trickling Filter Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 44 Nitrification Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 396 0.00834*D4*D34/(1-D19) 45 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Loading Limit Ibs/day 2.19 8.34 *D21*D23*D25*D35/D17 46 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 47 Biosolids CCR Loading Limit Ibs/day 17.5 8.34*D22*D26*D37/D17 48 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 49 Limiting MAHL Ilbs/day 2.19 I MIN(D39:D47) 50 Driving Factor I Incinerator Biosolids Feed Loading Limit City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant B-4 October 2006 Local Limits -Priority Pollutant Metals FI G H I I J 1 Cadmium 2 Units I Calculations I Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Infiuent Flow mgd 25.9 2005 Average Infiuent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Infiuent Concentration ug/L 0.3 January 2004-December 2005 Data 7 Maximum Infiuent Concentration ug/L 0.7 January 2004-December 2005 Data 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration ug/L 0.4 January 2004-December 2005 Data 9 Average Effluent Concentration ug/L 0.1 January 2004-December 2005 Data 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration ug/L 0.3 January 2004-December 2005 Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration ug/L 0.4 March 2000-September 2005 Data 12 Existing Loadings 13 Average Infiuent Loading I Ibs/day I 0.06 I 0.00834'14'16 14 Maximum Infiuent Loading I Ibs/day I 0.15 0.00834'14'17 15 Average Domestic Loading Ilbs/day I 0.08 0.00834'(14-15)*111 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical I % I 66.7% (16-19)116 18 In-Plant Removal, Worst I % I -- 19 In-Plant Primary Removal I % I -33.3% (16-18)/16 20 Existing Conditions (8iosolids) 21 Biosolids Flow to Incinerator mgd 0.027 Average Flow to Incinerator 22 Biosolids Flow to LandfiJI mgd 0.0013 Average Flow to Landfill 23 Percent Solids to Incinerator % 26.9% January 2004-December 2005 Data 24 Percent Solids to Landfill % 58.3% January 2004-December 2005 Data 25 Biosolids Density to Incinerator kg/L 1.00 Local Limits Guidance 26 Biosolids Density to Landfill kg/L 0.88 Metcalf & Eddy 27 Average Ash Concentration, Wet mg/kg 1.17 January 2004-December 2005 Data 28 Treatment/Discharge/Disposal Limits 29 Water Quality Criteria/Objective (Lowest) ug/L 2.4 California Toxies Rule/Basin Plan 30 Discharge Limit (Daily) ug/L -- 31 Discharge Limit (Monthly) ug/L -- 32 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit ug/L 1,000 EPA Local Limits Guidance 33 Trickling Filter Inhibition Limit ug/L -- 34 Nitrification Inhibition Limit ug/L 5,200 EPA Local Limits Guidance 35 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Limit, Dry mg/kg 59 40 CFR 503.43 36 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Limit, Dry mg/kg -- 37 Biosolids CCR Limit, Wet mg/kg 100 CCR 22-66261.24 38 Headworks Loading Limits 39 Water Quality Loading Limit Ibs/day 1.57 0.00834"14"129/(1-117) 40 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 41 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 42 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 162 0.00834"14"132/(1-119) 43 Trickling Filter Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 44 Nitrification Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 842 0.00834"14"134/(1-119) 45 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Loading Limit Ibs/day 5.29 8.34"121"123"125'135/1 17 46 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 47 Biosolids CCR Loading Limit Ibs/day 1.43 8.34'122'126'1371117 48 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 49 Limiting MAHL Ibs/day 1.43 I MIN(139:147) 50 Driving Factor Biosolids CCR Loading Limit City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant 8-5 October 2006 Local Limits -Priority Pollutant Metals KI L I M I N I 0 1 Chromium (Total) 2 I Units I Calculations I Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow I mgd I 25,9 I 2005A~ 5 Average Industrial Flow R 2005 Pretreatment Influent Concentration January 2004- Maximum Influent Concentration January 2004-December 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration January 2004-December 2005 Data 9 Average Effluent Concentration January 2004-December 2005 Data 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration 1,1 I January 2004-December 2005 Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration ug/L 3,97 March 2000-September 2005 Data 12 Existing Loadings 13 Average Influent Loading Ibs/day I 0,91 0,00834*N4*N6 14 Maximum Influent Loading Ibslday I 1.73 0,00834*N4*N7 15 Average Domestic Loading Ibs/day I 0,80 0,00834*(N4-N5tN11 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical % I 88,1% (NS-N9)/N6 18 In-Plant Removal, Worst % I -- 19 In-Plant Primary Removal % I 73,8% (NS-N8}/N6 20 Existing Conditions (Biosolids) 21 Biosolids Flow to Incinerator I mgd 0,027 Average Flow to Incinerator 22 Biosolids Flow to Landfill I mgd 0,0013 A._'~ lltr-I % 26,9% January 2004-D sto Landfill m 58,3% January 2004-[ sity to Incinerator 1,00 Local Limits Guidance sity to Landfill 0,88 Metcalf & Eddy I 27 Average Ash Concentration, Wet January 2004-December 28 TreatmentlDischargelDisposal Limits 29 _~ Qool'" C"""""""""'" (lowml~ rnia Toxics Rule/Basin Plan 30 Discharge Limit (Daily) - ~ Discharge Limit (Monthly) - Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit uglL EPA Local Limits Guidance Trickling Filter Inhibition Limit ug/L EPA Local Limits Guidance 34 Nitrification Inhibition Limit ug/L 250 EPA Local Limits Guidance 35 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Limit, Dry mg/kg 230 40 CFR 503,43 36 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Limit, Dry mg/kg -- 37 Biosolids CCR Limit, Wet mg/kg 500 CCR 22-66261,24 38 Headworks Loading Limits 39 Water Quality Loading Limit Ibs/day 20,7 0,00834*N4*N29/(1-N17) 40 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day - 41 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day - 42 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 825 0,00834*N4*N32/(1-N19) 43 Trickling Filter Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 2,887 0,00834 *N4*N33/(1-N 19) 44 Nitrification Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 206 0,00834*N4*N34/(1-N19) 45 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Loading Limit Ibs/day 15.6 8,34*N21*N23*N25*N35/N17 46 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 47 Biosolids CCR Loading Limit Ibslday 5,42 8,34*N22*N26*N37/N 17 48 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 49 Limiting MAHL Ilbs/dayl 5.42 I MIN{N39:N47} 50 Driving Factor I Biosolids CCR Loading Limit City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant B-6 October 2006 Local Limits Priority Pollutant Metals PI Q I R I s I T 1 Copper 2 I Units I Calculations I Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 25.9 2005 Average Influent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration ug/L 62.8 January 2004·December 2005 Data 7 Maximum Influent Concentration ug/L 110 January 2004·December 2005 Data 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration ug/L 38.8 January 2004·December 2005 Data 9 Average Effluent Concentration ugiL 9 January 2004·December 2005 Data 10 um Effluent Concentration ug/L 16 January 2004·December 2005 Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration ugIL 78.2 March 2000·September 2005 Data fii'-13 e Influent Loading I~ 0.00834*S4*S6 14 um Influent Loading II 0.00834*S4*S7 15 Domestic Loading Ilbs/dayl 15.8 0.00834*(S4-85)*811 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In·Plant Removal, Typical I % I 85.7% (86·S9)/86 18 In·Plant Removal, Worst I % I 74.5% (86-810)/S6 19 In·Plant Primary Removal I % 38.2% (S8-S8)/S6 20 Existing Conditions (Biosolids) 21 Biosolids Flow to Incinerator mgd 0.027 Average Flow to Incinerator 22 Biosolids Row to Landfill mgd 0.0013 Average Flow to Landfill 23 Percent Solids to Incinerator % 26.9% January 2004·December 2005 Data 24 Percent Solids to Landfill % 58.3% January 2004·December 2005 Data 25 Biosolids Density to Incinerator kg/L 1.00 Local Limits Guidance 26 Biosolids Density to Landfill kg/L 0.88 Metcalf & Eddy 27 Average Ash Concentration, Wet mg/kg 780 January 2004·December 2005 Data 28 TreatmentlDischargelDisposal Limits 29 Water Quality Criteria/Objective (Lowest) ug/L · · 30 Discharge Limit (Daily) ug/L 17.4 NPDES Permit 31 Discharge Limit (Monthly) ug/L 11.8 NPDES Permit 32 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit ug/L 1,000 EPA Local Limits Guidance 33 Trickling Filter Inhibition Limit ug/L · · 34 Nitrification Inhibition Limit ug/L 50 EPA Local Limits Guidance 35 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Limit, Dry mglkg · · 36 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Limit, Dry mg/kg · · 37 Biosolids CCR Limit, Wet mg/kg 2,500 CCR 22·66261.24 38 Headworks Loading Limits 39 Water Quality Loading Limit lbs/day · · 40 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day 14.8 0.00834*$4*S30/(1·S18) 41 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day 17.8 0.00834*$4*S31/(1·S17) 42 Activated 81udge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 350 0.00834*$4*S32/(1·S19) 43 Trickling Filter Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day · · 44 Nitrification Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 17.5 0.00834*$4*S34/( 1·S19) 45 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Loading Limit Ibs/day · · 46 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Loading Limit Ibs/day · - 47 Biosolids CCR Loading Limit Ibs/day 27.8 8.34 *S22*826*S37/S 17 48 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 49 Limiting MAHL Ilbs/day I 14.8 I MIN(S39:847) 50 Driving Factor I IDaily Discharge Loading Limit City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant B·7 October 2006 Local Limits -Priority Pollutant Metals UI V I W X I y 1 Lead 2 I Units Calculations I Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 25.9 2005 Average Influent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration ug/L 5 January 2004-December 2005 Data 7 Maximum Influent Concentration ug/L 9 January 2004·December 2005 Data 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration ug/L 4.4 January 2004·December 2005 Data 9 Average Effluent Concentration ug/L 0.3 January 2004·December 2005 Data 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration ugfL 2.7 January 2004-December 2005 Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration ug/L 7.6 March 2000·September 2005 Data 12 Existing Loadings 13 IlbS/day I 1.08 I 0.OO834*X4*X6 14 Maximum Influent Loading Ilbs/dayl 1.94 I 0.00834*X4*X7 15 Average Domestic Loading Ilbs/dayl 1.53 I 0.00834*CX4·X5)*X11 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical I % I 94.0% I (X6·X9)1X6 18 In-Plant Removal, Worst I % I -I . 19 In-Plant Primary Removal I % I 12.0% I (X6-X8)fX6 20 Existing Conditions (Biosolids) 21 Biosolids Flow to Incinerator mgd 0.027 Average Flow to Incinerator 22 Biosolids Flow to Landfill mgd 0.0013 Average Flow to Landfill 23 Percent Solids to Incinerator % 26.9% January 2004·December 2005 Data 24 Percent Solids to Landfill % 58.3% January 2004·December 2005 Data 25 Biosolids Density to Incinerator kglL 1.00 Locel Limits Guidance 26 Biosolids Density to Landfill kg/L 0.88 Metcalf & Eddy 27 Average Ash Concentration, Wet mg/kg 62.9 January 2004·December 2005 Data 28 TreatmentfDischargelDisposal Limits 29 Water Quality CriteriafOb'ective (Lowest) ug/L 2.6 California Toxics Rule/Basin Plan 30 Discharge Limit (Daily) ug/L · - 31 Discharge Limit (Monthly) ug/L -- 32 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit ug/L 1,000 EPA Local Limits Guidance 33 Trickling Filter Inhibition Limit ug/L -- 34 Nitrification Inhibition Limit ug/L 500 EPA Local Limits Guidance 35 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Limit, Dry mg/kg 540 40 CFR 503.43 36 BiosoJids 40 CFR 503 Limit, Dry mg/kg · - 37 Biosolids CCR Limit, Wet mg/kg 1,000 CCR 22·66261.24 38 Headworks Loading Limits 39 Water Quality Loading Limit Ibs/day 9.38 O. 00834*X4 'X29/( 1-X 17) 40 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 41 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 42 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 245 0.00834·X4*X32/(1-X191 43 Trickling Filter Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day · . 44 Nitrificetion Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 123 0.00834*X4*X34/(1-X19) 45 Incinerator Biosclids Feed Loading Limit Ibs/day 34.3 8.34*X21*X23*X25*X351X 17 46 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Loading Limit Jbs/day -- 47 Biosclids CCR Loading Limit Jbs/day 10.1 8.34*X22*X26*X371X 17 48 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 49 Limiting MAHL Ilbs/dayl 9.38 I 50 Driving Factor I IWater Quality Loading Limit City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant 8-8 October 2006 Local Limits -Priority Pollutant Metals 21 AA I AB I AC AD 1 Mercury 2 I Units I Calculations I Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 25.9 2005 Average Influent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration ug/L 0.269 January 2004-December 2005 Data 7 Maximum Influent Concentration ug/L 0.7 January 2004-December 2005 Data 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration ug/L -- 9 Average Effluent Concentration ug/L 0.005 January 2004-December 2005 Data 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration ug/L 0.012 January 2004-December 2005 Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration ug/L 0.19 Manch 2000-September 2005 Data 12 Existing Loadings 13 Average Influent Loading Ilbs/day 0.06 I 0.00834*AC4*AC6 14 Maximum Influent Loading Ilbs/day 0.15 I 0.00834*AC4*AC7 15 Average Domestic Loading Ilbs/day 0.04 I 0.00834*(AC4-AC5)*AC11 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical I % 98.1% I (AC6-AC9)/AC6 18 In-Plant Removal, Worst I % -I - 19 In-Plant Primary Removal I % 10.0% I EPA Local Limits Guidance 20 Existing Conditions (Biosolids) 21 Biosolids Flow to Incinerator mgd 0.027 Average Flow to Incinerator 22 Biosolids Flow to Landfill mgd 0.0013 Average Flow to Landfill 23 Percent Solids to Incinerator % 26.9% January 2004-December 2005 Data 24 Percent Solids to Landfill % 58.3% January 2004-December 2005 Data 25 Biosolids Density to Incinerator kg/L 1.00 Local Limits Guidance 26 Biosolids Density to Landfill kg/L 0.88 Metcalf & Eddy 27 Average Ash Concentration, Wet mg/kg 0.011 January 2004-December 2005 Data 28 Treatment/Discharge/Disposal Limits 29 Water Quality Criteria/Objective (Lowest) ug/L 0.025 California Toxics RUle/Basin Plan 30 Discharge Limit (Daily) ug/L -- 31 Discharge Limit (Monthly) ug/L 0.023 NPDES Permit 32 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit ug/L 100 EPA Local Limits Guidance 33 Trickling Filter Inhibition Limit ug/L -- 34 Nitrification Inhibition Limit ug/L -- 35 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Limit, Dry mg/kg 112 40 CFR 61.52 36 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Limit, Dry mg/kg -- 37 Biosolids CCR Limit, Wet mg/kg 20 CCR 22-66261.24 38 Headworks Loading Limits 39 Water Quality Loading Limit Ibs/day 0.29 0.00834*AC4*AC29/(1-AC17) 40 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 41 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day 0.27 0.00834*AC4*AC31/(1-AC17) 42 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 24.0 0.00834*AC4*AC32/(1-AC19) 43 Trickling Filter Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 44 Nitrification Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 45 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Loading Limit Ibs/day 6.82 8.34*AC21 *AC23*AC25*AC35/AC17 46 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 47 Biosolids CCR Loading Limit Ibs/day 0.19 8.34*AC22*AC26*AC37/AC17 48 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 49 Limiting MAHL Ilbs/day I 0.19 I MIN(AC39:AC47) 50 Driving Factor I I Biosolids CCR Loading Limit City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant B-9 October 2006 Local Limits· Priority Pollutant Metals AEI AF AG AH I AI 1 Nickel 2 Units Calculations I Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 2S.9 200S Average Influent Flow S Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 200S Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration ug/L 6.6 January 2004·December 200S Data 7 Maximum Influent Concentration ug/L 12 January 2004-December 200S Data 8 Average Primary Effluent Con ~"'~ 2004-0,~mbec 2005 """ 9 Average Effluent Concentration uary 2004-December 200S Data 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration 200S Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration ug/L S,2S I March 2000-September 200S Data 12 Existing Loadings ~ 13 Average Influent Loading 0,00834*AH4*AH6 14 Maximum Influent Loading 0.00834*AH4*AH7 lS Average Domestic Loading 0.00834*(AH4·AHS)*AH11 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical I (AH6-AH9)/AH6 18 In-Plant Removal Worst I (AH6-AH 1 0)/AH6 19 In-Plant Primary Removal I (AH6·AH8)/AH6 20 Existing Conditions (Biosolids) 21 Biosolids Flow to Incinerator mgd 0.027 Average Flow to Incinerator 22 Biosolids Flow to Landfill mgd 0,0013 Average Flow to Landfill 23 Percent Solids to Incinerator % 26.9% January 2004-December 200S Data 24 Percent Solids to Landfill % S8.3% January 2004-December 200S Data 2S Biosolids Density to Incinerator kg/L 1.00 Local Limits Guidance 26 Biosolids Density to Landfill kg/L 0,88 Metcalf & Eddy 27 Average Ash Concentration, Wet mg/kg 36,1 January 2004-December 200S Data 28 TreatmentlDischargelDisposal Limits 29 Water Quality Criteria/Obiective (Lowest) ug/L -- 30 Discharge Limit (Daily) ug/L 32.2 NPDES Permit 31 Discharge Limit (Monthly) ug/L 2S.6 NPDES Permit 32 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit ug/L 1,000 EPA Local Limits Guidance 33 Trickling Filter Inhibition Limit ug/L -. 34 Nitrification Inhibition Limit ug/L 2S0 EPA Local Limits Guidance 3S Incinerator Biosolids Feed Limit, Dry mg/kg 48,000 40 CFR S03.43 36 Biosolids 40 CFR S03 Limit, Dry mglkg -- 37 Biosolids CCR Limit, Wet mg/kg 2,000 CCR 22-66261.24 38 Headworks Loading Limits 39 water Quality Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 40 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day 11.S 0,00834*AH4*AH30/(1-AH18) 41 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day 11.4 0.00834*AH4*AH31/(1·AHl7) 42 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 324 0.00834*AH4*AH32/(1·AH19) 43 Trickling Filter Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day . . 44 Nitrification Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 81.0 0.00834*AH4*AH34/(1-AH 19) 4S Incinerator Biosolids Feed Loading Limit Ibs/day 5,569 8.34*AH21*AH23*AH2S*AH3S/AH17 46 Biosolids 40 CFR S03 Loading Limit lbs/day . - 47 Biosolids CCR Loading limit Ibs/day 37.0 8.34*AH22*AH26*AH37/AH17 48 Maximum Allowab 49 Limiting MAHL Ilbs/da I MIN(AH39:AH47) SO Driving Factor I IMonthly Discharge Loading Limit City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant 8-10 October 2006 Local Limits -Priority Pollutant Metals AJI AK AL I AM I AN 1 Selenium 2 Units I Calculations I Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 25.9 2005 Average Influent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration ug/L 0.8 January 2004-December 2005 Data 7 Maximum Influent Concentration ug/L 1.3 January 2004-December 2005 Data 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration ug/L 1.2 January 2004-December 2005 Data 9 Average Effluent Concentration ug/L 0.6 January 2004-December 2005 Data 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration ug/L 0.8 January 2004-December 2005 Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration ug/L 0.52 March 2000-September 2005 Data 12 Existing Loadings 13 Average Influent Loading Ibs/day I 0.17 0.00834*AM4*AM6 14 Maximum Influent Loading Ibs/day I 0.28 0.00834*AM4*AM7 15 Average Domestic Loading Ibs/day I 0.10 0.00834*(AM4-AM5)*AM11 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical % I 25.0% (AM6-AM9)/AM6 18 In-Plant Removal, Worst % I -- 19 In-Plant Primary Removal % I -- 20 Existing Conditions (Biosolids) 21 Biosolids Flow to Incinerator mgd 0.027 Average Flow to Incinerator 22 Biosolids Flow to Landfill mgd 0.0013 Average Flow to Landfill 23 Percent Solids to Incinerator % 26.9% January 2004-Decem ber 2005 Data 24 Percent Solids to Landfill % 58.3% January 2004-December 2005 Data 25 Biosolids Density to Incinerator kg/L 1.00 Local Limits Guidance 26 Biosolids Density to Landfill kg/L 0.88 Metcalf & Eddy 27 Average Ash Concentration, Wet mg/kg 3.41 January 2004-December 2005 Data 28 Treatment/Discharge/Disposal Limits 29 Water Quality Criteria/Objective (Lowest) ug/L 5 California Toxics Rule/Basin Plan 30 Discharge Limit (Daily) ug/L -- 31 Discharge Limit (Monthly) ug/L -- 32 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit ug/L -- 33 Trickling Filter Inhibition Limit ug/L -- 34 Nitrification Inhibition Limit ug/L -- 35 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Limit, Dry mg/kg -- 36 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Limit, Dry mg/kg -- 37 Biosolids CCR Limit, Wet mg/kg 500 CCR 22-66261.24 38 Headworks Loading Limits 39 Water Quality Loading Limit Ibs/day 1.44 0.00834*AM4*AM29/(1-AM17) 40 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 41 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 42 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 43 Trickling Filter Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 44 Nitrification Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 45 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 46 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 47 Biosolids CCR Loading Limit Ibs/day 19.1 8.34*AM22*AM26*AM37/AM 17 48 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 49 Limiting MAHL Ilbs/day I 1.44 I MIN(AM39:AM47) 50 Driving Factor I IWater Quality Loading Limit City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant B-11 October 2006 Local Limits -Priority Pollutant Metals Aq AP I AQ AR AS 1 Silver 2 I Units I Calculations Formula/Source 3 EXisting Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 25,9 2005 Average Influent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1,69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration ug/L 1.9 January 2004-December 2005 Data 7 Maximum Influent Concentration ug/L 5 J,"",~200~ 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration ug/L 1,1 January 2004-De 9 Average Effluent Concentration I JTL I <0.2 January 2004-De 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration <0.2 January 2004-De 11 Average Domestic Concentration 0.87 March 2000 12 Existing Loadings ~ 13 Average Influent Loading 0.00834*AR4'AR6 14 Maximum Influent Loading 0.00834*AR4·AR7 15 Average Domestic Loading 0.00834*(AR4-AR5)*AR11 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical I % (AR6-AR9)/AR6 18 In-Plant Removal. Worst I % I -I - 19 In-Plant Primary Removal I % I -I - 20 Existing Conditions (Biosolids) 21 Biosolids Flow to Incinerator mgd 0,027 Average Flow to Incinerator 22 Biosolids Flow to Landfill mgd 0.0013 Average Flow to Landfill 23 Percent Solids to Incinerator % 26,9% January 2004-December 2005 Data 24 Percent Solids to Landfill % 58.3% January 2004-December 2005 Data 25 Biosolids Density to Incinerator kg/L 1.00 Local Limits Guidance 26 Biosolids Density to Landfill kg/L 0.88 Metcalf & Eddy 27 Average Ash Concentration, Wet mg/kg 30,6 January 2004-December 2005 Data 28 Treatment/Discharge/Disposal Limits 29 Water Quality Criteria/Ob:e 2.2 California Toxics Rule/Basin Plan 30 . Discharge Limit (Daily) -- I 31 I Discharge Limit (Monthly) - 32 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit -- 33 Trickling Filter Inhibition Limit - 34 Nitrification Inhibition Limit I -- 35 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Limit, Dry - 36 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Limit Dry -- 37 Biosolids CCR Limit, Wet CCR 22-66261.24 38 Headworks Loading Limits 39 Water Quality Loading Limit 0.00834·AR4*AR29/(1-AR17) 40 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 41 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 42 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibslday -- 43 Trickling Filter Inhibition Loading Limit IbsJday - 44 Nitrification Inhibition Loading Limit IbsJday - 45 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Loading Limit IbsJday - 46 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Loading Limit Ibslday - 47 Biosolids CCR Loading Limit Ibs/day 5.04 8.34 *AR22* AR26*AR37/AR 17 48 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 49 Limiting MAHL Ilbs/day 5.04 MIN(AR39:AR47) 50 Driving Factor Biosolids CCR Loading Limit City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant 8-12 October 2006 Local Limits -Priority Pollutant Metals AT! AU I AV I AW AX 1 Zinc 2 I Units I Calculations Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 25.9 2005 Average Influent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration ug/L 141 January 2004-December 2005 Data 7 Maximum Influent Concentration ug/L 280 January 2004-December 2005 Data 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration ug/L 79 January 2004-December 2005 Data 9 Average Effluent Concentration ug/L 48 January 2004-December 2005 Data 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration ug/L 68 January 2004-December 2005 Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration ug/L 161 March 2000-September 2005 Data 12 Existing Loadings 13 Average Influent Loading Ilbs/day I 30 0.00834*AW4*AW6 14 Maximum Influent Loading Ilbs/day I 60 0.00834*AW4*AW7 15 Average Domestic Loading Ilbs/day I 33 0.00834*(AW4-AW5)*AW11 16 Removal Efficiency 17 In-Plant Removal, Typical I % I 66.0% I (AW6-AW9)/AW6 18 In-Plant Removal, Worst I % I -I - 19 In-Plant Primary Removal % I 44.0% I (AW6-AW8)/AW6 20 Existing Conditions (Biosolids) 21 Biosolids Flow to Incinerator mgd 0.027 Average Flow to Incinerator 22 Biosolids Flow to Landfill mgd 0.0013 Average Flow to Landfill 23 Percent Solids to Incinerator % 26.9% January 2004-December 2005 Data 24 Percent Solids to Landfill % 58.3% January 2004-December 2005 Data 25 Biosolids Density to Incinerator kg/L 1.00 Local Limits Guidance 26 Biosolids Density to Landfill kg/L 0.88 Metcalf & Eddy 27 Average Ash Concentration, Wet mg/kg 992 January 2004-December 2005 Data 28 Treatment/Discharge/Disposal Limits 29 Water Quality Criteria/Objective (Lowest) ug/L 120 California Toxics Rule/Basin Plan 30 Discharge Limit (Daily) ug/L -- 31 Discharge Limit (Monthly) ug/L -- 32 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit ug/L 300 EPA Local Limits Guidance 33 Trickling Filter Inhibition Limit ug/L -- 34 Nitrification Inhibition Limit ug/L 290 EPA Local Limits Guidance 35 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Limit, Dry mg/kg -- 36 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Limit, Dry mg/kg -- 37 Biosolids CCR Limit, Wet mg/kg 5,000 CCR 22-66261.24 38 Headworks Loading Limits 39 Water Quality Loading Limit Ibs/day 76.1 0.00834*AW4*AW29/(1-AW17) 40 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 41 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 42 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 116 0.00834 *AW4 *AW32/(1-AW19) 43 Trickling Filter Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 44 Nitrification Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 112 0.00834*AW4*AW34/(1-AW19) 45 Incinerator Biosolids Feed Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 46 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 47 Biosolids CCR Loading Limit Ibs/day 72.3 8.34 *AW22*AW26*AW37/AW17 48 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 49 Limiting MAHL Ilbs/day 72.3 I MIN(AW39:AW47) 50 Driving Factor I Biosolids CCR Loading Limit City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant B-13 October 2006 Local Limits -Other Toxics AI B I C D E 1 Cyanide with Proposed ssa (August 2006 Draft) 2 I Units Calculations I Formula/Source 3 Existing Conditions (Wastewater) 4 Average Influent Flow mgd 25.9 2005 Average Influent Flow 5 Average Industrial Flow mgd 1.69 2005 Pretreatment Annual Report 6 Average Influent Concentration ug/L <1.6 Post December 2006 Data* 7 Maximum Influent Concentration ug/L <1.6 Post December 2006 Data* 8 Average Primary Effluent Concentration ug/L -- 9 Average Effluent Concentration ug/L 3.1 January 2004-December 2005 Data 10 Maximum Effluent Concentration ug/L 7.3 January 2004-December 2005 Data 11 Average Domestic Concentration ug/L <1.6 March 2000-September 2005 Data 12 Existing Loadings 13 Average Influent Loading Ibs/day 0.17 0.00834 *D4 *D6 14 Maximum Influent Loading Ibs/day 0.17 0.00834*D4*D7 15 Average Domestic Loading Ibs/day 0.16 0.00834*(D4-D5)*D11 16 Average Effluent Loading Ibs/day 0.67 0.00834*D4*D9 17 Average Formation Loading Ibs/day 0.50 D16-D13 18 Removal Efficiency 19 In-Plant Primary Removal % I 0.0% Assumed Zero Removal 20 Existing Conditions (Biosolids) 21 Biosolids Flow to Incinerator mgd 0.027 Average Flow to Incinerator 22 Biosolids Flow to Landfill mgd 0.0013 Average Flow to Landfill 23 Percent Solids to Incinerator % 26.9% January 2004-December 2005 Data 24 Percent Solids to Landfill % 58.3% January 2004-December 2005 Data 25 Biosolids Density to Incinerator kg/L 1.00 Local Limits Guidance 26 Biosolids Density to Landfill kg/L 0.88 Metcalf & Eddy 27 Average Ash Concentration, Wet mg/kg 3.18 January 2004-December 2005 Data 28 TreatmentJDischarge/Disposal Limits 29 Water Quality Criteria/Objective (Lowest) ug/L -- 30 Discharge Limit (Daily) ug/L 14 Projected NPDES Permit Limits 31 Discharge Limit (Monthly) ug/L 7.1 Projected NPDES Permit Limits 32 Activated Sludge Inhibition Limit ug/L 100 EPA Local Limits Guidance 33 Trickling Filter Inhibition Limit ug/L -- 34 Nitrification Inhibition Limit ug/L 340 EPA Local Limits Guidance 35 Incinerator Air Emission Limit, Dry mg/kg -- 36 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Limit, Dry mg/kg -- 37 Biosolids CCR Limit, Wet mg/kg -- 38 Headworks Loading Limits 39 Water Quality Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 40 Daily Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day 2.46 0.00834 *D4*D30-D17 41 Monthly Discharge Loading Limit Ibs/day 1.04 0.00834*D4*D31-D17 42 Activated Sludge Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 21.1 0.00834*D4*D32/(1-D19)-D17 43 Trickling Filter Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 44 Nitrification Inhibition Loading Limit Ibs/day 72.9 0.00834*D4*D34/(1-D19)-D17 45 Incinerator Air Emission Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 46 Biosolids 40 CFR 503 Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 47 Biosolids CCR Loading Limit Ibs/day -- 48 Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading (MAHL) 49 Limiting MAHL Ibs/day 1.04 I MIN(D39:D47) 50 Driving Factor Monthly Discharge Loading Limit 51 Maximum Allowable Industrial Loading (MAIL) 52 Safety Factor 10% 0.10 C52*D49 53 Industrial Allocation Ibs/day 0.77 D49-D15-D52 54 Equivalent Across-the-Board Limit ug/L 55 D53/D5/0.00834 *Prior to January 2006, the influent sampling location was not representative of raw influent and included some process 55 retum flow. MAHL was calculated assuming non-detect cyanide results «1.6 ~g/L) at the influent. City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant B-14 October 2006 Attachment C Air Emission Standards Calculations Local Limits Evaluation This attachment provides documentation of sources of data used to calculate air emission standards that a re applicable to the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant biosolids incinerator. Air emission standards calculations are based on equations provided in the 40 Code of Regulations §503.43 and Local Limits Guidance. Variations from these data sources are noted on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis. For All Pollutants • The maximum sludge cake feed rate is 28.8 dry metric tons per day (mton/day). • The incinerator control efficiencies are from the City's 1994 permit application. • The dispersion factor is 41.7 llg/m3/g/s. Lead The following equation is used to calculate the average daily concentration criterion for lead in sludge cake fed into the biosolids incinerator: Where: C = NAAQS· 8,640 DF .{I CE).SF C = Average daily concentration in sewage sludge [mg/kg]; NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standard lllg/m3]; OF = Dispersion factor lllg/m3/g/s]; CE = Incinerator control efficiency [in hundredths]; and SF = Sludge cake feed rate [dry mton/day]. The National Ambient Air Quality Standard for lead is 1.5 llg/m3 for a maximum arithmetic mean over a calendar quarter (40 CFR 50.12). Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Nickel The following equation is used to calculate the average daily concentration criterion for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and nickel in sludge cake fed into the biosolids incinerator: Where: C = 86,400· RSC DF ·{I-CE).SF C = Average daily concentration in sewage sludge [mg/kg]; RSC = Risk specific concentration [llg/m3]; City of Palo Alto C-1 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant October 2006 Local Limits Evaluation DF = Dispersion factor fJ.t.g/m3/g/s]; CE = Incinerator control efficiency [in hundredths]; and SF = Sludge cake feed rate [dry mton/day]. The risk specific concentration (RSC) for arsenic, cadmium, and nickel are 0.023,0.057, and 2.0 l-t9/m3, respectively (40 CFR 503.43 Table 1). The City's biosolids incinerator is a multiple hearth furnace with a wet scrubber. As such, the chromium RSC is 0.064 l-t9/m3 (40 CFR 503.43 Table 2). Mercury The following equation is used to calculate the average daily concentration criterion for mercury in sludge cake fed into the biosolids incinerator: Where: c= NESHAP (l-CE).SF C = Average daily concentration in sewage sludge [mg/kg]; NESHAP = National Emission Standard for mercury [g/day]; CE = Incinerator control efficiency [in hundredths]; and SF::: Sludge cake feed rate [dry mton/day]. The National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for mercury is 3,200 g/d, respectively (40 CFR 61.52). The mercury incinerator control efficiency was calculated to be 0.005 based on January 2004-December 2005 sludge cake and ash data. City of Palo Alto C-2 October 2006 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Attachment D / San Francisco Bay Area Publicly-Owned Treatment Works Local Limits Local Limits for San Francisco Bay POTWs aDependent on type and amount of discharge. April 12, 2010 Donna Grider. City Clerk City ofPaio Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 9430 I Dear Ms. Grider: ATTACHMENT B I'm .pleased to inform you that the Amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement for the Administration of the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Program previously submitted for your boardlcolUlcil's consideration has met the threshold for adoption. In compliance with the requirements of the Joint Powers Agreement, the amendment has been approved by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Au~hority (VTA), Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors and a majority of the cities representing a majority of the population in the County. We will be circulating a single original of the Amendment to each location for execution by the appropriate party in your jurisdiction. We will be contacting you to set up an appointment for the purpose of having the document signed at your convenience. . Many thanks for your cooperation with this effort. It represents a major step forward in improving the representation on the VTA Board of Directors. If you have any questions or need further informatio~ please do not hesitate to contact Scott Haywood, Policy and Communications Manager. He can be reached by telephone, 408.321.7544 or e~mail) scott.haywood@Vta.org. Yours truly ~ s~~ Board Secretary 00: Mayor City Manager J. Lawson K.Allmand 3331 North First Street· San Jose, CA 95134-19Z7· Administration 408.32l.55SS . Customer Service 408.321.2300 AMENDMENT TO JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE ADMINISTRATI,ON OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM THIS AMENDMENT TO JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT (hereitlafter "Amendment") dated as of December 10, 2009 is made and entered into between Cities within the County of Santa Clara, the County of Santa Clara and the Santa Clara Valier Transportation Authority (forinerly known as the Santa Clara County Transit District). ' 'RECITALS , . WHEREAS, the parties hereto entered into a JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR TIlE ADMINISTRATION OF nm SANTA CLARA COUNTY CONGESTION . MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (here!paft,~r "Agreement") dated pecember 1, 1994; WHEREAS, Section 6 of the Agreement, pursuant to California Public Utilitie,s Section l00069~. establish~d the groupings ofth~ Cities within the County of Sarita Clara, other than the City of Siln Jose, for the ,appointment of members to the Santa Cla~ C',ounty transit District (now' the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority) Board of Directors; . . " , . WHEREAS, the parties now desire to amend Section 6 to reconfigure the groupings of the qitjes 'YiJhin the County of Santa Cla~a, other tha~ the City of San Jose, to ill~lude a new city group comprised of Sunnyvale, Santa Clara and Milpitas, that would appoint two ~oard . members and one alternate; , . NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: (1) Section 6.A.l ofthe Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: The five (5) city council members and three (3) alternates to be appointed as Directors by aU the cities in Santa Clam County except the City of San Jose shall be selected according to the following groupings: TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DATE: JUNE 7,2010 REPORT TYPE: CONSENT DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CMR: 234:10 SUBJECT: Approval of Amendment No.1 to the Option Agre.ement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto History Museum for the Roth Building, 300 Homer Avenue, Providing for a One-Year Extension of the Option Term RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to execute the attached Amendment #1 to the Option Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto History Museum (Museum), for the Roth Building located at 300 Homer Avenue. This amendment will extend the term of the option for one year in order to provide the Museum additional time in which to meet the conditions of the option. BACKGROUND In April 2000, the City Council approved the $1,957,000 purchase of the Roth Building and its 0.41 acre site for potential development as a "public facility or alternative use if a public facility is not feasible," in conjunction with the South of Forest Avenue Coordinated Area Plan (SOFA CAP). On May 20, 2002, Council approved a Request for Proposals (RFP) and directed staff to solicit proposals for the lease of the Roth Building. The RFP specified that preference be given to non- profit groups located in or serving Palo Alto, that the property by improved and operated at no cost to the city and required public access to the Roth Building restrooms by users of the neighboring park. In response to the RFP, one proposal was received in November 2003. The Museum's proposal to restore, preserve and improve the historic Roth Building for use as the Palo Alto History Museum was accepted by the Council in April 2004, at which time staff sent the Museum a draft Option Agreement for its review. In February 2006, staff received the Museum's proposed changes to the draft option including a request that the City contribute up to $300,000 to repair leaking and drainage problems at the Roth building. On JulU 10, 2006, Council created a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Roth Building maintenance in the amount of $415,000 to provide funding for interim measures to prevent further deterioration of CMR:234:IO Page 1 of4 the building until the Museum takes over the site. On May 14, 2007, Council authorized the Mayor to execute the Option Agreement and approved a City contribution of $150,000 for repair of the leaking and drainage problems. The Option Agreement was executed on June 22, 2007 with a twenty-four month term. A summary of the Option Agreement and Lease are attached (Attachment B). In January 2009, in response to the written request from the Museum citing difficulties with fund raising due to the economic downturn, the City Manager, in accordance with the terms of the option, granted the Museum a one-year extension of the term, to June 30, 2010. On April 12, 2010, Council approved the nomination of the Category 2 Roth Building to the National Register of Historic Places and transmittal of letter of support to the State Historical Resources Commission. On April 30, 2010, the State Historical Resources Commission recommended that the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) forward the Roth Building National Register nomination to the Keeper of the National Register for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. DISCUSSION The Museum has now requested an additional extension of the Option term to June 21, 2011, to provide more time to meet the submittal requirements outlined in the Option Agreement (Attachment C, April 13, 2010 letter), and have paid the additional $2,000.00 deposit as required under the terms to extend the Option. The Option Agreement provided for an initial two-year period to satisfy the specified conditions prior to exercising the option and entering into the lease. During the option period, the Museum must obtain plan approvals, permits, variances and any other discretionary approvals that may be required for the project and provide evidence of sufficient financial security to complete, operate and maintain the project. Upon written request from the Museum, the City Manager may extend the term of the option: 1) for a reasonable time in the event the Museum is delayed in fulfilling the option conditions by any cause not the fault of or within the reasonable control of the Museum; or 2) for a period not to exceed 180 days in the event the Museum is delayed in fulfilling the conditions for any other reason. This option provision allows for the City Manager to administratively grant one extension, which has already been granted. Therefore, any further extensions must be approved by the City Council. As stated in the Museum's April 13,2010 letter, the need for another option term extension is due to the continued difficulty fundraising during the economic downturn. The letter provides an update on the Museum's progress in both fundraising and project design development. Between that April letter and the most recent letter, dated May 18, 2010 (Attachment D), the Museum reports they have selected a contracting firm, obtained additional capital gifts, and due to the current building economy and efficiencies, have reduced the current capital gift goal to $1.7 million. On May 7, 2010, the Museum's architectural team met with the City Planning department and submitted its plans to begin the City review, approval and permitting process. The project's LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) design and certification is underway with a target of Gold or possibly Platinum certification. CMR:234:10 Page 2 of4 In summary, the Museum notes the challenge the current economy brings to fundraising but is confident that its fundraising goal is within reach by the end of the calendar year, and that all remaining Option conditions will be met and permits granted to enable the Museum to sign the lease and begin construction on the rehabilitation of the building within the next twelve months. RESOURCE IMPACT The City of Palo Alto purchased the Roth Building at a cost of $1,957,000, spent an additional $950,000 to retain the spine, and in 2007 an additional $150,000 to repair leaks and drainage problems. The cost to the City,for improvements and maintenance allocated in a July 2006 CIP was $415,000, of which approximately $152,000 has been spent in repairing roofleaks, electrical problems, glass breakage and providing general maintenance and security. The proposed improvements, maintenance and operation of the property during the lease term will be at no cost to the City with the exception of the cost of maintenance and utilities for the restroom open to the park public. The estimated armual cost to the City for restroom maintenance and utilities is $25,000 to $30,000. Extension of the Option will require that the City continue to provide minor maintenance to the building such as, repairing/replacement of broken windows, repairing roofleaks, both as needed, and providing minimal heat/ventilation in the finished areas to try to prevent further deterioration of the finishes. The estimated cost to the City for this maintenance and periodic monitoring is approximately $5,000 annually. The estimated value of the proposed tenant improvements is approximately $7 million dollars, and the entire renovation, development and operation of the Museum is to be at no cost to the City. In exchange, the City will receive a nominal $1 per year in lease revenue for the facility during the 40 year lease term. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The proposed Amendment to the Option to Lease does not represent any changes to existing City policy. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Extension of an option is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Enviromnental Quality Act under Article 19, Section 15301, existing facilities. CMR:234:10 Page 3 of4 PREPARED BY: MARTHA MILLER Manager, Real Property DEPARTMENTAL HEAD APPROVAL: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ATTACHMENTS L Z, Director Administrative Services Attachment A: Amendment #1 to the Option Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto History Museum Attachment B: Summary of Option to Lease with Museum for Roth Building Attachment C: April 201 0 letter from Steve Staiger, President, Palo Alto History Museum Attachment D: May 18,2010 Additional Status Update from Steve Staiger, President, Palo Alto History Museum CC: Palo Alto History Museum CMR:234:10 Page 4 of4 ATTACHMENT A AMENDMENT NO.1 TO OPTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF PALO ALTO AND PALO ALTO HISTORY MUSEUM This Amendment No. I to the Option Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto History Museum, dated (" Option"), is made and entered into this __ day 2010, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California municipal eorporation of the State of California ("CITY"), and PALO ALTO HISTORY MUSEUM, a California non-profit corporation ("MUSEUM"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the Option provides for an exclusive two-year option to lease the property located at 300 Homer Avenue, Palo Alto ("Premises"), for the purpose of developing, operating, restoring and preserving the Premises as a History Museum ("Projeet") as described in the Option and the lease attached thereto as Exhibit I ("Lease"); and WHEREAS, on April 2, 2009, in response to MUSEUM'S written request outlining difficulties raising funds for the Project due to the recent economie downturn, the City Manager, in accordance with the terms of the option, granted the Museum a one year extension of the term, to June 30, 2010; and WHEREAS, on April 13, 20] 0, MUSEUM submitted a written request for an additional one-year extension until June 30, 2011, due to the continued difficulty raising funds for the Project during the economic downturn and to unanticipated "due diligence" required to complete the design phase of the Project; and WHEREAS, MUSEUM has shown progress toward fulfilling the option conditions and desires to improve and operate the Project; and WHEREAS, MUSEUM and CITY desire to amend the Option to provide for the Project; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants, the parties hereto agree as follows: SEC'll ON 1. Seetion 2 of the Option is hereby amended to read as follows: "2. TERM OF OPTION. The term of this option shall he extended to June 30,2011." SECTION 2. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of and exhibits to the Option shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment the day and year first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO PALO ALTO HISTORY MUSEUM By:. ____________________ __ Mayor Its: ------------------------ ATTEST: City Clerk City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Assistant City Attorney APPROVED: Director of Administrative Services 2 ATTACHMENT B SUMMARY OF OPTION TO LEASE WITH THE PALO ALTO HISTORY MUSEUM FOR THE ROTH BUILDING Conditions of the Option Term of the Option: 2 years (effective June 22, 2007) Museum Conditions: Prior to exercising its option to Lease the property, the Palo Alto History Museum (Museum) must satisfY the following conditions: 1. Pay the option purchase price ($5,000). 2. Submit schematic plans for the project within twelve (12) months of the commencement of the option. 3. Comply with all requirements of the California Enviromnental Quality Act (CEQA). 4. Receive approval of its development plans for the entire project from the Architectural ReviewlHistoric Resources Board for SOFAl projects, the Planning & Transportation Commission and City Council. 5. Receive approvals from the City Engineer and Chief Building Official of construction drawings, including the construction contract form and proposed construction schedule. 6. Receive approval from the City Manager of a long-term maintenance plan and schedule for the building during the Lease term. 7. Receive approval of any land use permits or approvals required to implement the project and development plans . • 8. Provide evidence to the Real Property Manager that any and all permits from any agencies having pre-construction jurisdiction over the proposed development have been authorized and are available. 9. SatisfY the Director of Administrative Services that the Museum has sufficient finances or financial commitments to implement the project as approved by the City and furnish to the Director of Administrative Services evidence that sufficient financial security will be available to construct the project. 10. Submit to the Real Property Manager a security deposit as required by the Lease. Terms of the Lease LESSOR: City of Palo Alto TENANT: The Palo Alto History Museum, a non-profit corporation PREMISES: 300 Homer Avenue, Palo Alto, commonly known as the Roth Building. PURPOSE: The purpose of the Lease is to allow the Museum to perform the project as described in Exhibit C to the Lease by developing and operating a museum open to the public, according to the terms and conditions of the Lease. TERM: The term of the Lease is 40 years. USES: A. REQUIRED: Throughout the term of the Lease, the Museum shall provide the following services, activities and uses: I. Restoration, preservation and improvement of the Roth Building. 2. Restrooms available to the public using the adjacent City park and a community meeting room available for use by neighborhood groups. 3. Displays, exhibits and demonstrations relating to local history. 4. All required activities shall be open to the public a minimum of 20 hours per week and free of charge except the Museum may charge a membership fee for members and a fee for admission to members and non-members for special events, activities or use of facilities. B. PERMITTED: In addition to the required uses, the following uses shall also be permitted, but only as incidental to the required uses: I. Workshops, classes and lectures associated with museum purposes. 2. Administrative offices and storage space to support the required services, activities and uses under the Lease. 2 3. Fund raising activities only to support the required services, activities and uses, including but not limited to sales of goods and gifts related to the museum use and the hosting of benefits and social aetivities; and 4. Periodic rental of space to Palo Alto-based community groups and individuals (including living quarters for a caretaker, dircetor, and/or curator of the Museum building) and to for-profit organizations for corporate events unrelated to the required services and uses for the purpose of fund-raising to support the required services and uses. Rentals must not interfere with the obligation of Museum to provide the required services, activities and uses. C. OPTIONAL: Subject to the prior written approval of the City Manager, the Museum may provide additional services and uses which are ancillary to and compatible with the required services above, including use of the property for revenue-generating events or operations so long as such uses do not interfere with Museum's ability to provide the required services and uses, will not result in damage to the property, and all net revenue generated by sueh are devoted exclusively to funding the activities of the Museum conducted at the property. C. PROHIBITED: Any use not authorized by the Lease. D. SPECIAL USES: I. Museum has the right to exclusive use the paved patio area at the rear of the building, which shall be included in the leased area. 2 Museum has the right to temporarily close the museum operations to conduct repairs, make alterations, change exhibits, and observe holidays and to suspend operations for up to an aggregate of one hundred eighty (180) days in any three (3) year period if for any reason Museum is financially unable to operate the museum. The Museum shall provide the City with not less than tliirty (30) days' written notice of its intention to temporarily suspend operations for any period of time. CONSIDERA TIONfRENT: A. MONETARY: One Dollar ($1.00) per year, payable upon execution of the Lease and thereafter on each anniversary date of the Lease. B. NON-MONETARY: Development and operation of a muselun consistent with the purpose and clauses of the Lease, at no cost to the City. SECURITY DEPOSIT: A $10,000 secllI'ity deposit is required which can be cash, assignment of savings account, certificate of deposit or letter of credit. REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE BY TENANT: 3 Required improvements are those improvements which are identified and shown in the plans approved by the City during the option period MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS OF TENANT; Except for the publie restrooms to be maintained by the City, the Museum shall be responsible for all maintenance and repairs on the Property in accordance with the City-approved maintenance program to preserve the historic features of the building, including in the areas on the northwestern and southwestern sides of the Roth building, including the sidewalk and courtyard area. MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS OF CITY; City to maintain the public restrooms accessible from the exterior of the property, including water and sewer lines serving the restrooms. City to also maintain all trees except for those located on the northwestern and southwestern sides of the Roth building, including the courtyard area. City to be responsible for property damage and pcrsooal injury occurring on or about the public restrooms. UTILITIES; Museum to pay all utilities except for utilities supplied to the public restrooms, which shall be the responsibility of the City. Museum and City shall each be responsible for the cost of installing and maintaining its meter for its respective utilities service. ASSIGNMENTISUBLETTING: Assignment or encumbrance of the Lease is prohibited except if the Museum dissolves or ceases doing business, in which case the Museum may assign its interest in the Lease to a non-profit organization who agrees to abide by the tenns and conditions of the Lease, subject to approval by the City. The Museum may sublease to other non-profit groups for office use and to a museum caretaker for residential use subject to compliance with City ordinances and to approval by the City Manager. Museum also has the right to sublease up to 25 % of the property to for- profit organizations, and portions of the property to a food service operator and a gififbook shop so long as these uses are in support of Museum's obligation to provide the required services, activities and uses specified in the Lease. TAXES, ASSESSMENTS, INSURANCE: The Museum shall be responsible for all taxes and assessments for the property and shall maintain insurance meeting the City's standard requirements for insurance protection. 4 Palo Alto History Museum Project Status Update Attn: Martha Miller April 13, 2010 ATTACHMENT C Please consider this an update to the report dated October 15, 2009. Fundraising: The fundraising goal of $7.2 million dollars is, we believe, within reach by the end of the calendar year given the nature of current activities and support. Led by a $2 million pledge from the Peery Family Foundation, we are now looking to close the last $3.1 million dollar gap needed to complete the restoration of the Roth Building for purposes of relating the remarkable story of the Palo Alto-Stanford community. In addition to major financial commitments, the volunteer efforts of the Peery family, Leonard Ely, and others significantly support our fundraising activities. Concluding the fundraising this year should result in measurable construction cost savings on the $7.2 million project costs. We are favored with the generous participation of Vance Brown Builders in keeping capital cost estimates and possibilities current as well as on-going discussions regarding project cost reductions through value engineering. We also anticipate finalizing an agreement with a prominent local non-profit in the very near future which collaboration will benefit both organizations, result in an approximate $500,000-$750,000 capital commitment, and on-going rent to support Museum activities. Though challenged by a difficult economy, several other possibilities are being pursued with promise for positive outcome. Building/ architecture: We are in the schematic design and design development phase of the project. Ongoing communication by the architeet team with staff should soon resolve some process questions that remain. The efforts of a Board committee and the arehitect's team has established the major building elements and has also identified areas to be dedicated to programming needs for the Museum building. With this information, we have involved the sub-consultants (structural and mechanieall eleetrical! plumbing) in the design process. With the Council approval of the National Register nomination, we are the next step closer to achieving another funding goal. Palo Alto History Museum April 13, 2010 LEED design and certification for the building are underway. A target certification level will need to be established by the Board, but we are certain of Gold and arc looking to Platinum as a possibility, we believe to be a first in the community for an adaptive reuse project. The AlE team has collected a variety of technical questions (mostly code issues) and has met with the Fire and Building Departments with the direct participation of the Public Works Department for their input. With these major issues addressed the architeet's team has moved forward on the technical part of the project. Meetings have been also held with Planning, Real Estate, Parks, Utilities, Sustainability I Green Building, and Police Departments for their timely input. Planning and Community Services have provided input and submissions are anticipated in the near future, again, once a few process questions are clarified. Summary: While the economy has been a challenge of no small proportion these last months, the additional support and interest of community members, along with the on-going efforts of our pro bono fundraising consultant and a number of volunteers, significant progress is being made. The unveiling of the window graphics at the Roth Building have generated additional community interest at the building itself. Architectural/building plans are progressing well and are being received positively. With the economy and some unanticipated extra work to do due diligence, we are requesting a one-year extension to complete the project and fill the gap in our local cultural experience that the Palo Alto History Museum will filL If you hnve any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Steve Staiger President Palo Alto History Museum 650.322.3089,650.851.2248 sstaiger@pahistorymuseum.org Palo Alto History Museum Additional Project Status Update Attn: Martha Miller May 18, 2010 ATTACHMENT D Since significant progress has been made since our communication just last month, we are providing the following new information pertaining to the History Museum projec:t: The board unanimously agreed on a choice of contracting firms, and work is underway coordinating their efforts with those of our architecture team. Fundraising efforts have resulted in additional major gifts of $300,000. Working with our newly selected contractor team to take advantage of the current building economy as well as their skills with project efficiency combined with the additional capital gifts, the Museum's capital gifts goal is now $1.7 million. Additionally, plans were submitted to the City last week for architectural review. We are very excited to present you with this updated information and look forward to completing the vision of a place where people can come to experience our remarkable past that paves the way for the future. Again, should you have any questions, please feel free to-contact me. Sincerely, Steve Staiger President Palo Alto History Museum 650.322.3089, 650.851.2248 sstaiger@pahistorymuseum.org Palo Alto History Museum May 18, 2010 In April 2009, Council approved a resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to submit an application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for a grant from the first cycle of federal ARRA Program funding for local streets and roads rehabilitation projects (CMR:225:09). The funding was subsequently granted in two tiers. Tier I was used for resurfacing portions of San Antonio Avenue, Lytton Avenue, and Guinda Street. Tier II is being used completely for this Alma Street concrete project. DISCUSSION Project Description This funding will allow for an additional 4,400 feet of new curb and gutter, 10,000 sf of replaced driveways, 2,000 sf of replaced sidewalks and 13 curb ramps to be installed per Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards or retrofitted to ADA standards. This project is projected to create approximately 15 new jobs. Per American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) guidelines, all ARRA funds shall be used on arterial or collector streets. Arterial and collector streets make up 37% of all lane miles within the city of Palo Alto of which approximately one third are backlog streets in need of reconstruction. In order to determine which streets should be included in the grant funding work, Public Works Engineering staff reviewed the list of eligible streets, their pavement conditions, and all planned utility projects. It was determined that the concrete work on Alma Street between East Meadow Road to Colorado Avenue qualified for grant funding. This project will precede the resurfacing of Alma Street, which is currently scheduled for the summer of 2011, and will enable the resurfacing contract to be completed much more quickly next year. Of the many streets that qualified for the grant funding, applying the grant to Alma Street made the most sense due to both the cost savings and reducing disruption during summer of 20 11. The scope of this contract is for a supplemental concrete project which was made possible due to the additional funding received from the ARRAThe work locations and schedule for this project are shown on the Project Location Map (Attachment B). Due to the existing lane widths, the only safe way to construct the new gutter is to close the right lane of northbound Alma Street for extended periods of time. The right lane will be closed in sections approximately 500' long from Monday at 9:00 AM until Friday at 4:00 PM. This will be repeated approximately 10 times during the summer of 20 1 0 to complete construction. Bid Process On April 6, 2010, a notice inviting formal bids (IFB) for the 2010 Street Maintenance Program Alma Street Concrete Rehabilitation Project was posted at City Hall, and was sent to thirteen (13) builder's exchanges and nine (9) contractors. The bidding period was 28 calendar days. Bids were received from seven (7) qualified contractors on May 4,2010 as listed on the attached Bid Summary (Attachment C). CMR:256:10 Page 2 of4 S fB'dP ummaryo 1 rocess Bid NamelNumber 2010 Street Maintenance Program Alma Street Concrete Rehabilitation Project / IFB 135570 Proposed Length of Project 84 calendar days Number of Bid Packages Mailed to 10 Contractors Number of Bid Packag~s Mailed to 12 Builder's Exchanges Total Days to Respond to Bid 28 Pre-Bid Meeting? Yes (mandatory) Number of Bids Received: 7 Bid Price Range From a low of $29,7,825 to a high of $461,676 Bids ranged from a high of $461,676 to a low bid of $297,825 and ranged from 57% above to 1 % above the engineer's estimate. Staff used bid results from recently constructed street maintenance projects to prepare the engineer's estimate. Staff has reviewed all bids submitted and recommends that the bid totaling $297,824 submitted by Spencon Construction, Inc. be accepted and that Spencon Construction, Inc. be declared the lowest responsible bidder. The change order amolint of $29,782, which equals 10 percent of the total contract, is requested for related, additional, but unforeseen work which may develop during the project The lowest responsible bidder, Spencon Construction, Inc:, has worked with the city on previous concrete projects. Staff investigated the references and found no significant complaints. Staff also checked with the Contractor's State License Board and found that the contractor has an active license on file. RESOURCE IMPACT Funds for this project are included in Capital Improvement Program project PE-86070 Street Maintenance with $209,000 of the project budget coming from the American Recovery and ReinvestmentAct (ARRA) which was approved in the FY 2010 mid year budget. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15301c of the CEQA Guidelines as repair, maintenance and/or minor alteration of the existing facilities and no further environmental review is necessary. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Contract Attachment B: Location Map Attachment C: Bid Summary CMR:256:10 Page 3 of4 ATTACHMENT A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Contract No. C10135570 City of Palo Alto and Spencon Construction PROJECT: Alma Street Concrete Restoration Rev. February 1, 2010 SECTION 1. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS .................................... 1 1.1 Recitals ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Definitions ........................................ ~ .................................................................................. 1 SECTION 2. THE PROJECT ..•.....................................•.......................................................... 1 SECTION 3. THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS ............•...................................................•...... 1 LIST OF DOCUMENTS ..............................................................•.................................•................... 1 3.2 ORDER OF PRECEDENCE ..............................................................................• 2 SECTION 4. THE WORK ........................................................................................................ 2 SECTION 5. PROJECT TEAM ................................................................................................ 2 SECTION 6. TIME OF COMPLETION .........................•.......................................................... 3 6.1 Time Is of Essence ............................................................................................................. 3 6.2 Commencement of Work ................................................................................................... 3 6.3 Contract Time ..................................................................................................................... 3 6.4 Liquidated Damages .......................................................................................................... 3 6.4.1 Entitlement ................................................................................................................... 3 6.4.2 Daily Amount ............................................................................................................... 3 6.4.3 Exclusive Remedy ....................................................................................................... 3 6.4.4 Other Remedies .......................................................................................................... 3 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time .......................................................................................... 3 SECTION 7. COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR .......................................................•...... 3 7.1 Contract Sum ....................................................................................................................... 1 7.2 Full Compensation ............................................................................................................. 1 7.3 Compensation for Extra or Deleted Work ........................................................................ 1 7.3.1 Self Performed Work ................................................................................................... 1 7.3.2 Subcontractors ............................................................................................................ 1 Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc SECTION 8. STANDARD OF CARE ....................................................................................... 1 SECTION 9. INDEMNIFiCATION ............................................................................................ 5 9.1 Hold Harmless .................................................................................................................... 5 9.2 Survival ............................................................................................................................... 5 SECTION 10 NONDISCRIMINATION ...................................................................................... 5 SECTION 11. INSURANCE AND BONDS ................................................................................ 5 SECTION 12. PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS ............................................................ 5 SECTION 13. NOTiCES ............................................................................................................ 6 13.1 Method of Notice ................................................................................................................ 6 13.2 Notice Recipients ............................................................................................................... 6 13.3 Change of Address ............................................................................................................ 7 14.1 Resolution of Contract Disputes ...................................................................................... 7 14.2 Resolution of Other Disputes ........................................................................................... 7 14.2.1 Non-Contract Disputes ................................................................................................ 7 14.2.2 Litigation, City Election ................................................................................................. 7 14.3 Submission of Contract Dispute ...................................................................................... 8 14.3.1 By Contractor ............................................................................................................... 8 14.3.2 By City ..................................................................... , .................................................... 8 14.4 Contract Dispute Resolution Process .............................................................................. 8 14.4.1 Direct Negotiations .................................................. : ................................................... 8 14.4.2 Deferral of Contract Disputes .............................. '" ............................ , ........................ 9 14.4.3 Mediation ..................................................................................................................... 9 14.4.4 Binding Arbitration ....................................................................................................... 9 14.5 Non-Waiver ....................................................................................................................... 10 SECTION 15. DEFAULT ......................................................................................................... 11 15.1 Notice of Default ............................................................................................................... 11 15.2 Opportunity to Cure Default ............................................................................................ 11 SECTION 16. CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES ................................................................... 11 16.1 Remedies Upon Default ................................................................................................... 11 16.1.1 Delete Certain Services ............................................................................................. 11 16.1.2 Perform and Withhold ................................................................................................ 11 ii Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C1 0135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc 16.1.3 16.1.4 16.1.5 16.1.6 Suspend The Construction Contract ......................................................................... 11 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default.. ..................................................... 11 Invoke the Performance Bond ................................................................................... 11 Additional Provisions .................................................................................................. 12 16.2 Delays by Sureties ........................................................................................................... 12 16.3 Damages to City ............................................................................................................... 12 16.3.1 For Contractor's Default ............................................................................................ 12 16.3.2 Compensation for Losses .......................................................................................... 12 16.5 Suspension by City for·Convenience ............................................................................. 12 16.6 Termination Without Cause ............................................................................................ 13 16.6.1 Compensation ........................................................................................................... 13 16.6.2 Subcontractors ............................................ ; ............................................................. 13 16.7 Contractor's Duties Upon Termination .......................................................................... 13 SECTION 17. CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES .................................................. 14 17.1 Contractor's Remedies .................................................................................................... 14 17.1.1 For Work Stoppage ................................................................................................... 14 17.1.2. For City's Non-Payment. ............................................................................................ 14 17.2 Damages to Contractor ................................................................................................... 14 SECTION 18. ACCOUNTING RECORDS ............................................................................... 14 18.1 Financial Management and City Access ........................................................................ 14 18.2 Compliance with City Requests ....................................................................................... 14 SECTION 19. INDEPENDENT PARTIES ................................................................................. 14 SECTION 20. NUISANCE ....................................................................................................... 15 SECTION 21. PERMITS AND LICENSES .............................................................................. 15 SECTION 22. WAiVER ............................................................................................................ ·15 SECTION 23 GOVERNING LAW ........................................................................................... 15 SECTION 24 COMPLETE AGREEMENT .............................................................................. 15 SECTION 25 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT ............................................................................. 15 SECTION 26 PREVAILING WAGES ...................................................................................... 15 iii Rev. February 1. 2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc SECTION 27 SECTION 28 SECTION 29 SECTION 30 NON APPROPRIATION ................................................................................... 16 GOVERNMENTAL POWERS ..................................................•....................... 16 ATTORNEY FEES ............................................................................................ 16 SEVERABILITY ................................................................................................ 16 iv Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on ("Execution Date") by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and SPENCON CONSTRUCTION ("Contractor"), is made with reference to the following: REC ITALS: A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City. B. Contractor is a corporation duly organized and in good standing in the State of California, Contractor's License Number 820205. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State of California and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set forth in this Construction Contract. C. On April 5, 2010, City issued an Invitation for Bids (lFB) to contractors for the Alma Street Concrete Restoration ("Project"). In response to the IFB, Contractor submitted a bid. D. City and Contractor desire to enter into this Construction Contract for the Project, and other services as identified in the Bid Documents for the Project upon the following terms and conditions. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS. 1.1 Recitals. All of the recitals are incorporated herein by reference. 1.2 Definitions. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth in this Construction Contract and/or in the General Conditions. If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Construction Contract and in the General Conditions, the definitions in this Construction Contract shall prevail. SECTION 2 THE PROJECT. The Project is the construction of the Alma Street Concrete Restoration ("Project"). SECTION' 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 3.1 List of Documents. The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as "Agreement',' or "Bid Documents") consist of the following documents which are on file with the Purchasing Division and are hereby incorporated by reference. 1) Change Orders 2) Field Change Orders 3) Contract 4) Project Plans and Drawings 5) Technical SpeCifications 1 Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C1 0135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc 6) Special Provisions 7) Notice Inviting Bids 8) Instructions to Bidders 9) General Conditions 10) Bidding Addenda 11 ) Invitation for Bids 12) Contractor's Bid/Non-Collusion Affidavit 13) Reports listed in the Bidding Documents 14) Public Works Department's Standard Drawings and Specifications dated 2007 and updated from time to time 15) Utilities Department's Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards dated 2005 and updated from time to time 16) City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements 17) City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations 18) Notice Inviting Pre-Qualification Statements, Pre-Qualification Statement, and Pre- Qualification Checklist (if applicable) 19) Performance and Payment Bonds 20) Insurance Forms 3.2 Order of Precedence. For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best interests of the City. SECTION 4 THE WORK. The Work includes all labor, materials, equipment, services, permits, fees, licenses and taxes, and all other things necessary for Contractor to perform its obligations and complete the Project, including, without limitation, any Changes approved by City, in accordance with the Contract Documents and all Applicable Code Requirements. SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM. In addition to Contractor, City has retained, or may retain, consultants and contractors to provide professional and technical consultation for the design and construction of the Project. The Project requires that Contractor operate efficiently, effectively and cooperatively with City as well as all other members of the Project Team and other contractors retained by City to construct other portions of the Project. SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION. 2 Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C1 0135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc 6.1 Time Is of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents. 6.2 Commencement of Work. Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in City's Notice to Proceed. 6.3 Contract Time. Work hereunder shall begin on the date specified on the City's Notice to Proceed and shall be completed o not later than [gI within eighty-four calendar days (84) after the commencement date specified in City's Notice to Proceed. 6.4 Liquidated Damages. 6.4.1 Entitlement. City and Contractor acknowledge and agree that if Contractor fails to fully and satisfactorily complete the Work within the Contract Time, City will suffer, as a result of Contractor's failure, substantial damages which are both extremely difficult and impracticable to ascertain. Such damages may include, but are not limited to: (i) Loss of public confidence in City and its contractors and consultants. (ii) Loss of public use of public facilities. (iii) Extended disruption to public. 6.4.2 Daily Amount. City and Contractor have reasonably endeavored, but failed, to ascertain the actual damage that City will incur if Contractor fails to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. Therefore, the parties agree that in addition to all other damages to which City may be entitled other than delay damages, in the event Contractor shall fail to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time, Contractor shall pay City as liquidated damages the amount of $500 per day for each Day occurring after the expiration of the Contract Time until Contractor achieves Substantial Completion of the entire Work. The liquidated damages amount is not a penalty but considered to be a reasonable estimate of the amount of damages City will suffer by delay in completion of the Work. 6.4.3 Exclusive Remedy. City and Contractor acknowledge and agree that this liquidated damages provision shall be City's only remedy for delay damages caused by Contractor's failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. 6.4.4 Other Remedies. City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where City's Losses are caused by any reason other than Contractor's failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time. The Contract Time may only be adjusted for time extensions approved by City and agreed to by Change Order executed by City and Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR. 7.1 Contract Sum. Contractor shall be compensated for satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the Contract Documents the Contract Sum of Two Hundred Ninety-seven Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty-four and 97/100 Dollars ($297,824.97). D [This amount includes the Base Bid and Add Alternates .] 3 Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C1 0135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc 7.2 Full Compensation. The Contract Sum shall be full compensation to Contractor for all Work provided by Contractor and, exceptas otherwise expressly permitted by the terms of the Contract Documents, shall cover all Losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the acts of the elements or any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until its Acceptance by City, all risks connected with the Work, and any and all expenses incurred due to suspension or discontinuance of the Work. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted for Change Orders issued, executed and satisfactorily performed in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. 7.3 Compensation for Extra or Deleted Work. The Contract Sum shall be adjusted (either by addition or credit) for Changes in the Work involving Extra Work or Deleted Work.based on one or more of the following methods to be selected by City: 1. Unit prices stated in the Contract Documents or agreed upon by City and Contractor, which unit prices shall be deemed to include Contractor Markup and Subcontractor/Sub-subcontractor Markups permitted by this Section. 2. A lump sum agreed upon by City and Contractor, based on the estimated Allowable Costs and Contractor Markup and Subcontractor Markup computed in accordance with this Section. 3. Contractor's Allowable Costs, plus Contractor Markup and Subcontractor Markups applicable to such Extra Work computed in accordance with this Section. Contractor Markup and Subcontractor/Sub-subcontractor Markups set forth herein are the full amount of compensation to be added for Extra Work or to be subtracted for Deleted Work that is attributable to overhead (direct and indirect) and profit of Contractor and of its Subcontractors and Sub-subcontractors, of every Tier. When using this payment me~hodology, Contractor Markup and Subcontractor/Sub-subcontractor Markups, which shall not be compounded, shall be computed as follows: 7.3.1 Markup Self-Performed Work. 10% of the Allowable Costs for that portion of the Extra Work or Deleted Work to be performed by Contractor with its own forces. 7.3.2 Markup for Work Performed by Subcontractors. 15% of the Allowable Costs for that portion of the Extra Work or Deleted Work to be performed by a first Tier Subcontractor. SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE. Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, ex'perienced and well-supervised personnel. All services performed in connection with this Construction Contract shall be performed in a manner consistent with the standard of care under California law applicable to those who specialize in providing such services for projects of the type, scope and complexity of the Project. SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION. 9.1 Hold Harmless. To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City, from and against any and all Losses arising directly or indirectly from, or in any manner relating to any of, the following: (i) Performance or nonperformance of the Work by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub-subcontractors, of any tier; 4 Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc (ii) Performance or nonperformance by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub- subcontractors of any tier, of any of the obligations under the Contract Documents; (iii) The construction activities of Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub-subcontractors, of any tier, either on the Site or on other properties; (iv) The payment or nonpayment by Contractor to any of its employees, Subcontractors or Sub-subcontractors of any tier, for Work performed on or off the Site for the Project; and (v) Any personal injury, property damage or economic loss tothird persons associated with the performance or nonperformance by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub- subcontractors of any tier, of the Work. However, nothing herein shall obligate Contractor to indemnify any Indemnitee for Losses resulting from the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs City incurs to enforce this provision. Nothing in the Contract Documents shall be construed to give rise to any implied right of indemnity in favor of Contractor against City or any other Indemnitee. 9.2 Survival. The provisions of Section 9 shall survive the termination of this Construction Contract. SECTION 10 NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, Contractor certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, itshall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. Contractor acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and will comply with all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS. On or before the Execution Date, Contractor shall provide City with evidence that it has obtained insurance and Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions. Failure to do so shall be deemed a material breach of this Construction Contract. SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS. . City is entering into this Construction Contract based upon the stated experience and qualifications of the Contractor and its subcontractors set forth in Contractor's Bid. Accordingly, Contractor shall not assign, hypothecate or transfer this Construction Contract or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any assignment, hypothecation or transfer without said consent shall be null and void. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if the Contractor is a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy shall result in changing the control of Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract. Control means more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity. 5 Rev. February 1,2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc ( SECTION 13 NOTICES. 13.1 Method of Notice. All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Construction Contract shall be given in writing and shall be deemed served on the earlier of the following: (i) On the date delivered if delivered personally; (ii) On the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as hereinafter provided; (iii) On the date sent if sent by facsimile transmission; (iv) On the date sent if delivered by electronic mail; or (iv) On the date it is accepted or rejected if sent by certified mail. 13.2 Notice Recipients. All notices, demands or requests (including, without limitation, Claims) from Contractor to City shall include the Project name. and the number of this Construction Contract and shall be addressed to City at: To City: City of Palo Alto City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Copyto:~ City of Palo Alto Public Works Administration 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: Elizabeth Ames Or o City of Palo Alto Utilities Engineering 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this Construction Contract shall be provided to the following: Palo Alto City Attorney's Office 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, California 94303 All Claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail. 6 Contract C1 0135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc Rev. February 1, 2010_ All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to: Spencon Construction P.O. Box 1220 Danville, CA 94526 13.3 Change of Address. In the event of any change of address, the moving party shall notify the other party of the change of address in writing. Each party may, by written notice only, add, delete or replace any individuals to whom and addresses to which notice shall be provided. SECTION 14 DISPUTE RESOLUTION. 14.1 Resolution of Contract Disputes. Contract Disputes shall be resolved by the parties in accordance with the provisions of this Section 14, in lieu of any and all rights under the law that either party have its rights adjudged by a trial court or jury. All Contract Disputes shall be subject to the Contract Dispute Resolution Process set forth in this Section 14, which shall be the exclusive recourse of Contractor and City for such Contract Disputes. 14.2 Resolution of Other Disputes. 14.2.1 Non-Contract Disputes. Contract Disputes shall not include any of the following: (i) Penalties or forfeitures prescribed by statute or regulation imposed by a governmental agency; (ii) Third party tort claims for personal injury, property damage or death relating to any Work performed by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub- subcontractors of any tier; (iii) False claims liability under California Government Code Section 12650, et. seq.; (iv) Defects in the Work first discovered by City after Final Payment by City to Contractor; (v) Stop notices; or (vi) The right of City to specific performance or injunctive relief to compel performance of any provision of the Contract Documents. 14.2.2 Litigation, City Election. Matters that do not constitute Contract Disputes shall be resolved by way of an action filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara, and shall not be subject to the Contract Dispute Resolution Process. However, the City reserves the right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to treat such disputes as Contract Disputes. Upon written notice by City of its election as provided in the preceding sentence, such dispute shall be submitted by the parties and finally decided pursuant to the Contract Dispute Resolution Process in the manner as required for Contract Disputes, including, without limitation, City's right under Paragraph 14.4.2 to defer resolution and final determination until after Final Completion of the Work. 7 Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C1 0135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc 14.3 Submission of Contract Dispute. 14.3.1 By Contractor. Contractors may commence the Contract Dispute Resolution Process upon City's written response denying all or part of a Claim pursuant to Paragraph 4.2.9 or 4.2.1 0 of the General Conditions. Contractor shall submit a written Statement of Contract Dispute (as set forth below) to City within seven (7) Days after City rejects all or a portion of Contractor's Claim. Failure by Contractor to submit its Statement of Contract Dispute in a timely manner shall result in City's decision by City on the Claim becoming final and binding. Contractor's Statement of Contract Dispute shall be signed under penalty of perjury and shall state with specificity the events or . circumstances giving rise to the Contract Dispute, the dates of their occurrence and the asserted effect on the Contract Sum and the Contract Time. The Statement of Contract Dispute shall include adequate supporting data to SUbstantiate the disputed Claim. Adequate supporting data for a Contract Dispute relating to an adjustment of the Contract Time shall include both of the following: (i) All of the scheduling data required to be submitted by Contractor under the Contract Documents to obtain extensions of time and adjustments to the Contract Time and (ii) A detailed, event-by-event description of the impact of each event on completion of Work. Adequate data to support a Statement of Contract Dispute involving an adjustment of the Contract Sum must include both of the following: (a) A detailed cost breakdown and (b) Supporting cost data in such form and including such information and other supporting data as required under the Contract Documents for submission of Change Order Requests and Claims. 14.3.2 By City. City's right to commence the Contract Dispute Resolution Process shall arise at any time following City's actual discovery of the circumstances giving rise to the Contract Dispute. City asserts Contract Disputes in response to a Contract Dispute asserted by Contractor. A Statement of Contract Dispute submitted by City shall state the events or circumstances giving rise to the Contract Dispute, the dates of their occurrence and the damages or other relief claimed by City as a result of such events. 14.4 Contract Dispute Resolution Process. The parties shall utilize each of the following steps in the Contract Dispute Resolution Process in the sequence they appear below. Each party shall participate fully and in good faith in each step in the Contract Dispute Resolution Process, and good faith effort shall be a condition precedent to the right of each party to proceed to the next step in the process. 14.4.1 Direct Negotiations. Designated representatives of City and Contractor shall meet as soon as possible (but not later than ten (10) Days after receipt of the Statement of Contract Dispute) in a good faith effort to negotiate a resolution to the Contract Dispute. Each party shall be represented in such negotiations by an authorized representative with full knowledge of the details of the Claims or defenses being asserted by such party in the negotiations, and with full authority to resolve such Contract Dispute then and there, subject only to City's obligation to obtain administrative and/or City Council approval of any agreed settlement or resolution. If the Contract Dispute involves the assertion of a right or claim by a Subcontractor or Sub-subcontractor, of any tier, against Contractor that is in turn being asserted by Contractor against City ("Pass- Through Claim"). then the Subcontractor or Sub-Subcontractor shall also have a 8 Rev. February 1.2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc representative attend the negotiations, with the same authority and knowledge as described above. Upon completion of the meeting, if the Contract Dispute is not resolved, the parties may either continue the negotiations or any party may declare negotiations ended. All discussions that occur during such negotiations and all documents prepared solely for the purpose of such negotiations shall be confidential and privileged pursuant to California Evidence" Code Sections 1119 and 1152. 14.4.2 Deferral of Contract Disputes. Following the completion of the negotiations required by Paragraph 14.4.1, all unresolved Contract Disputes shall be deferred pending Final Completion of the Project, subject to City's right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to require that the Contract Dispute Resolution Process proceed prior to Final Completion. All Contract Disputes that have been deferred until Final Completion shall be consolidated within a reasonable time after Final Completion and thereafter pursued to resolution pursuant to this Contract Dispute Resolution Process. The parties can continue informal negotiations of Contract Disputes; provided, however, that such informal negotiations shall not be alter the provisions of the Agreement deferring final determination and resolution of unresolve~ Contract Disputes until after Final Completion. 14.4.3 Mediation. If the Contract Dispute remains unresolved after negotiations pursuant to Paragraph 14.4.1 ,the parties shall submit the Contract Dispute to non-binding mediation before , a mutually acceptable third party mediator . . 1 Qualifications of Mediator. The parties shall endeavor to select a mediator who isa retired judge or an attorney with at least five (5) years of experience in public works construction contract law and in mediating public works construction disputes. In addition, the mediator shall have at least twenty (20) hours of formal training in mediation skills . . 2 Submission to Mediation and Selection of Mediator. The party initiating mediation of a Contract Dispute shall provide written notice to the other party of its decision to mediate. In the event the parties are unable to agree upon a mediator within fifteen (15) Days after the receipt of such written notice, then the parties shall submit the matter to the American Arbitration Association (AAA) at its San Francisco Regional Office for selection of a mediator in accordance with the AAA Construction Industry Mediation Rules . . 3 Mediation Process. The location of the mediation shall be at the offices of City. The costs of mediation shall be shared equally by both parties. The mediator shall provide an independent assessment on the merits of the Contract Dispute and recommendations for resolution. All discussions that occur during the mediation and all documents prepared solely for the purpose of the mediation shall be confidential and privileged pursuant to California Evidence Code Sections 1119 and 1152. 14.4.4 Binding Arbitration. If the Contr.act Dispute is not resolved by mediation, then any party may submit the Contract Dispute for final and binding arbitration pursuant to the provisions of California Public Contract Code Sections 10240, et seq. The award of the arbitrator therein shall be final and may be entered as a judgment by any court of competent jurisdiction. Such arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the following: .1 Arbitration Initiation. The arbitration shall be initiated by filing a complaint in arbitration in accordance with the regulations promulgated pursuant to California Public Contract Code Section 10240.5. 9 Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc .2 Qualifications of the Arbitrator. The arbitrator shall be approved by all parties. The arbitrator shall be a retired judge or an attorney with at least five (5) years of experience in public works construction contract law and in arbitrating public works construction disputes. In addition, the arbitrator shall have at least twenty (20) hours of formal training in arbitration skills. In the event the parties cannot agree upon an arbitrator, the provisions of California Public Contract Code Section 10240.3 shall be followed in selecting an arbitrator possessing the qualifications required herein . . 3 Hearing Days and Location. Arbitration hearings shall be held at the offices of City and shall, except for good cause shown hand determined by the arbitrator, be conducted on consecutive business days, without interruption or continuance . . 4 Hearing Delays. Arbitration hearings shall not be delayed except upon good cause shown . . 5 Recording Hearings. All hearings to receive evidence shall be recorded by a certified stenographic reporter, with the costs thereof borne equally by City and Contractor and allocated by the arbitrator in the final award . . 6 Limitation of Depositions. The· parties may conduct discovery in accordance with the provisions of section 10240.11 of the Public Contract Code; provided, however, that depositions shall be limited to both of the following: (i) Ten (10) percipient witnesses for each party and 5 expert witnesses per party. Upon a showing of good cause, the arbitrator may increase the number of permitted depositions. An individual who is both percipient and expert shall, for purposes of applying the foregoing numerical limitation only, be deemed an expert. Expert reports shall be exchanged prior to receipt of evidence, in accordance with the direction of the arbitrator, and expert reports (including initial and rebuttal reports) not so submitted shall not be admissible as evidence . . 7 Authority of the Arbitrator. The arbitrator shall have the authority to hear dispositive motions and issue interim orders and interim or executory awards . . 8 Waiver of Jury Trial. Contractor and City each voluntarily waives its right to a jury trial with respect to any Contract Dispute that is subject to binding arbitration in accordance with the provisions of this Paragraph 14.4.4. Contractor shall include this provision in its contracts with its Subcontractors who provide any portiOn ofthe Work. 14.5 Non-Waiver. Participation in the Contract Dispute Resolution Process shall not waive, release or compromise any defense of City, including, without limitation, any defense based on the assertion that the rights or Claims of Contractor that are the basis of a Contract Dispute were previously waived by Contractor due to Contractor's failure to comply with the Contract Documents, including, without limitation, Contractor's failure to comply with any time periods for providing notice of requests for adjustments of the Contract Sum or Contract Time or for submission of Claims or supporting documentation of Claims. 10 Rev. February 1 • 2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc SECTION 15 DEFAULT. 15.1 Notice of Default. In the event that City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any provision of the Contract Documents, City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract. 15.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under the Contract Documents within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) after receipt of written notice. However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) Days after receipt of such written notice. SECTION 16 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 16.1 Remedies Upon Default. If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth above in Section 15, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including, without limitation, the following: 16.1.1 Delete Certain Services. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, delete certain portions of the Work, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 16.1.2 Perform and Withhold. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, engage others to perform the Work or portion of the Work that has not been adequately performed by Contractor and withhold the cost thereof to City from future payments to Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 16.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor for damages if City directs Contractor to resume W9rk. 16.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default. City shall have the right to terminate this Construction Contract, in whole or in part, upon the failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default as required by Section 15. City's election to terminate the Construction Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract. Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately, unless otherwise provided therein. 16.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond. City may, with or without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses rel~ted thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond. 11 Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc 16.1.6 Additional Provisions. All of City's rights and remedies under this Construction Contract are cumulative, and shall be in addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity. Designation in the Contract Documents of certain breaches as material shall not waive the City's authority to designate other breaches as material nor limit City's right to terminate the Construction Contract, or prevent the City from terminating the Agreement for breaches that are not material. City's determination of whether there has been noncompliance with the Construction Contract so as to warrant exercise by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Construction Contract, shall be binding on all parties. No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and Losses suffered by City. 16.2 Delays by Sureties. Without limiting to any of City's other rights or remedies, City has the right to suspend the performance of the Work by Contractor's sureties in the event of any of the following: (i) The sureties' failure to begin Work within a reasonable time in such manner as to insure full compliance with the Construction Contract within the Contract Time; (ii) The sureties' abandonment of the Work; (iii) If at any time City is of the opinion the sureties' Work is unnecessarily or unreasonably delaying the Work; (iv) The sureties' violation of any terms of the Construction Contract; (v) The sureties' failure to perform according to the Contract Documents; or (vi) The sureties' failure to follow City's instructions for completion of the Work within the Contract Time. 16.3 Damages to City. 16.3.1 For Contractor's Default. City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of Contractor's default under the Contract Documents. 16.3.2 Compensation for Losses. In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor's default under the Contract Documents, City shall be entitled to withhold monies otherwise payable to Contractor until Final Completion of the Project. If City incurs Losses due to Contractor's default, then the amount of Losses shall be deducted from the amounts withheld. Should the amount withheld exceed the amount deducted, the balance will be paid to Contractor or its designee upon Final Completion of the Project. If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount withheld, Contractor shall be liable to City for the difference and shall promptly remit same to City. 16.4 Suspension by City for Convenience. City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing, to suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time. The order shall be specifically identified as a Suspension Order by City. Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City's expense, comply with the order and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the Work covered by the Suspension Order. During the Suspension or extension of the Suspension, if any, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or, by Change Order, delete the Work covered by the Suspension Order. If a SuspenSion Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume and continue with the Work. A Change Order will be issued to cover any adjustments of the Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension. A Suspension Order shall not be the exclusive method for City to stop the Work. 12 Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc 16.5 Termination Without Cause. City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or in whole by giving thirty (30) Days written notice to Contractor. The compensation allowed under this Paragraph 16.5 shall be the Contractor's sole and exclusive compensation for such termination and Contractor waives any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind resulting from termination without cause. 16.5.1 Compensation. Following such termination and within forty-five (45) Days after receipt of a billing from Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Paragraph 16.5, City shall pay the following to Contractor as Contractor's sole compensation for performance of the Work: .1 For Work Performed. The amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion of the Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination, less sums previously paid to Contractor .. . 2 For Close-out Costs. Reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors and Sub-subcontractors for: (i) Demobilizing and (ii) Administering the close-out of its participation in the Project (including, without limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including attorney or expert fees) for a period of no longer than thirty (~O) Days after receipt of the notice of termination . . 3 For Fabricated Items. Previously unpaid cost of any items delivered to the Project Site which were fabricated for subsequent incorporation in the Work. 16.5.2 Subcontractors. Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this Construction Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are afforded to Contractor against City under this Section. 16.6 Contractor's Duties Upon Termination. Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the notice directs otherwise, do the following: (i) Immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice; (ii) Place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities, except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work that is not discontinued; (iii) Provide to City a description, in writing no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes, payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine necessary in orderto decide whether to accept assignment of or request Contractor to terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract; (iv) Promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and (v) Thereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in transit thereto. 13 Rev. February 1. 2010 Contract C1 0135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc SECTION 17 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 17.1 Contractor's Remedies. Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the following: 17.1.1 For Work Stoppage. The Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive Days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any Subcontractor, or any employee or agent of Contractor or any Subcontractor, due to issuance of an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable. This provision shall not apply to any work stoppage resulting from the City's issuance of a suspension notice issued either for cause or for convenience. 17 .1.2 For City's Non-Payment. If City does not make pay Contractor undisputed sums within ninety (90) Days after receipt of notice from Contractor, Contractor may terminate the Construction Contract (30) days following a second notice to City of Contractor's intention to terminate the Construction Contract. 17.2 Damages to Contractor. In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided for in Paragraph 16.5.1 above. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential,direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind. SECTION 18 ACCOUNTING RECORDS. 18.1 Financial Management and City Access. Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Construction Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices. City and City's accountants during normal business hours, may inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take-offs, cost reports, ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this· Project. Contractor shall retain these documents for a period of three (3) years after the later of (i) final payment or (ii) final resolution of all Contract Disputes and other disputes, or (iii) for such longer period as may be required by law~ 18.2 Compliance with City Requests. Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 18 shall be a condition precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents. City many enforce Contractor's obligation to provide access to City of its business and other records referred to in Section 18.1 for inspection or copying by issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such court, without the necessity of oral testimony. SECTION 19 INDEPENDENT PARTIES. Each party is acting in its independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint venturers of the other party. City, its officers or employees shall have no control over the conduct of Contractor or its respective agents, employees, subconsultants, or subcontractors, except as herein set forth. 14 Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc SECTION 20 NUISANCE. Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection in the performance of services under this Construction Contract. SECTION 21 PERMITS AND LICENSES. Except as otherwise provided in the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications, The Contractor shall provide, procure and pay for all licenses, permits, and fees, required by the City or other government jurisdictions or agencies necessary to carry out and complete the Work. Payment of all costs and expenses for such licenses, permits, and fees shall be included in one or more Bid items. No other compensation shall be paid to the Contractor for these items or for delays caused by non-City inspectors or conditions set forth in the licenses or permits issued by other agencies. SECTION 22 WAIVER. A waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character. SECTION 23 GOVERNING LAW. This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. SECTION 24 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. SECTION 25 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT. ( The provisions of the Construction Contract which by their nature survive termination of the Construction Contract or Final Completion, including, without limitation, all warranties, indemnities, payment obligations, and City's right to audit Contractor's books and records, shall remain in full force and effect after Final Completion or any termination of the Construction Contract. SECTION 26 PREVAILING WAGES. o This Project is not subject to prevailing wages. The Contractor is not required to pay prevailing wages in the performance and implementation of the Project, because the City, pursuant to its authority as a chartered city, has adopted Resolution No. 5981 exempting the City from prevailing wages. The City invokes the exemption from the state prevailing wage requirement for this Project and declares that the Project is funded one hundred percent (100%) by the City of Palo Alto. Or ~ The Contractor is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and Section 16000 et seq. and Section 1773.1 of the California Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the contract for this Project from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. Copies-of these rates may be obtained at cost at the Purchasing office of the City of Palo Alto. Contractor shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to any staff or subcontractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1775, 1776, 15 Rev. February 1, 2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc 1777.5,1810, and 1813 of the Labor Code. SECTION 27 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 the City does not appropriate funds for the following fiscal year for this event, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Construction Contract are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 28 AUTHORITY. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capadty and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. SECTION 29 ATTORNEY FEES. Each Party shall bear its own costs, including attorney's fees through the completion of mediation. If the claim or dispute is not resolveq through mediation and in any dispute described in Paragraph 14.2, the prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provision of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorney's 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 attorney's'fees paid to third parties. SECTION 30 SEVERABILITY. In case a provision of this Construction Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contractto be executed the date and year first above written. 16 Rev. February 1,2010 Contract C10135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc CITY OF PALO ALTO o Purchasing Manager IZI City Manager ~PPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney APPROVED: Public Works Director Contract C1 0135570 SPENCON CONSTRUCTION.doc CONTRACTOR: SPENCON CONSTRUCTION By:, ______ ~ ________________ _ Name: _____________________ __ Title:, _______________________ _ 1 Rev. February 1, 2010 IFB 135570 2010 STREET MAINTENANCE PROGRAM: BID SUMMARY ALMA STREET CONCRETE RESTORATION PROJECT ATTACHMENT C ITEM # BASE BID DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE SPENCON CONSTRUCTION GUERRA CONSTRUCTION JJR CONSTRUCTION GROUP REMOVE AND REPLACE VERTICAL CURB 1 AND GUTTER, l' GUTTER PAN 2,804 LF $ 34.00 $ 95,336.00 $ 37.70 $ 105,710.80 $ 40.00 $ 112,160.00 $ 39.80 $ 111,599.20 REMOVE AND REPLACE CONCRETE 2 GUTTER 1,596 SF $ "6.00 $ 41,496.00 $ 37.70 $ 60,169.20 $ 12.00 $ 19,152.00 $ 39.80 $ 63,520.80 3 NEW ADA RAMP 7 TONS $ 1,800.00 $ 12,600.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 12,600.00 $ 1.800.00 $ 12,600.00 $ 1,970.50 $ 13,793.50 4 RETROFIT EXISTING RAMP 6 SF $ 350.00 $ 2,100.00 $ :!60.00 $ 1,560.00 $ 650.00 $ 3,900.00 $ 400.00 $ 2,400.00 5 REMOVE AND REPLACE SIDEWALK 1,916 LF $ 8.00 $ 15,328.00 $ 8.30 $ 15,902.80 $ 9.70 $ 18,585.20 $ 6.85 $ 13,124.60 6 REMOVE AND REPLACE DRIVEWAY 9,867 LF $ 9.00 $ 88,803.00 $ 8.50 $ 83,869.50 $ 11.00 $ 108,537.00 $ 9.85 $ 97,189.95 7 RECYCLE CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL 1,267 TONS $ 5.00 $ 6,335.00 $ 0.01 $ 12.67 $ 2300 $ 29,141.00 $ 1.00 $ 1,267.00 8 PROJECT SURVEY 1 LS $ 5.000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 8,900.00 $ 8,900.00 $ 7.000.00 $ 7,000.00 . 9 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS $20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 7.500.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 6,.150.00 $ 6,150.00 $ 13,000.95 $ 13,000.95 10 PROJECT NOTIFICATIONS I LS $ 2.000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 1,675.00 $ 1,675.00 $ 3.000.00 $ 3,000.00 11 MOBILIZATION 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 2.500.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 7.200.00 $ 7,200.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 BASE BID TOTAL $ 293,998.00 $ 297,824.97 $ 328,000.20 $ 328,896.00 ------------ ITEM # BASE BID DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS GOLDEN BAY SPOSETO ENGINEERING VANGUARD CONSTRUCTION ROBERT A. BOTHMAN, INC. CONSTRUCTION INC. REMOVE AND REPLACE VERTICAL CURB I AND GUTTER, l' GUTTER PAN 2,804 LF $ 47.75 $ 133,891.00 $ 54.20 $ 151,976.80 $ 51.00 $ 143,004.00 $ 53.11 $ 148,920.44 REMOVE AND REPLACE CONCRETE 2 GUTTER 1,596 SF $ 47.75 $ 76,209.00 S 54.20 $ 86,503.20 $ 46.00 $ 73,416.00 $ 40.49 $ 64,622.04 3 NEW ADA RAMP 7 TONS $ 1.850.00 $ 12,950.00 S 2,575.00 $ 18,025.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 21,000.00 $ 2.56(U2 $ 17,921.54 4 RETROFIT EXISTING RAMP 6 SF $ 425.00 $ 2,550.00 $ 520.00 $ 3,120.00 $ 450.00 $ 2,700.00 $ 89(fOO $ 5,340.00 5 REMOVE AND REPLACE SIDEWALK 1,916 LF $ 8.25 $ 15,807.00 S 9.00 $ 17,244.00 $ 10.00 $ 19,160.00 $ 11.76 $ 22,532.16 6 REMOVE AND REPLACE DRIVEWAY 9,867 LF $ 9.30 $ 91,763.10 $ 9.40 $ 92,749.80 $ 10.80 $ 106,563.60 $ 12.73 $ 125,606.91 7 RECYCLE CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL 1,267 TONS $ 0.01 $ 12.67 $ 11.00 $ 13,937.00 $ 11.00 $ 13,937.00 $ 11.74 $ 14,874.58 8 PROJECT SURVEY I LS $ 500.00 $ 500.00 S 4.500.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 6.600.00 $ 6,600.00 $ 6,009.42 $ 6,009.42 9 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS $ 5.850.00 $ 5,850.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ ~~,OOO.OO $ 22,000.00 $ 18AOaDO $ 18,400.00 10 PROJECT NOTIFICA nONS I LS $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 2,330.92 $ 2,330.92 11 MOBILIZATION 1 LS $ 3.746.00 $ 3,746.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 35.1 17.<)9 $ 35,117.99 BASE BID TOTAL $ 343,778.77 $ 397,555.80 $ 412,380.60 $ 461,676.00 I • Demolition of four existing SoM buildings and construction of three replacement buildings, with no net increase in square feet; • Demolition of shops and storage space, renovation of existing Hoover Pavilion, and net addition of approximately 46,000 square feet of new medical, office, research, clinic, and administrative facilities at the Hoover Pavilion Site for medical offices for community practitioners and SUMC-related medical offices, clinical facilities, and support uses; • Demolition of existing parking spaces and construction of 2,985 new and replacement spaces, for a net increase of 2,053 spaces to address additional demand for the SUMC project, to be located in surface parking and above-and underground structures; • Construction of a new road connecting Sand Hill Road and Welch Road, and provision of interior driveways and improved circulation connections, including the extension of Quarry Road to Roth Way; • Widening of Welch Road by the addition of a third lane to accommodate left turns in both directions; and • Related on-site and off-site improvements. The SUMC Project sponsors have applied to the City for the following entitlements: • Comprehensive Plan Amendment; • Creation of a new Hospital zone; • Conditional Use Permit; • Architectural Review; • Annexation of a small piece ofland adjacent to the SoM, and, • A development agreement. The SUMC Project sponsors have identified program, siting, circulation and cost objectives for the SUMC Project. Primary objectives include: • SHC and LPCH: o Optimize delivery of healthcare and services to patients o Achieve timely compliance with the seismic requirements of Senate Bill 1953 o Provide modern, state-of-the-art facilities • SoM: o Optimize ability to translate medical research discoveries into treatments and cures o Allow design flexibility to be able to adapt to changes in medical research needs and technology • Siting and Circulation: o Arrange the buildings and open space areas to create a highly functional medical center environment o Provide sufficient, convenient parking for patients and visitors with sensitivity to the needs of elderly, limited mobility, and ill patients In addition to the SUMC Project sponsor's objectives, the City has identified objectives for the City of Palo Alto Page 4 j J SUMC Project. Some of those key objectives include: • Provide high quality employment districts, each with its own distinctive character arid each contributing to the character of the City as a whole • Create a more walkable, bikeable, mixed-use, transit-oriented, and well-connected urban environment • Locate work force housing close to SUMC sites and train station in order to reduce traffic trips of both employees and employee household members • Encourage public and private preservation and maintenance of resources that have historic merit Additionally, the Project Description includes information on the location of the project, existing setting, changes proposed under the SUMC Project, summary comparison of existing and proposed development, project construction and approvals. Most of the information in this section of the Draft EIR is based on the Project application. The analyses conducted throughout the Draft EIR are based on the Project description. 2. Land Use Land Use impacts are addressed in Section 3.2 of the Draft EIR. Significance Thresholds Land Use impacts are addressed in Section 3.2 of the Draft EIR. Based on the following significance thresholds, the SUMC Project would result in a significant land use impact if it would: • Conflict with any applicable City land use plan, policy, or regulation (including, but not limited to the Comprehensive Plan, coordinated area plan, or the City's Zoning Ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; • Be incompatible with adjacent land uses or with the general character of the surrounding area, including density and building height; • Conflict with established residential, recreational, educational, religious, or scientific uses of an area; • Physically d'ivide an established community; • Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance· (farmland) to non-agricultural use; or • Otherwise adversely change the type or intensity of overall existing or planned land use patterns in the area. Key Impacts and Mitigations The following impacts have been identified as significant (S);however the impacts identified in this chapter can be eliminated through mitigation. The mitigation measures developed for each ofthe impacts are also identified below. • LU-I: Conflicts with Adopted Land Use Plans and Policies (S). City of Palo Alto Page 5 , J • 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), that exceeds ABAG projected levels; • Displace substantial numbers of existing housing units, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere; • Displace substantial numbers of people,· necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere; or • Cumulatively exceed regional or local population projections. Key Impacts and Mitigations The DEIR found the impact on population and housing to be less than significant. However, for informational purposes the DEIR also included a discussion ofthe secondary environmental impacts relating to increasing the City's jobs/housing balance. Below is a summary of this analysis together with some possible mitigation measures. • PH-3: Impacts on Jobs to Employed Residents Ratio. The SUMC Project would have an adverse impact on the City's jobs to employed residents ratio because it would exceed the existing Comprehensive Plan and zoning allowances for the SUMC Sites and thus require amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and rezoning, and it would increase the City's jobs to employed residents ratio by more than 0.01. However, this impact is not, itself, an environmental impact. Mitigation is presented for informational purposes, and to ensure that all possible options for mitigation of impacts are adequately considered. Mitigation Measures - o PH-3.1: Reduce the impacts on the City's Jobs to Employed Residents Ratio which shall include one or more the following options: • The City shall explore amending the Zoning Code to permit more residential uses, particularly multifamily residential use; • The SUMC Project sponsors shall ensure that a specified number of housing units in the County shall be dedicated to SUMC employees; • The City shall amend the Zoning Code to remove the hospital exemption from payment of the affordable housing fee; • The City shall impose an additional ad hoc housing fee on development to ensure development of required affordable housing. The amount of the fee shall be based on the cost ofthe additional affordable housing units induced by the SUMC Project as well as the cost of the General Fund subsidy contribution to the existing housing impact fee; and/or • The City shall provide an inclusionary housing requirement in the newly created Hospital District. The requirement shall provide a number of options for development of additional housing with an emphasis on affordable housing. Discussion The SUMC Project would not include the development of new housing units and would thus not City of Palo Alto Page 8 ATTACHMENT A - TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DATE: MAY 24,2010. REPORT TYPE: STUDY SESSION DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT CMR: 253:10 SUBJECT: Introduction of the Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft Environmental Impact Report and Outline of Public Review Schedule EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City contracted with the environmental consulting finn PBS&J to prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) for the Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project (SUMC). The Draft EIR was published on May 20,2010, commencing an extended public review period that will conclude on July 27, 2010. The public review period has been extended beyond the nonnal 45-day period to provide ample opportunity for the public to comment on this important project. RECOMMENDATION The purpose of this Study Session is to provide the City Council with an overview of the EIR process and to commence public review of the document. BACKGROUND The Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) comprises the general area between Sand Hill Road, Vineyard Lane, Quarry Road, Pasteur Drive, and including Welch Road and Blake Wilbur Drive. The area is zoned Medical Office and Medical Research (MOR) and Public Facilities (PF). The applicant is proposing the demolition of the existing Stanford Hospital and Clinics (SHC), construction of new hospital buildings, renovation and expansion of the Lucile Packard Children's Hospital (LPCH), reconstruction of the School of Medicine (SoM) facilities, and construction of a new medical office building near Hoover Pavilion to meet State mandated ,seismic safety standards (SB 1953) and to address capacity issues, changing patient needs and modernization requirements. The renovation and expansion project, which would be constructed over a 15-year horizon, would result in a net increase of approximately 1.3 million square feet of hospital, clinic, and office space. The original application for the project described above was filed on August 21, 2007 with the City of Palo Alto. Subsequently, applicants filed nine fonnal application amendments with the latest amendment dated March 25, 2010. The SUMC Project sponsors have applied for 1 amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, adoption of a new zoning district, changes in zoning boundaries, a jurisdictional boundary change, design review approvals, and a development agreement. The City distributed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) on August 22,2007, announcing its intent to prepare and distribute an EIR analyzing the impacts of the SUMC Project. The NOP identified two separate projects, including the SUMC Project and the Simon-Properties Stanford Shopping Center Expansion. However, in April 2009, after the DEIR was nearly complete, Stanford withdrew the application for the expansion of the Stanford Shopping Center requiring significant changes to the EIR and delaying the EIR release date.. As such, this EIR addresses only the SUMC Project. The Draft EIR for the SUMC Project was published on May 20, 2010, commencing a public review period through July 27, 2010. At over 1,000 pages, the Draft EIR provides a comprehensive review of environmental impacts, mitigations and alternatives, as described in detail below. The Draft EIR is available for public review via the City's website, www.cityofpaloalto.org/sumc, at the City of Palo Alto Development Center, and at the Palo Alto Main Library. Copies of the document are available on-loan from the Department of Planning and Community Environment, Fifth Floor, Palo Alto City Hall. Comments on the Draft EIR may be submitted in writing or orally at any of scheduled Planning and Transportation Commission (P&TC) hearings or City Council hearings, including the kick-off meeting on May 24, 2010. Additionally, comments can be submitted in writing at any time during the public review period to Steven Turner, Advance Planning Manager, City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department and via electronic mail at Stanford.Project@cityofpaloalto.org by 5:00 p.m. on July 27,2010. DISCUSSION Description of Physical Improvements The SUMC Project is proposed jointly by Stanford Hospital and Clinics (SHC), the Lucile Packard Children's Hospital (LPCH), and the Stanford University School of Medicine (SoM), which are collectively referred to here as the SUMC Project sponsors. The SUMC Project would demolish and replace on-site structures, adding approximately 1.3 million square feet of net new floor area, broken down as follows: • Demolition, renovation, and construction of SHC facilities, providing a net increase of approximately 824,000 square feet; • Demolition, renovation, and construction of LPCH facilities, resulting in approximately 442,000 additional square feet; • Demolition of four existing SoM buildings and construction of three replacement buildings, with no net increase in square feet; • Demolition of shops and storage space, renovation of existing Hoover Pavilion, and net addition of approximately 46,000 square feet of new medical, office, research, clinic, and 2 unavoidable environmental effects, approval of the SUMC Project would require the adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations, indicating that the City of Palo Alto is aware of the significant environmental consequences and believes that the benefits of approving the SUMC Project outweigh its unavoidable significant environmental impacts. Alternatives As required by CEQA, the EIR analyzes several project alternatives. Included are two No Project Alternatives, two Reduced Intensity Alternatives, a Tree Preservation Alternative, an Historic Preservation Alternative and a Village Concept Alternative. The Project sponsors have developed the Tree Preservation Alternative in order to preserve biologically and aesthetically significant oak trees. The Tree Preservation Alternative maintains the same square footage and programmatic functions as the SUMC Project, but proposes design modifications to the new hospital building as well as FIM 1 to accomplish tree preservation. The Project sponsor is promoting the Tree Preservation Alternative and has indicated to City staff that it now prefers this alternative over its original proposal.The City's Architectural Review Board has seen this revised design at study sessions and will be reviewing it through their regularly scheduled meetings. The Tree Preservation Alternative would meet all of the objectives outlined by the SUMC Project sponsors. The Project sponsors consider the Tree Preservation Alternative their preferred Alternative. Also, in an effort to better integrate the surrounding areas and regional transit facilities with the SUMC Project, along with exploring alternative means for reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) attributable to employee trips, the City has identified the Village Concept Alternative for consideration. The Village Concept Alternative assumes that the previously approved housing units located in the County of Santa Clara will be occupied by SUMC employees. Taken together staff believes the Tree Preservation Alternative and the Village Concept Alternative meet the Project sponsor's and City's project objectives. Development Agreement In addition, Stanford is seeking a Development Agreement, which will lock in the zoning regulations for a negotiated period of time. Development Agreements are negotiated contracts between the applicant and City. Developers typically apply for a Development Agreement to ensure that the regulations will not change over time and to help secure financing for large-scale projects. In exchange, the parties negotiate an acceptable community benefit package. Since they are the product of voluntary negotiations rather than a unilateral imposition by the governments, community benefits under a Development Agreement are typically broader than EIR mitigation measures and project conditions of approval. As such, community benefits are not legally required to have the same rigorous nexus applicable to other development conditions. A Development Agreement in this case is a discretionary legislative action by the City Coucil and is subject to referendum. The May 24,2010 CMR describes the status of the Development Agreement negotiations. It is not anticipated that the Development Agreement would result in physical environmental impacts beyond those disclosed in the EIR for the SUMC Project. 5 Public Review The Draft EIR is being distributed for a public review and comment period that concludes on July 27, 2010. Readers are invited to submit written comments on the document. Comments are· most helpful when they suggest specific alternatives or measures that would better mitigate significant environmental effects. Staff has shared with the cities of Menlo Park and East Palo Alto copies of the Traffic Impact Report which is the technical analysis of traffic impacts prepared for the Draft EIR. Staff also met with representatives from East Palo Alto on March 31 st and has made contact with staff from Menlo Park to discuss traffic issues. Staff has also contacted these cities to let them know of the release of the Draft EIR and the schedule for public review. Public hearings to take oral comments on the Draft EIR will be held before the P&TC and also the City Council. Traditionally, the public review period for a Draft ElR is 45-days. Due to the complexity of this project and the volume of information contained in the ElR, the public review period has been extended to July 27, 2010, which constitutes 69-days. This expanded review period will allow the P&TC to hold a series of six weekly hearings starting on June 2, 2010. Each hearing will be focused on particular topics in order to allow the Commission and the public time to review the Draft ElR and to allow for more focused comments. The City Council will also hold a series of five public hearings during this same time frame. The structure of the hearing schedule is that the P&TC would review specific ElR topics first, which would then be followed soon after with City Council hearings on the same topics. In total there will be 11 public hearings to collect comments on the Draft EIR as well as an expanded review period enabling a broad forum for public testimony. A schedule of hearings and meeting topics is found in Attachment C. All comments received by 5:00 p.m., July 27,2010, will be responded to in writing as part of the Final EIR. As required by CEQA, responses to all comments will be prepared, and both comments and responses will be included in the Final ElR. The purpose of the scheduled public hearings is to provide the public, P&TC and City Council with opportunities to present comments on whether the information presented in the Draft EIR adequately covers the environmental impacts that could result from the prqposed SUMC Project. The hearings are not meant to be a forum for dialogue about the project merits, but to be opportunities to collect comments on the Draft EIR to ensure that it adequately describes the environmental impacts of the project. NEXT STEPS During the public review period and beyond, the applicant will continue to present preliminary designs for the SHC, LPCH, FIM 1, Hoover Pavilion and Design Guidelines to the City's Architectural Review Board. Upon completion of the public comment period, PBS&J will prepare written responses to all comments received during the comment period. The Comprehensive Plan amendments, zone change, development agreement, architectural review and annexation will be reviewed by the P&TC during the time PBS&J is preparing the Response to Comments document. The Development Agreement negotiations will also continue (Attachment D). 6 ATTACHMENT A TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DATE: DECEMBER 7~ 2009 REPORT TYPE: STUDY SESSION DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT CMR: 453:09 Ii' ! • SUBJECT: Review of the Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff will provide an update to the City Council of progress regarding the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) project, particularly the -Environmental Impact Report (EIR) preparation and the Development Agreement discussions. The City contracted with the environmental consulting firm PBS&J to prepare a joint EIR for the SUMC Facilities Renewal. and Replacement Project (Project) and Simon Properties -Stanford Shopping Center Expansion Project. In April of 2009, Simon Properties formally withdrew their request for the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion Project. Over the past several months, staff has been working with the environmental consultant to extract the Shopping Center Project from the environmental analysis. This involved updating most sections ,of the EIR and updating the Citi s traffic model. In June 2009 Stanford provided the City with a Development Agreement proposal. Representatives from Stanford and the City have initiated discussions about the draft business terms of the Development Agreement. ' RECOMMENDATION The purpose of this Study Session is to provide the City Council with an overview of the EIR and the status of the Development Agreement negotiations and allow for Council comment. The current City Council has provided substantial input and direction to Staff and the applicants throughout the review period of the project. This session is an opportunity for this City Council to provide their additional Project comments before the new City Council is seated in January. BACKGROUND The Stanford University Medical Center comprises the general area between Sand Hill Road, Vineyard Lane, Quarry Road, Pasteur Drive, and including Welch Road and Blake Wilbur Drive. The Project applicant is proposing the demolition of the existing Stanford Hospital and Clinics (SHC) at 300 Pasteur Drive, construction of a new hospital building, renovation and expansion 1 of the Lucile Packard Children's Hospital (LPCH), reconstruction. of the School of Medicine (SoM) facilities, and construction of a new medical office building near Hoover Pavilion to meet State mandated seismic safety standards (SB 1953) and to address capacity issues, changing patient needs and modernization requirements. SB 1953 requires hospitals to retrofit or replace noncompliant facilities by January 1,2013. There have been some legislative attempts to extend this deadline and Stanford has received a partial concession from OSHPD to ,receive early plan review. The. renovation and expansion project, which would be constructed over a IS-year horizon, would result in a new increase of approximately 1.3 million square of hospital, clinic, and office space. The Project includes a request for the following entitlements: • Comprehensive Plan amendments to: o Change 701, 703 Welch Road and a small portion of Santa Clara County land on Welch Road proposed to be annexed "Major InstitutionaVSpecial Facilities" land use designation. o Amend Program L-3 to revise the Citywide 50-foot height limit to allow exceptions for taller buildings within the proposed "Hospital District." o Amend Policy L-8 to clarify that the hospital and treatPlent uses are exempt from. the development cap. • Zoning Code and Map ahl.endments to: o Create a new "Hospital Zone." I o Rezone 701 and 703 Welch Road from MOR to the new "Hospital Zone." . 0 Prezone the site to be annexed to the City to the new "Hospital Zone." • ~ex the small parcel described above. • ARB review of the SHC,LPCH, FIMI, medical office building at Hoover Pavilion, and Design Guidelines. • Development Agreement • Certification of an Environmental Impact Report The Project applicant has submitted seven substantive project amendments with the most recent amendment submitted on June 2, 2009. Since the Project was first submitted to the City, SUMC has made changes based upon Staff analysis and ARB, Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council input. These changes include significant modifications to site planning and building massing, revisions to the location of parking garages and site access for automobiles, refmements to the pedestrian and bicycle network to promote stronger linkages and connections, and changes to building placement and design to protect significant oak tree specimens. DISCUSSION Environmental Impact Report The EIR will addr.ess the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of the Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project. The Project would demolish and replace on-site structures, adding approximately 1.3 million square feet of net new floor area. 2 The following is a summary of the key ElR sections and possible mitigation measures. Land Use , EIR analyses of land use and planning generally consider the compatibility of a project with , neighboring areas, change to or displacement of existing uses, and consistency of a project with relevant local land use policies that have been adopted with the intent to mitigate or avoid an envirorunental effect. With respect to land use conflicts or compatibility issues, the magnitude of these impacts depends on how a project affects the existing development pattern, development intensity, traffic circulation, noise, and visual setting in the immediately surrounding area. Comprehensive Plan Policy (L-8) addresses growth in non-residential square footage for nine planning areas evaluated in the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study. The City has initiated a Comprehensive Plan amendment to provide clarification of this policy. City staff will "recommend that the policy should not limit growth of hospital and treatment center uses. If adopted by the City Council, the amendment will modify the text of the Policy to clarify that such uses are exempt under this policy. Text modifications to the Comprehensive Plan are also proposed to clarify proposed building height exceptions within the proposed hospital zone district (discussed below). Following adoption of the proposed amendments, the Project would not conflict with any Comprehensive Plan policies. To address zoning issues, the Project sponsors propose creation of a new zoning district that could be applied by the City to land used specifically for hospitals and clinics, associated medical research, medical office, and support uses. The new "Hospital Zone" would include development standards that accommodate the Project. Visual Quality This section of the ElR will discuss how development of the Project would affect the existing visual quality in the Project Area and its vicinity. Visual quality pertains to how people see and " experience the environment, particularly its visual character. Visual character consists of spatial and scale ~elationships, and the line, form, color, and texture of an area's natural features and man-made elements. Natural features include landforms, street trees, rock outcrops, vegetation, and water bodies. Man-made elements include buildings, structures, parking areas, roads, roadway interchanges and overpasses, above ground utilities, signs, and lighting fixtures. Full buildout conditions will be depicted through visual simulations prepared by William Kanemoto " and Associates. The Project may degrade the existing visual character and quality of the SUMC Sites during construction. Possible mitigation measures could be to aesthetically improve portions of the project site that would remain unimproved for an extended period and screen the construction zone from view by passersby along the public streets and sidewalks, conceal staging areas with fencing and remove construction debris and refuse would reduce visual impacts during construction to less than significant. The analysis also considers if the Project would substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the SUMC Site and its surroundings, and alter public viewsheds, view corridors or scenic resources. Given the size and scope of the Project it is likely that there would 3 be visual· character or quality impacts. Architectural Review of the Project would consider among other factors, whether the Project has a coherent composition, and whether its bulk and mass are harmonious with surrounding development. Architectural Review approval cannot be granted unless the Project meets stringent criteria, including a fmding of consistency with the sixteen Architectural Review Board (ARB) findings. Compliance with the ARB findings and Comprehensive Plan visual quality policies would typically reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Transportation This section of the EIR will evaluate the potential transportation impacts resulting. from construction and operation of the Project. Potential impacts include the addition of project related pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and auto trips to the surrounding transportation system, resulting in an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system; exceed either individually or cumulatively a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways; result in a change in air traffic patterns; substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses; result in inadequate emergency access; result in inadequate parking capacity; or conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. The basis for the traffic analysis will be the revised citywide transportation model that was originally developed in 1996 and last updated in 2008. The purpose of the model is to accurately forecast demand for travel by vehicles, and conforms to upgraded modeling methodologies adopted regionally. The citywide transportation model has been updated to account for changes in Palo Alto demography, street network, transit services, and land use patterns. The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) travel demand model formed the basis for the City's model, using 2005 Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG) projections for growth. The traffic conditions of the C/CAG (City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County) were investigated for the study area and reviewed by the City and the project team. The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) travel demand model growth estimates were modified to an average 1.6% annual traffic growth through 2025. The City model was initially developed without constrained volumes in the Palo Alto area. The City model was then constrained at four identified locations (Sand HilllI-280, EI Camino Real/San Antonio, El Camino Real/Sand Hill, Middlefield/San Antonio) based on those roadway capacities and VT A travel demand growth rates. The traffic volumes at the freeways were constrained to their capacities. The model results were reviewed and refined several times by the City to calibrate intersection turning movement counts for both A.M. and P.M. peak hour, link and intersection turning movement volumes of years 2006, 2015, and 2025 for both A.M. and P.M. peak' hour, and 66 study intersections with turning movement volumes. Recent updates to the Palo Alto model have resulted in a more accurate tool to analyze traffic within Palo Alto as compared with other adjacent and nearby cities. The limitations of the Palo Alto model are evident as when the analysis reflects traffic volumes entering Palo Alto from other jurisdictions. The result is that more traffic would enter Palo Alto through the roadway gateways than what would be expected due to intersection capacity constraints. Concerns have 4 been raised with the traffic model's regional growth assumptions. To address this, the model has been modified to constrain additional gateways in addition to the four gateways mentioned above (for a total of 11 constrained intersections), to limit traffic entering the. City during peak hours. Post-processing the model will also look at the trips and spread some trips beyond the peak hour and/or be transferred to other· roadways. The process of constraining gateways is commonly practiced to more precisely address these variables. The VTA has previously accepted these adjustments to address model limitations. . . Some possible mitigation measures include: Participation in region-wide commute incentive programs, construction/improvement of bicycle lanes and pedestrian crossings, expansion of the City shuttle program, adjustment of traffic lanes, and signal timing adjustments. The EIR is also evaluating the potential for CalTrain Go Pass use and remote parking as a potential mitigation. The City Council has historically not approved physical widening of traffic lanes or physical increases to intersections to accommodate increased traffic. These types of mitigations are not expected to be recommended in the EIR. A revised Traffic Impact Analysis is tentatively scheduled to be reviewed by the Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) and City Council prior to the release of the Draft EIR. Air Quality This section of the EIR will evaluate the potential impacts on air quality resulting from construction and operation of the proposed Project. Possible air quality impacts could result from construction activities, emergency generator testing and operation, increased vehicular traffic to the hospital, and other stationary source emis~ions. Possible mitigations include the development and approval of a construction management plan to limit the operation or machinery and control on-site dust, limits on the testing on generators, and similar practices. Climate Change It is recognized that anthropogenic (human caused) emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols are contributing to changes in the global climate, and that such changes are having and will have adverse effects on the environment, the economy, and public health. These are cumulative effects of past, present, and future actions worldwide. Pursuant to SB 97, the State Secretary for Natural Resources is in the process of promulgating thresholds of significance for assessing greenhouse gases. The Governor's office of Planning and Research (OPR) has recommended guidelines for assessing the significance of the project's impact on greenhouse gases; and it is expected that the Secretary will formally adopt such guidelines by January 2010. While OPR's suggested guidelines have not been formally adopted, in anticipation of their adoption the EIR applies the guidelines for assessing the greenhouse gas . impacts of the project. The OPR recommended guidelines provide that a lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based on available information, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project. In making this assessment the agency may consider "[t]he extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or 5 preservation measures. If avoidance measures cannot be achieved, and protected trees are removed, not retained, or relocated, then the Project could result in a significant and unavoidable impact. Because it is unlikely that avoidance measures can be fully implemented to the extent that all protected trees to be removed would be replaced or relocated, impacts would be conservatively assumed to be significant and unavoidable. In response, Stanford has prepared an Alternative to be studied in the EIR that shifts the SHe and one of the SoM building (FIMl) footprints around to avoid significant oak trees. (See Alternative section below.) Ge%gy, Soils, and Seismicity Geology, soils, and seismicity conditions are important aspects of all development projects in the San Francisco Bay Area. Although most projects have little or no effect on geology, any project involving construction would have some effect on soils and topography, and all projects may be affected by certain geologic events, such as earthquakes or landslides. Protection from the effects of geologic events is provided through existing building codes and construction standards, land use policies, and State and local regUlations. Because one of the major effects of loss of topsoil is sedimentation in receiving waters, erosion control standards are set by the State Water Quality Control Board through administration of the NPDES permit process for storm drainage discharge. Erosion and sedimentation issues are addressed in Hydrology because they are they are primarily related to turbidity and other depositional effects in local and regional water bodies. Hydrology This section describes the hydrology and water quality conditions present at the Project Area including surface and groundwater resources. This section evaluates whether the Project could , affect storm drainage and streams, as well as local groundwater resources in the area. Potential impacts expanded upon in this EIR section are ground and surface water quality degradation during construction and operation, flooding and drainage, and loss of groundwater recharge. ' The Project could have a significant impact on groundwater quality during construction'. Mitigation measures would be required to prevent construction site run-on and direct infiltration to reduce this impact to less than significant. Hazardous Materials This section provides an analysis of the potential for the Project to expose persons or the environment to hazardous materials. Potential environmental impacts can be associated with the potential disturbance of contaminated soils or groundwater, if present in the Project Area, as well as risk of spills from increased future use disposal, and transport of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes associated with project construction or operation. Specific topics presented in this section include the types of hazardous materials that would be handled and hazardous wastes that would be generated, known on-site contamination from historic uses, the regulatory setting applicable to such activities, and applicable health and safety policies and procedures. Population and Housing This section documents the existing population, housing, and employment conditions in the City of Palo Alto and estimates changes in current conditions that could result from implementation 8 J of the Project. Demographic changes in population and employment that would result from development of the Project are not intrinsically physical environmental impacts. However, environmental effects associated with increased population or daytime employment, such as increased traffic, traffic-generated air quality and noise concerns, increased demands on public services and utilities, and growth inducement could result from population growth. The impacts associated with population growth are addressed separately in various sections of this EIR The city's significance criteria treat substantial population growth and increases in the jobs to housing ratio as significant environmental effects in order to ensure the effects of such growth are analyzed. The Project, as proposed, would not directly result in substantial population growth. It would, however, increase local employment, which in turn could create demand for additional housing and result in associated population. In addition, the Project could have a significant adverse impact on the City's jobs to employed residents ratio and the related jobs to housing ratio because it would generate a large number of new jobs without adding housing to increase the number of employed residents in the City. Possible mitigation measures include dedicating housing and/or providing a site near the Project to house Medical Center employees, payment of housing fees, and an inc1usionary housing" requirement in the Hospital Zone; Public Services This section addresses the potential environmental effects of the Project on public services, including police and fire protection, schools, and parks and recreational services. Increases in public service demand alone do not constitute a significant environmental effect. Instead, an increase in demand for public services, such as additional staff or lengthier response times, could lead to potentially significant enviro~ntal impacts only if constructing or expanding a new facility were required and the construction or operation of the facility might adversely affect the air, water, noise, or other aspects of the physical environment. The current EIR analysis concludes that while the Project will likely increase demand for public services, such demand will not result in an environmental impact. For impacts to school, under proposition lA, payment of school impact fees by new development is the exclusive method of considering and mitigating impacts on school facilities that may occur as a result of approval of development of real property. Utilities The Project would result in increased on-site employment, visitors, and developed floor area. These increases have the potential to create greater demand for utilities, including water supply, wastewater collection and treatment, stonn drainage, solid waste disposal, and energy (which includes electricity and natural gas). This section assesses whether the potential increase in demand would overtax, to a significant degree, the capacity of the infrastructure systems serving the Project Area. A Water Supply Assessment (WSA) was conducted for this project. In April 2009 the City Council reviewed the SUMC WSA and directed staff to return to Council with a revised plan for 9 the Project that quantifies significant reductions in water use due to conservation measures. The WSA has been amended and is tentatively scheduled for Council consideration in early 2010 prior to release of the Draft EIR.The EIR will inClude analysis and conclusions from the WSA. Alternatives CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines require that the EIR "describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects ofthe project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives". Based on the objective of substantially reducing significant impacts, two No Project Alternatives, two Reduced Intensity Alternatives, a Preservation Alternative, a Tree Preservation Alternative and a Village Concept Alternative have been developed for the SUMC Project for evaluation in the EIR. No Project Alternatives The two No Project Alternatives include: (A) Retrofitting only those hospital facilities that could be retrofitted and no new buildings would be constructed; (B) Replace only SB 1953 noncompliant structures with new structures. Reduced Intensity Alternatives The two Reduced Intensity Alternatives include: (A) Right-sizing SHC and LPCH so construction of new hospital facilities would be limited to the minimum additional square footage required to right-size the existing LPCH and SHC facilities without adding space for additional growth; (B) Right-size SHC and LPCH plus add 60-percent of the floor area of the SUMC Project medical offices and 60 percent of the floor area of the SUMC Project hospital space above the amounts needed for ri~t-sizing. Preservation Alternative The Preservation Alternative would retain the. 1959 Hospital Building complex, which includes SoM buildings (Grant, Alway, Lane, and Edwards), along with the following SHC hospital/clinic buildings: West Pavilion ("West"), East Pavilion ("East"), Boswell, and Core. However, these buildings have a low seismic rating and do not comply with structural and non-structural criteria that must be met by the deadlines imposed by Senate Bill (SB) 1953 for retrofit or replacement of hospital facilities. Accordingly, under the Preservation Alternative, these buildings would not be used as hospital buildings, as defined by the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD). Tree Preservation Alternative In response to a number of significant trees planned for removal, an Alternative is being prepared that would preserve protected oak trees located in the portion of the SUMC known as Kaplan Lawn and near Welch Road. Under the proposed SUMC Project a hospital module is proposed to be located on the Kaplan Lawn, resulting in removal of nine protected trees. Under this Alternative, the square footage and programmatic functions planned for this module would be incorporated into the other hospital modules and the proposed ambulance route would be reconfigured. In addition, the previously proposed underground SHC parking structure at the 10 would meet Stanford University's 2008 Building Performance Guidelines, which set a target energy efficiency in new buildings of 30 percent below California Title 24/ ASHRAE 90.1 (2004). These buildings would include exterior sunshades, highly insulated building shells and fenestration, high efficiency building lighting systems and. HV AC equipment, use of passive cooling and smart building technology to coordinate building systems operations with occupancy and use patterns. Green building components include the use of sustainable building materials, where feasible, . such as recycling crushed concrete from demolition, renewable/recyclable materials in flooring, paint, construction adhesives, cabinet substrates, insulation, ceiling acoustical panels and furniture. Permeable asphalt; permeable concrete, and grass pavers will be used. The Hospitals would include measures such as: occupancy controls for patient rooms, and occupancy sensors for lighting strategic· areas, reduced lighting power densities, use EPA EnergyStar labeled equipment where available, link to the Stanford University cogeneration/thermal storage system for generation of chilled water and steam, and implement various water saving features. The Hospitals and SoM would continue to focus on environmentally preferable purchasing and extensive recycling programs. Transportation programs proposed would include consideration of the GO Pass for all eligible hospital employees, expansion of the Marguerite Shuttle service between the Palo Alto Transit Center and the SUMC, and inClusion of hospital employees in the Stanford C9mmute Club that gives subsidies for vanpools and for not driving, guaranteed ride home, Bco Pass for free use of VTA buses and light rails, Dumbarton Express, Highway 17 Express and U Line Stanford Express that connects BART and ACE Train to Stanford. Development Agreement Negotiations . . '\ Stanford is seeking a Development Agreement, which will lock in the zoning regulations for a negotiated period of time. Development Agreements are negotiated contracts between the applicant and City. Developers typically apply for a Development Agreement to ensure that the regulations will not change over time and to help secure financing for large-scale projects. In exchange, the parties negotiate an acceptable community benefit package. Since they are the product of voluntary negotiations rather than a unilateral imposition by the government, community benefits under a Development Agreement are typically broader than EIR mitigation measures and project conditions of approval. As such, community benefits are not legally required to have the same rigorous nexus applicable to other development conditions. A Development Agreement is a legislative action and is subject to referendum. On June 15, 2009, the City received a Development Agreement proposal from Stanford (Attachment A). Stanford proposed a 30-year Development Agreement with some terms extending to 51 years. The proposal focused on the following major categories of community benefits: (1) health care, (2) fiscal benefits, (3) reduced vehicle trips, (4) linkages, and (5) housing. The proposal noted that the most important community benefit would be the applicants' investment in seismically safe, state of the art facilities that would enable the hospitals to continue to provide high quality patient care. In addition, Stanford offered some additional community benefits, including the following significant proposals: 12 • . Establishment of two new programs for the exclusive benefit of residents: a $3 million fund to assist qualified low-income residents and a $4 million fund to subsidize comrtlUnity health programs within Palo Alto. • Proyide construction spending and associated use taxes of $8.3 million and obtain a use tax direct payment permit that will generate approximately $26,000 annually. • Purchase of "Caltrain Go Passes" for all SUMC employees at an estimated annual cost of $1.3 million. (Currently only Stanford University employees are entitled to this benefit.) • Expansion of the Marguerite service by purchasing additional shuttles in the amount of $2 million and by funding additional annual operating costs of $450,000. . • Funding a range of improvements to encourage use of transit and enhance pedestrian and bicycle connections between the hospitals and downtown: $2.25 million for pedestrian and bicycle connections around the Intermodal Transit Center, $400,000 for right of way improvements along Quarry Road and $700,000 for pedestrian connection between the Medical Center and Shopping Center (Stanford Bam area) .. • Payment of housing in lieu fees in the amount of $23.1 million which is equivalent to what a commercial project would pay. Staff believes Stanford's proposal is substantive and responsive to many project impacts. The proposal focuses on the key areas of concern raised by the Planning and Transportation Commission, the City Council and the community. However, it is also important to note that with a project of this magnitude many of the proposed community benefits would typically be imposed as conditions of approval or EIR mitigation measures. Staff has had several meetings with Stanford to discuss areas where the community benefit package can be enhanced. These discussions to date have focused on health care, fiscal impacts and housing. Staff plans to continue these discussions and will provide a further progress report in January or February. At that time, staff will seek input from the Council on whether the offered package is acceptable and if not which areas to prioritize. NEXT STEPS Substantial progress has been achieved in the preparation of the Project for formal entitlement reviews, though significant work remains to see the project to completion. Initial staff work focused on the preparation of the update tp the Stanford University Medical Center Land Use Area Plan (Area Plan), which was presented to City Council in July 2007 for review and comment. Staff and the applicant have since focused on four generally concurrent tracks: 1) Preparation of the Draft EIR, 2) Preliminary ARB reviews of project components, 3) Development Agreement preparation and discussions with the applicants, and 4) Community outreach and updates with the Planning & Transportation . Commission and City Council. Due to the complexity of the Project and the potential for substantial environmental impacts upon the community, the timeline for preparation of the Draft EIR has been extended from initial expectations. In addition, the withdrawal of the SSC Project has resulted in additional delays in the completion and issuance of the DEIR. Staff, in cooperation with the SUMC applicants and Stanford University representatives, is committed to completion of the Draft EIR, the Development Agreement discussions, 13 It is important to emphasize that the hospitals served more than two-thirds of the Palo Alto residents who required hospital~tion in 2007. The addition of more beds for adults and children will alleviate' overcrowding and allow the two hospitals to serve patients who currently must be turned away. In 2008, 924 patients could not be admitted to the hospitals because of. a shortage of avai1abl~ beds. ' ' 3 The hospitals ws6 pr~vide the only Levell Trauma Center between San Francisco and San Jose. ,The Trauma Center and the Emergency pep~ent ensure critical emergency preparedness and response resources for the commUnity in the event of an earthquake, pandemic, or other major disaster. The expansion of the Emergency DePartment and the associated facilities needed to support the ED services will solve th~ critical problem of-a wOefully undersized facility for the volume of people seeking care. In the last year, the Emergency Department had to be closed numerous times due to lack offacilities. ' , , Health Care: Additional Offered Community Benefits. the hospitals propose to fund the following new programs specifically to benefit residents of Palo Alto. Each of these funding obliptions will commence at issuance of tile first gnlding permit for the Project. e $3 million for in-patient and out-patient services at Stanford , Hpspital and Clinics and Lucile Packard Children's Hospital for residents of Palo Alto who have a self-payment responsibility beyond their ~cial means. This program is additional to the hospit$1s' charity policies. The hospitals will maintain and distribute this fund, with reporting to the City of Palo Alto when the tun4 ~s depleted. The reporting will be in a form that complies with , all applicable, privacy laws and policies. e$4 million for community health programs within the City of Palo' Alto, paId in equal annual amounts over 10 years to selected programs. The hospitals will work with a community Bdvisory board to ~lect tb.e ~pecific community health programs to receive funding. Examples of potentially eligible health programs and groups include the Mayview Health Clinic, health programs in the public schools, seniOTS health services provided by A venidas and Lytton ,Gardens, Psychiatric services at the Opportunity Center, programs for child: and adolescent suicide prevention, Breast Cancer Comections, and health programs provided by Taube Koret Campus for Jewish Life, Abilities United, Palo Alto YMCA, and Children's Health Council.' ' 300 Pasteur Drln -H3200 -M/C 5230. Shlnfol'd CA 94305. Telephone 650-721-2878 5 • ,S~ford University runs a free comprehensive Marguerite Shuttle system, support"" by payments from the hospitals, that connects the hospitals to local transit, Caltrain, shopping and dining. • The hospitals provide an Eco Pass to their employees, which allows :free use 'of VI' A buses and light rail, the Dumbarton :express, and the Highway 17 Express, and the Monterey~San Jose Express. • The hospitals provide free use of the U-Line Stanford Express that connects BART and the ACE train, and the Ardenwood Park & Ride , to Stanford. . • stanford also provides an extensive transportation website, transit pass sales,altemative transportation information at new employee orientation, regular e-mail updates to Commute Club members and .: parking permit holders, one-on-one commute planning assistance, and it commute cOst and carbon emissions calculator. • . The hospitals also provide services to bicyclists; including maps, clothes lockers and showers, bike lockers, safety education, and commute planiling . As described above, in connection with this Project, the hospitals also will be paying $2 million in Citywide Transportation Impact Fees for public facilities and services that relieve citywide traffic congestion caused by new development projects, including advanced transportation management and information systetns, expanded shuttle transit services, and bicycle and pedestrian improvements . Reduced VehiCle Trips: Additional Offered COmmunity Benefits. To further minimize commute trips'in drive-alone vehicles, the hospitals p~pose to provide the following benefits for the life of the Project: • The hospitals will purchase annual Caltrain Go Pa~ses(free train passes) for all existing and new hospital employees who work more than 20 hours per week at a cost of up to $1.3 million per year, . asSuming Caltrain continues to offer the Go Pass program at its . . current cost (plus cost of living adjustments) or Caltrain offers a substantially equivalent program at approximately the same cost. While the hospit4ds cannot guarantee a specific level of Cal train ridership, ifCaltrain ridership by hospital employees reaches the . S8me level as is being achieved currently by University employees, this program Would resUlt in o~etting all peak hour trips from the Project's new employment. 300 Pasteur D.'lve-H3200 -M/C 5230, Stanrol'd CA 94305, Telephone 650-721-2878 , --' 6 • The hQspitals will fund expansion of Marguerite service by purchasing additional shuttles at a total capital cost of up to $2.0 million, and by funding annl18lopei'ating QOsts of providing increased shuttle service in an amount of up to $450,000 per year in order to acconunodate the increase in demand for shuttle services res~lting from increased Caltrain ridership by hospital employees. • The hospitals will provide an onsite Transportation Demand Management Coordinator. • The.total.value of these benefits over the life of the Project is $90.4 million. Linkages LinkA&esj .' Additional Offered Community ·Beriefits. To further encourage use of.Galtrain, bus and. other transit services, and to enhance pedestrian and bicycle connections between the hospitals and downtown Palo Alto, the ·hospitals propose to fund the following improvements: • $2.25 million for improvements to enhance the pedestrian and bicycle connection from the Palo Alto Intennodal Transit Center to the existing intersection at EI Camino Real and Quarry Road, with up to $2.0 million of that amount going to the development of an . attractive, landscaped passive park/green space with a clearly nuirked and lighted pedestrian pathway, benches, and flower bonters. This amount will be paid to the City of Palo Alto upon . . issuance of the first gniding permit for the Project, and the City wili be responsible for constructing .these improvements. • .$400,000 fc;>r improvements to the public right-of-way to enhance the pedestrian and bi~ycle cOlUlection from EI Camino Real to Welch Road along Quarry Road, including urban design elements and way finding, wider bicycle lanes, as necessary, on Quarry Road, enhanced transit nodes for bus and/or sputtle stops, and prominent bicycle facilities. This amount will be paid to the City of Palo Alto . upon issuance of the first grading pennit for the Proj~ct, and the City will. be responsible for constructing these improvements. • Up to $700,000 for improvements to enhance the pedestrian connection between the Medical Center and the Stanford Shopping Center going from Welch Road to Vineyard Lane, in the area adjacent to the Stanford Bam. The hospitals will be responsible for constructing these improvements prior to Project completion. 300 Pasteur Drive -H3200· M/C 5230, SIRnfOl'd CA 94305, Telephone 650·721·2878 7 Housing Housing: Additional Offered Community Benefits. The Hospitals are exempt from the City's housing impact requirements under Section 16.47 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Like other exempt entities (churches, · schools and Gity facilities), hospitals provide needed services to the conUnunity~ and therefore are not expected to also provide community services in the form of affordable housing. Nevertheless, in recognition of the relatively large number of jobs created by the Project, the need for City . subsidies to entice affordable housing development, and the City's stated desire to increase its affordable housing supply in Palo Alto, the hospitals propose to provide payment to the city's housing fund in the amount of $23.1 million. . . · This amount is the same amount that a for-profit developer would pay under · Municipal Code section 16.47, based on. the City's current in-lieu housing· . fee.· The Agreement will provide that the portion of the fee that corresponds to each new structure will be due and payable prior to the issuance ·ofthe building permit by the City or OSHPD for that structure, and the amount of the fee will be calcUlated at the· fee rate in effect on June 1,2009. City Services City Services: Direct and Indirect Hospitals Community Benefits. The Fiscal Impact Report prepared by CBRE Consulting concludes that revenues generated by the Project will more than offset the City's on-going cost of providing services. CitY Services: Additiopal Offered Community Benefits. To further support the provision of City services, the hospitals propose to provide $70,000 in funding for a jurlsdiction.,wide Standard of Service Fire Study. This ' funding will be provided to the Palo Alto Fire Department prior to issuance of the first grading pennit for the Project. School Fees School Fees: Direct and Indire,s;t Hospitals Community Benefits. The hospiWs will pay School Fees to the Palo Alto Unified School District in the amount of$616,413, based upon the currently applicable School Fee. The applicable fee for each new or expanded building will be due and payable prior to receiving a building pennit from the City of Palo Alto. The hospitals propose that, for buildings subject to OSHPD jurisdiction, school fees willbe due Within five days of issuance of a building pennit from OSHPD. 300 Pasteur Drive -H3200 -M/C 5230, Stanfol'd CA 94305, Telephone 650-721-2878 Development Agreement Condidons and Understandings , The proposal is bMed on .our un~tanding that the Development Agreement will apply only to development olthe Project; and not to any other'property owned by Stanford or any other project proposed })y the hospitals or Stanford. In addition, we have base our. proposal on the following anticipated benefits of entering into a Development Agreement: Project Appr,ovals, City Regulations . . The Agreement will vest the applicants' right to c~truct, use and occupy the Project in accordance with (a) approvals for the Project granted by the City, specified in the Agreement and acceptable to the hospitals and . . Stanford, including amendments tQ the Comprehensive Plan and zoning . ordinance, a jurisdictimial boundary change, and architectural review approval (collectively!' Project Approvals"); (b) the ordinances, rules, regulations, and official policies of the City in force and effect on June 1, ·2009 as modified by the Ploject Approvals ("City Regulations") and such other ministerial and discretionary approvals.that are necessary or desirable for the economic and efficient ~nstruction, use and occupancy of the Pr9ject that maybe granted subsequent to the execution of this Agreement ("Subsequent Approvals"). Through incorporation of the Project Approvals, th~ Agreement will specify the pennitted uses of the 'property, the. density or intensity of use, the maximum height and size 9f proposed bui1dings, and provisions (if any) for reservation or dedication ofland for public pwposes. The City will agree to grant all Subsequent Approvals, whether ministerial or discretionary, subject only to its reasonable determination that the application for the requested Subsequent Approval is complete and 8 . consistent with the Project Approvals, City Regulations, and any new City rules, regulations, and .policies which do not conflict with the Project Approvals and City Regulations. The City will agree not to impose any requirement or condi~on Qn Subsequent Approvals or development or operation of the Project other than those required by the Project Approvals, City Regulati~ns, an<J any new City rules, regulations, and policies which do not c~>nflict with the Project Approvals and City Regulations. The Agreement will provide that the parties will cooperate and diligently work to implement all Project Approvals and to expeditiously review and act upon·all requests for Subsequent Approvals. From and after approval, each . Subsequent Approval shall be vested under this Agreement to the same extent as.the Project Approvals. 300 Pasteur Drive -H3200 -M/C 5230, Stanford CA 94305. Telephonr 650-721-2878 • • 'I V 9 Project Design The Agreement will include the Design Guidelines for the Project as an $chment. For those portions of the Project that have not yet received architectural review approval by the time the City approves the Development Agreement, the Design Guidelines will be the exclu.sive design criteria applicable to tJte Project components, and the exercise. of the City's· architectural review discretion will be limited to determining whether a proposal is substantially consi~t with the' Design Guidelines; If architectural review approval or any other type of site or design appfoval is needed for Subsequent Approvals, the decisions shall be made by the Director of Planning and Co~unity Environment, after recommendation . by the Architectural Review Board, subject only to appeal to the City Counci1'(purs~ai1t to Section 18.77.070 of the Municipal·Code). PubUc Improvements, Fees and Exactions The' A8feemenf will describe the public improvements (if any), fees, dedications and exactions required by the Project Approvals or otherwise required under the Dev~lopment Agreement, and the Agreement will proVide that no other public improvements, fees, dedications or exactions will be required. . Inspections The Agreement will describe protocols and procedures for Subsequent Approvals and ~nspections, including agreed Upon tum arQund times. Phasing Schedule Phasing Schedule: The Agreement will confirm that the applicants are not required to initiate or complete development of the Project, or any portion thereof, or to initiate or complete the Project components within any period oftime or in any particular order .. The Agreement will acknowledge that the applicants may develop the Project components in such ord~ and at such rate and times as they deem appropriate within the exercise of their sole and subjective business judgment. The applicants also may choose, in their discretion, to phase the Project. Project Modification The Agreement will provide a process and standard of review for future City consideration of applicant-proposed modifications to the Project, including to Project phasing if the applicants so choose, with the ol,ljective 300 Pasleu," D."lve -H3200 -M/C S230, SlnnfOl"d CA 94305. Telephont' 650-721-2878 "" I Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts VQ-3. Alteration of Public Viewsheds, View Corridors, or Scenic Resources. The SUMC Project would result in significant impacts on views. Impact Significance Without Mitigation S NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-28 Mitigation Measures VQ-2.1 Adhere to City's Architectural Review Process and Recommendations. The SUMC Project sponsors shall submit final building and site plans to the ARB prior to issuance of any development permits. Architectural Review shall assess the appropriateness of proposed demolitions, proposed building heights and massing, siting of buildings and structures, architecture and facade treatments, landscaping, circulation plans, and parking. The ARB may require alterations to any of the above project features, or the ARB may suggest new features, such as new landscaping or public art, to improve the proposed SUMC Project design. Any recommendations made by the ARB with respect to the design of the SUMC Project shall be implemented by the SUMC Project sponsors. . MITIGATION MEASURE. Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1, above, requires and ensures compliance with ARB recommendations for final design and would reduce impacts on views from the proposed buildings under the SUMC Project. The Architectural Review of the SUMC Project would consider, among other factors, whether the SUMC Project has a coherent composition and that its bulk and mass are harmonious with surrounding development. The ARB's recommendations regarding these factors will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. The City Council would then review the recommendations and make findings, as appropriate, that natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with tbe SUMC Project; the design promotes hannonious transitions in scale and character in areas betw·een different designated land uses; and the planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an internal sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community. Implementation of Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1 regarding the Architectural Review process would ensure tbat impacts on views would be less than significant. S = Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With Mitigation LTS Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts VQ-4. Terrain Modifications. The SUMC Project would not require substantial terrain modifications that would degrade the visual character of the SUMC Sites. VQ-5. New Sources of Light and Glare. The SUMC Project could increase light and glare nuisance from exterior lighting; resulting in a significant impact. VQ-6. Shadowing of Public Open Space. The SUMC Project would not substantially shadow public open space (other than public streets and adjacent sidewalks) between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. from September 21 to March 2l. VQ-7. Cumulative Impacts on Visual Character. The SUMC Project, in combination with other reasonably foreseeable probable future development in the area, would have a less- than-significant cumulative impact on visual character in the vicinity of the SUMC Sites. Impact Significance Without Mitigation NI S LTS LTS NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-~ignijicant Mitigation Measures None required. MITIGATION MEASURE. Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1, above, requires compliance with ARB recommendations for final design and would reduce light and glare impacts from the proposed buildings under the SUMC Project. The Architectural Review of the SUMC Project would consider, among other factors, whether the SUMC Project incorporates quality materials, harmonious colors, appropriate ancillary features, a cohesive design with a coherent composition, and an appropriate lighting plan. The ARB's recommendations regarding these factors will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. The City Council would then review the recommendations and make findings, as appropriate, that the design is compatible with the ilIimediate environment of the SUMC Sites; is appropriate to the function of the SUMC Project; promotes harmonious transitions in character in areas between different designated land uses; and is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site. This Architectural Review process would ensure that exterior treatment would not emit substantial glare and that exterior lighting impacts would be less than significant. None required. None required. S=Signijicant SU= Sign(ficant Unavoidable StaJ~ford University Medical Center Facilities Renel'l-'al and Replacement Draft ElR -Summary hnpact Significance With Mitigation N/A LTS N/A N/A S-29 Impacts NI = No Impact ! Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures TR-I.2 Maintain Pedestrian Access. The SUMC Project. sponsors shall be prohibited from substantially limiting pedestrian access while constructing the SUMC Project, without prior approval from the City of Palo Alto Department of Public Works. Such approval shall require submittal and approval of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less-than- significant levels. Pedestrian access-limiting actions would . include, but not be limited to, sidewalk closures, bridge closures, crosswalk closures or pedestrian re-routing at intersections, placement of construction-related material within pedestrian pathways or sidewalks, and other actions which may affect the mobility or safety of pedestrians during the construction period. If sidewalks are maintained along the construction site frontage, covered walkways shall be provided. TR-I.3 Maintain Bicycle Access. The SUMC Project sponsors shall be prohibited from limiting bicycle access while constructing the SUMC Project without prior approval from the City of Palo Alto Department of Public Works. Such approval shall require submittal and approval of specific construction management plans that warn cyclists prior to reaching the impacted bicycle lanes and provide alternative routing around the construction sites to mitigate the specific impacts to a less-than-significant level. Bicycle access-limiting actions would include, but not be limited to, bicycle lane closures or narrowing, closing or narrowing of streets that are designated bicycle routes. bridge closures, the placement of construction-related materials within designated bicycle lanes or along bicycle routes, and other actions which may affect the mobility or safety of bicyclists during the construction period. S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renel'olal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Impact Significance With Mitigation S-31 Impacts NI = No Impact S-32 Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures TR-l.4 Restrict Construction Hours. The SUMC Project sponsors shall be required to prohibit or limit the number of construction material deliveries from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., and from 4pm to 6pm on weekdays. The SUMC Project sponsors shall be required to prohibit or limit the number of construction employees from arriving or departing the site from the hours of 4:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. TR-l.5 Restrict Construction Truck Routes. The SUMC Project sponsors shall be required to deliver and remove all construction- related equipment and materials on truck routes designated by the cities of Palo Alto, East Palo Alto and Menlo Park. Heavy construction vehicles shall be prohibited from accessing the site from other routes. Figure 3.4-6 and 3.4-7 of the ElR illustrates the Stanford Area Truck Routes which must be used by all trucks. TR-l.6 Protect Public Roadways During Construction. The SUMC Project sponsors shall be required to repair any structural damage . to public roadways, returning any damaged sections to original structural condition. The SUMC Project sponsors shall survey the condition of the public roadways along truck routes providing access to the proposed project site before construction, and shall again survey after construction is complete. A before-and-after survey report shall be completed and submitted to the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department for review, indicating the location and extent of any damage. TR-l.7 Maintain Public Transit Access and Routes. The SUMC Project sponsors shall be prohibited from limiting access to public transit, and from limiting movement of public transit vehicles, without prior approval from the Santa· Clara County Valley S = Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable hnpact Significance With Mitigation Stal1/ord University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -SummOlY Impacts NI = No Impact · ~ .. I .. Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures Transportation Authority or other appropriate jurisdiction. Such approval shall require submittal and approval of specific impacts to a less-than-significant level. Potential actions which would impact access to transit include, but are not limited to, relocating or removing bus stops, limiting access to bus stops or transfer facilities, or otherwise restricting or constraining public transit operations. TR-l.8 Prepare and Implement Construction Impact Mitigation Plan. In lieu of the above mitigation measures, the SUMC Project sponsors shall submit a detailed construction impact mitigation plan to the City of Palo Alto for approval by the Director of Public Works prior to commencing any construction activities with potential transportation impacts. This plan shall address in detail the activities to be carried out in each construction phase, the potential transportation impacts of each activity, . and an acceptable method of reducing or eliminating significant transportation impacts. Details such as the routing and scheduling of materials deliveIies, construction employee arrival and departure schedules, employee parking locations, and emergency vehicle access shall be described and approved. TR-l.9 Conduct Additional Measures During Special Events. The SUMC Project sponsors shall implement a mechanism to prevent roadway construction activities from reducing roadway capacity during major athletic events or other special events which attract a substantial number of visitors to the campus. This measure may require a special supplemental permit to be approved by either Santa Clara County or the City of Palo Alto prior to hosting such events during significant construction phases. S = Significant SU= Significant Ulwvoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renel1lal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary hnpact Significance With Mitigation S-33 Table S-4 SU1.\-1C Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts TR-2. Intersection Level of Service. Implementation of the SUMC Project would result in significant impacts to .' intersections during Peak Hour conditions. Impact Significance Without Mitigation S NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-34 Mitigation Measures MITIGATION MEASURES. Given the magnitude of the SUMC Project's infersection impacts, there is no single feasible mitigation measure that can reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level. However, there are a range of measures that, when taken individually, would each contribute to a partial reduction in the SUMC Project's impacts. When combined, these measures could result in a substantial reduction in th.e SUMC Project's impacts. Under all combinations of feasible mitigation measures below, impacts of the SUMC Project on intersection LOS would remain significant and unavoidable. Of all of the feasible combinations, the' one that would have the largest reduction in impact, and that mitigates the greatest number of the intersection impacts, is the combination of traffic adaptive signal technology, additional bicycle and pedestrian undercrossings, enhanced Travel Demand Management (TDM) program, and feasible intersection improvements. This combination of mitigation measures would reduce the SUMC Project impacts to a less-than-significant level at all of the impacted intersections during the AM Peak Hour. However, intersection impacts would remain significant and unavoidable in the PM Peak Hour at three intersections with. mitigation. TR-2.1 Install Traffic Adaptive Signal Technology. The SUMC Project sponsors shall contribute to the Palo Alto Citywide Traffic Impact Fee program, for the installation of traffic adaptive signals. However, this fee is not structured to mitigate one hundred percent of project related impacts, and an additional fee could be imposed by the City on the SUMC Project sponsors to mitigate the remaining share of the SUMC Project impacts. In Menlo Park, the SUMC Project sponsors shall contribute their fair share amount, which shall be tied to the amount of traffic added to analyzed intersections by the SUMC Project. The SUMC Project sponsors' contributions shall apply towards the S = Significant SU= Significant U/lavoidable hnpact Significance With Mitigation SU Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -SummaJY Impacts ~ NI = No Impact Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures installation of traffic adaptive signals as listed below. • SandHill Road (Oak Creek to Shopping Center) - 4 signals • Arboretum Road (Shopping Center to Palm Drive) - 3 signals • Embarcadero Road (Bryant to Saint Francis) - 7 signals • University Avenue (Palm to Lincoln) -13 signals • Lytton Avenue (Alma to Middlefield) -10 signals • Hamilton Avenue (Alma to Middlefield) -10 signals • Middlefield Road (San Antonio to Homer) - 9 signals • Charleston Road (Alma to Middlefield) - 2 signals • El Camino Real (northern city limits of Menlo Park to southern city limits of Palo Alto) -signals would require approval of Caltrans TR-2.2 Fund Additional Bicycle and Pedestrian Undercrossings. The SUMC Project sponsors shall contribute their fair share to the cost of construction of the Everett Avenue undercrossing of the Caltrain tracks in Palo Alto and the Middle Avenue undercrossing in Menlo Park. In Palo Alto, there is a Citywide Traffic Impact Fee program that the SUMC Project sponsors shall contribute to. However, this fee is not structured to mitigate one hundred percent of the SUMC Project related impacts, and an additional fee may be imposed by the City to mitigate the remaining share of the SUMC Project impacts. In Menlo Park, the fair share contribution shall be tied to the amount of traffic added to analyzed intersections by the SUMC S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft ElR -Summary Impact Significance With Mitigation S-35 Impacts NI = No Impact S-36 1- Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures Project. The construction of the Everett Avenue and Middle Avenue undercrossings would reduce traffic volumes on nearby streets, such as Ravenswood Avenue and University Avenue. TR-2.3 Enhance Stanford University Travel Demand Management (TDM) Program. The SUMC Project sponsors shall enhance the currently-implemented TDM program in order to achieve 35.1 percent usage of alternative transportation modes (i.e, carpool, vanpool, bus, Caltrain, bicycle, and walk) by SUMC employees. The initial enhancements to the SUMC TDM program shall include the following: • Provide Caltrain GO Passes, or an equivalent TDM measure, to all eligible hospital employees and set target Caltrain mode share for hospital employees equal to 15.8 percent. • If Caltrain GO Passes would be provided to SUMC employees, make arrangements with AC Transit to lease 75 spaces at the Ardenwood Park & Ride Lot, to serve SUMC employees who commute from the East Bay. • Expand bus service in support of the issuance of GO Passes. • Expand the Marguerite shuttle bus service, and integrate it 'With the other City of Palo Alto shuttle bus service. • Maintain load factors less than 1.00 on the U Line, and less than 1.25 on the Marguerite shuttle. • Expand and improve the bicycle and pedestrian networks. • Provide a full-time on-site TDM coordinator by 2015 for the hospital components. The coordinator would be responsible for organizing and disseminating TDM information primarily S=Significant SU= Significant Ullavoidable '--.'-"~--'-'-'-~-.-... ~ .. -" -~.-~--- bnpact Significance With Mitigation Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal alld Replacement Draft EIR -SummaJY Impacts NI = No Impact Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures to hospital employees and also to hospital patients. A central location would be made available to provide information on alternative travel modes. Also, the SUMC or hospitals' website would contain information on TDM programs. • Provide a guaranteed ride home program for all employees who use transit and other transport alternatives like carpool and vanpool. The guarantee ride home shall allow employees with dependent children the ability to use alternative modes to travel to and from work but still be able to travel home mid-day in case of an emergency. • Provide employees with shower facilities within the SUMC Sites to encourage bicycling to work. The SUMC Project sponsors shall also provide bicycle storage facilities on the SUMC Sites that would be conveniently located near the employee showers. • Establish, in conjunction with the GO Pass implementation, a "Zip Car" (or other similar car-sharing program) with Zip Cars available at the medical complex. • Perform annual TDM monitoring and submit the report to the City of Palo Alto to ensure that the assumed modal split to alternative forms of travel and away from autos is actually achieved. . These enhancements may not immediately change the mode split for SUMC employees, because many employees would be unable to change long standing commute patterns overnight. However, with the passage of a mutually agreed amount· of time, it is expected that the enhanced TDM program would gradually result in a shift in the mode split of SUMC employees. If this proves S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft ElR -SumlllaJY Impact Significance With Mitigation S-37 Impacts NI = No Impact S-38 Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-SignificaIU Mitigation Measures not to be the case, then a second round of improvements to the TDM program shall be implemented. Examples of additional measures could be to increase the parking permit charges while increasing the incentives to those who carpool or do not drive. If, by the year 2025, at least 35.1 percent of SUMC employees are not using alternative transportation modes, then a second . round of improvements to the TDM shall be implemented. Examples of additional measures could be to increase the parking permit charges while increasing the incentives to those who carpool or do not drive. Thereafter, SUMC Project sponsors shall monitor/survey employee use of alternative modes of transportation on an at least bi-annual basis, and shall continue to improve its TDM program, until it is confirmed to the satisfaction of the City that the target of 35.1 percent usage has been met. TR-2.4 Fund or Implement those Imersection Improvements that Have Been Detennined to be Feasible. The SUMC Project sponsors shall implement the following measures: • For the intersection of EI Camino Real/Page Mill Road - Oregon Expressway,. the SUMC Project sponsors shall pay a fair share towards (1) provision of exclusive light-turn lane for westbound Oregon Expressway, in addition to the two through lanes, (2) increasing the cycle length to 160 seconds. Improvements to the westbound right turn lane would require right-of-way from the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) park-and-ride lot. • At the intersection of Arboretum Road/Galvez Street, the SUMC Project sponsors shall install a traffic signal. S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With Mitigation Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary ~ I Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts TR-3. Impacts on Roadway Segments. The SUMC Project would result in adverse traffic impacts to roadway segments in the City of Menlo Park. TR-4. Local Circulation Impacts. The SUMC Project could result in significant traffic impact to the local circulation network in the immediate vicinity of the SUMC Sites. Impact Significance Without Mitigation S S NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-40 Mitigation Measures Road. The City shall coordinate with the City of Menlo Park regarding feasibility of this improvement. • Junipero Serra Boulevard/Campus Drive West -Request that Santa Clara County change the signal cycle length at this intersection to 90 seconds. The City shall coordinate with the County of Santa Clara regarding feasibility of this adjustment. MITIGATION MEASURES. With the provision of additional bicycle and pedestrian undercrossings (Mitigation Measure TR-2.2), the enhanced TDM program (Mitigation Measure TR-2.3), and contribution to the City of Menlo Park shuttle fee (Mitigation Measure TR-7.2), there would still be significant impacts on four Menlo Park roadways, including Marsh Road, Willow Road, Sand Hill Road, and Alpine Road. Therefore, the traffic impacts to Marsh Road, Sand Hill Road, Willow Road, and Alpine Road would remain significant and unavoidable with mitigation. MITIGATION MEASlJRES. Mitigation Measure TR-4.1, involving funding and implementation of a traffic impact study, and Mitigation Measure TR-4.2, involving re-striping of Durand Way. would reduce the SUMC Project's impact to a less-than-significant level. TR-4.1 FUlld Traffic Impact Study. Upon construction of the SHC and LPCH Hospital components. the SUMC Project sponsors shall fund an independent traffic evaluation, commissioned by the City, based on actual travel patterns, volumes, and emergency access. with an emphasis on ease of circulation around and through the medical complex to determine if the private street connection between Roth Way and Pasteur Drive should be operated as a public street. If the independent traffic study demonstrates that the connection between Roth Way and Pasteur Drive as a public street would improve circulation. then the S= Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With Mitigation SU LTS Stan/ord University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft ElR -Summmy "l"_~," """'""'_,_~,~"~~"'~_~, Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts TR-5. Freeway Impacts. The SUMC Project would result in less-than-significant impacts on freeways. TR-6. Bicycle and Pedestrian Impacts. The SUMC Project could impede the development or function of planned bicycle or pedestrian facilities, and result in a significant impact. Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS s NI = No hllpact LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures connection shall be designated as a public street for all vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit traffic. TR-4.2 Fund Signing and Striping Plan and Signal Optimization. In addition to paying for the construction of the extension of Durand Way from Sand Hill Road to Welch Road, the SUMC Project sponsors shall also pay for the following improvements to ensure that queues from the Durand Way/Sand Hill Road intersection do not spillback onto the Durand Way/Welch Road intersection. • A signing and striping plan for the Durand Way extension, which would maximize the storage capacity by creating a four-lane roadway with a left and through/right at Sand Hill Road and a right and through/left at Welch Road; • The installation and optimization of the two signals at the intersections of Durand Way/Sand Hill Road and Durand Way/Welch Road. None required. MITIGATION MEASURES. Mitigation Measure TR-2.3 involving trip- reducing measures, plus Mitigation Measure TR-6.1, which involves several bicycle and pedestrian improvements, would reduce the SUMC Project's impact to a less-than-significant level. The improved facilities would mitigate the hazards to pedestrians and bicyclists brought about by the increased vehicular traffic and congestion. " TR-6.1 Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements. The SUMC Project sponsors shall fund the expansion and improvement of the bicycle and pedestrian network in the immediate vicinity of the SUMC Project. -The intent of these improvements is to: S=Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renel',lal and Replacement Draft EJR -SumlllalY Impact Significance With :Mitigation N/A LTS S-41 Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts TR-7. Transit Impacts. Implementation of the SUMC Project could impede the operation of the transit system as a result of increased ridership, and result in a significant impact. Impact SignIficance Without Mitigation S NI = No IlIqJact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-44 Mitigation Measures • Install the appropriate number of Class I and Class III bicycle parking spaces as required by the City's Zoning Ordinance for the total amount of existing and future development. The SUMC Project sponsors shall install the required number of bicycle parking spaces equally distributed throughout the SUMC Sites. MITIGATION MEASURES. Mitigation Measure TR-7.1 involves the addition of transit centers to the SUMC Project's site plans, and Mitigation Measure TR-7.2 involves financial contributions towards the expansion. of transit service. Implementation of these measures would reduce the SUMC Project's transit impacts to a less-than-significant level. TR-7.1 IncOlporate Transit Centers Into Site Plans. The SUMC Project sponsors shall revise their SUMC Project site plan to incorporate two transit centers to reduce the impact to transit service caused by the SUMC Project. These transit centers shall be located at Hoover Pavilion and at SHC, and shall be off-street facilities. The transit centers shall accommodate three to four buses simultaneously, and shall have shelters, seating, lighting, signs. maps, bus schedules, and bicycle parking. On-street bus stops along Welch Road and Quarry Road shall also be provided, but the transit centers shall accommodate the majority of transit riders and shall· be located to maximize the convenience of employees, patients, and visitors. One transit center shall be located in the vicinity of Welch Road and Pasteur Drive to serve SHC. The other transit center shall be located near the entrance to Hoover Pavilion. Both of these b:ansit centers shall provide the focal point for transit use for the SUMC. TR-7.2 Provide Expanded Transit Sen'ice. The SUMC Project sponsors shall make a fair share financial contribution to the cost of expanding existing bus service of the Marguerite, Crosstown, S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable hnpact Significance With Mitigation LTS Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacemelit Draft EIR -Summary Impacts NI = No Impact Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures and Menlo Park Shuttle bus services, and to the VT A Community Bus Service. • Marguerite Shuttle. The SUMC Project sponsors shall make a financial contribution to expand the Marguerite shuttle service into Palo Alto. • U Line. The SUMC Project sponsors shall make a financial contribution towards the operation of the U Line. Arrangements with AC Transit shall be made to increase U Line service (such as decreasing headways) to meet the increase in demand attributable to the SUMC Project, and ensure that load factors remain below 1.0, • Crosstown Shuttle. The SUMC Project sponsors shall participate in operating the Palo Alto Crosstown Shuttle service, by contributing to the. Citywide Traffic Impact Fee, which would include covering the costs of this service. Then current fee is $2,861 per net new PM Peak Hour trips. A portion of Stanford's Citywide Traffic Impact Fee shall be used by the City to expand City shuttle services. • VTA Community Bus Service. The SUMC Project sponsors shall contribute to fund the project's fair share of Palo Alto's share of expanded VTA Community Bus Service. ' • Menlo Park Shuttle Bus. The SUMC Project sponsors shall pay into the City of Menlo Park shuttle fee at $0.105 per square foot of new development annually or a percentage agreed between Menlo Park and SUMC Project sponsors. In Menlo Park, the contribution shall be tied to the amount of project traffic added to analyzed roadway segments and intersections. S=Signijicant SU= Sign(ficant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Impact Significance With lVlitigation S-45 Impacts NI = No Impact Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation r LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures construction equipment emission reduction measures (Mitigation Measure AQ-1.2 below) would further reduce NOx, ROG, PMIO and PM2.5 emissions during construction. However. reduction of NOx emissions below 80 lbs/day during the first year of construction could not be guaranteed, and this impact would still be considered significant and unavoidable. AQ-I.I Implement Recommended Dust ConJrol Measures. To reduce dust emissions during project demolition and construction phases, the SUMC Project sponsors shall require the construction contractors to comply with the dust control strategies developed by the BAAQMD. The SUMC Project sponsors shall include in construction contracts the following requirements: a. Cover all trucks bauling soil, sand, and other loose materials including demolition debris, or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard; b. Water all active construction areas (exposed or disturbed soil surfaces) at least twice daily; c. Use watering to control dust generation during demolition of structures or break-up of pavement; d. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved parking areas and staging areas; e. Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas during the earthwork pbases of construction; f. Sweep daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets; g. Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more); S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Staltord University Medical Center Facilities Renel1-'al and Replacement Draft ElR -Summary hnpact Significance With Mitigation S-47 Impacts NI = No Impact S-48 _ ~ ... L", Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures h. Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.); i. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph; J. Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways; and k. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. AQ-l.2 Implement Equipment Et:haust Emission Reduction Measures. To reduce emissions from construction equipment during project demolition and construction phases. the SUMC Project sponsors shall require tbe construction contractors to comply with the following emission reduction strategies to the maximum feasible extent. The SUMC Project sponsors sball include in construction contracts tbe following requirements: a. Where possible, electrical equipment sball be used instead of fossil-fuel powered equipment. b. The contractor shall install temporary electrical service wbenever possibJe to avoid need for fossil-fuel powered equipment. c. Running equipment not being actively used for construction purposes for more tban five minutes sball be turned off. (e.g., trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate, or other bulk materials; however, rotating-drum concrete trucks may keep their engines running continuously as long as they are on site). d. Trucks shaH be prohibited from idling while on residential streets serving the construction site (also included in Mitigation Measure NO-I. 1). S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With Mitigation Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal alld Replacement Draft EIR -SummOlY Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts AQ-2. Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions. Combined mobile and stationary source emissions during operation of the SUMC Project would exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's significance threshold of 80 pounds/day of ROG, NOx and PMIO. Therefore, air emissions would result in a substantial contribution to an existing regional air quality problem and a significant impact. AQ-3. Localized Carbon Monoxide Impacts from Motor Vehicle Traffic. The SUMC Project would have less-than- significant localized air emissions re&ulting from additional traffic. AQ-4. Toxic Air Contaminants. Simultaneous exposures to DPM and T ACs from the construction and operational components of the SUMC Project would have a less-than- significant impact on air quality. Impact Significance Without Mitigation S LTS LTS NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures e. Diesel-powered construction equipment shall be Tier III or Tier IV California Air Resources Board (CARE) certified equipment to the maximum feasible extent. f. The engine size of construction equipment shall be the smallest practical to accomplish the task at hand. MITIGATION MEASURES. Mitigation Measure TR-2.3 involves implementation of enhanced TDM measures. The enhanced TDM measures include provision of the Caltrain GO Pass to SUMC employees, or an equivalent TDM measure. If the GO Pass would be provided, then remote parking spaces at the Ardenwood Park and Ride Lot in the East Bay would also be provided to serve commuters from the East Bay. Provision of the GO Pass plus remote parking spaces.in the East Bay would reduce Vehicle'Miles Travelled by 13.5 percent. This reduction in SUMC Project VMT, however, would not be sufficient to prevent project ROG, NOx and PMlO emissions from exceeding the BAAQMD significance thresholds. In addition, the City shall consider the feasibility of Mitigation Measure PH- 3.1. Nonetheless, impacts would be significant and unavoidable even with mitigation. None required. None required. S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Impact Significance With Mitigation SU N/A N/A S-49 Impacts NI = No Impact S-52 _~_I ______ ,~-.-,,"---------c~.~'"--~~-~~-----~"~~~' '~_~~~~ Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures CC-l.2 Participate in Palo Alto Green Energy PrograJ7j, Other Equivalent Renewable Energy Program, or combi1lation thereof Under the Palo Alto Green program, residential, business and industrial customers purchase renewable energy equivalent to their electricity needs at an additional cost of 1.5 cents per kWh above standard electric rates. The SHC and LPCH facilities shall participate in this program to offset electricity emissIons; develop new renewable generation sources in collaboration with the CPAU; incorporate a renewable energy source (such as photovoltaics) into the SUMC Project, or a combination thereof, such that a minimum of 54,640 MWh of electricity usage is offset annually. CC-l.3 Provide Annual Greenhouse Gas Reporting. The SHC and LPCH shall perform an annual inventory of greenhouse gas emissions associated with hospital and medical facilities on the SUMC Sites. This inventory shall be performed according to a common industry-standard emissions reporting protocol, such ,-as the approaches recommended by California Air Resources Board, The Climate Action Registry, or Business Council for Sustainable Development (BCSD). This inventory shall be shared with the City of Palo Alto to facilitate the development of future collaborative Emissions Reduction Programs. Emissions associated with energy, water, solid waste, transportation, employee commute and other major sources shall be reported in this inventory. CC-l.4 Prepare Waste Reduction Audit. The SUMC Project sponsors shall perform a waste reduction audit of waste management'- practices at the hospitals prior to construction of new facilities and after completion of the SUMC Project to determine post- project diversions. This audit shall be repeated annually, and S=Significant S U = Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With Mitigation Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summmy Table S-4 SUl\<IC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ..•. L. hnpact Significance With Impacts Impact Significance Without Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation CC-2 Emit Significant Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The proposed Emissions Reduction Program would minimize the greenhouse gas emission increases associated with the proposed development progranl, although the proposed Emissions Reduction Program would not reduce emissions to 30 percent below business as usual (BAU) emissions. Therefore the SUMC project would have a cumulative considerable contribution to global climate change. S N! = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant with the results being made available to the public or to City of Palo Alto staff. CC-I.5 Implement Construction Period Emission Reduction Measures. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the SUMC Project sponsors shall incorporate the following measures into the construction phasing plan and submit to City Planning for approval. • Use alternative-fueled (e.g., biodiesel, electric) construction vehicles/ equipment of at least 15 percent of the fleet: • Use local building materials of at least 10 percent; and • Recycle at least 50 percent of construction or demolition materials. MITIGATION MEAS1JRE. Mitigation Measures CC-l.l through CC-1.5, and TR-2.3 would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, to further reduce impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions, the City shall consider the feasibility of Mitigation Measure PH -3.1. However, even with the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, the anticipated emissions would remain above both the City of Palo Alto's Climate Protection Plan and the CARB' s reduction emission goals of 30 percent below BAU emissions. Because these reduction levels cannot be achieved, the SUMC Project would emit significant amounts of greenhouse gases and would have a cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate cbange. S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable StaJ1ford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -SummalY SU S-53 ,. l, -"'~_~~"'~~"_~". __ ''"''" __ ~'~''''~~_ ~. ~~,~_~ .. ~ .. ___ ~.~_ Impacts NI = No Impact Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure CR-1.5 requires implementation of the Stanford Hoover Pavilion Protection Documents (Documents) prepared by ARG and dated September 21, 2009 (see Appendix J). These Documents provide specifications for the treatment and protection of the Hoover Pavilion during SUMC Project construction activities that could damage the historic fabric of the building including the installation of protective covering of certain exterior surfaces and the removal, cataloging, and storage of selective historic elements. The Documents are based on National Park Service and National Fire Protection Agency protection guidelines and include details on materials and methods of installation for the protective coverings to prevent damage from nearby demolition. Proper installation, as required in the Documents would prevent the protective covering itself from damage the building. The removal of historic elements would ensure their. protection of some of the more fragile elements from construction activities and property cataloging and storage of such elements would ensure their proper care and reinstallation. The Documents include such details as specifying under what weather conditions it is acceptable to perform the various tasks that could be negatively impacted by different weather conditions. Any variations on the specifications of the Documents would not be allowed without prior consultation with ARG, or a qualified preservation architect. Refer to Appendix J, Stanford Hoover Pavilion Protection Documents, for a complete list of specifications for the Hoover Pavilion. CR-[l Manually Demolish Structures at the Hoover Pavilion Site. Where feasible, the project sponsors shall establish a perinleter of construction fencing around the Hoover Pavilion at a minimum of 25 feet to establish a protective buffer around the building. The demolition of these sheds and storage facilities shall be accomplished manually without the use of vibration causing equipment. Additional protective fencing at a height sufficient to prevent any debris from hitting the building shall S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable StaJ;ford University Medical Center Facilities Renel""ai and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Impact Significance With Mitigation S-57 Impacts NI = No Impact S-58 Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures also be installed between the Hoover Pavilion and demolition activities occurring within the 25 foot buffer. CR-l.2 Prepare RABS Documentation for the Stone Building Complex. The SUMC Project sponsors shall prepare HABS-like documentation using the National Park Services' Historic American Building Surveys Level III guidelines for each of the buildings in the Stone Building complex prior to demolition of each building that comprises this historic resource (East, West, Core, Boswell, Edwards, Lane, Alway, and Grant). HABS-like recordation shall not be required until each of the individual buildings is vacated and prepared for demolition. The documentation shall include written and photographic documentation of each of the historic structures within the Stone Building complex. The documentation shall be prepared by a qualified professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for Architectural History or History. The documentation shaH be prepared based on the National Park Services' HABS standards and include, at a minimum, the following: • Site-specific history and appropriate contextual information regarding the Stone Building complex. This history shall focus on the reasons for the buildings' significance: heart transplantation program and the role of B.D. Stone in the design of the complex. • Accurate mapping of all buildings that are included in the Stone Building complex, scaled to indicate size and proportion of the buildings to surrounding buildings; if existing plans accurately reflect these relationships these may S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With Mitigation Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary __ I. ___ .. __ ~._,,~~~~ .. ,,~"" ______ .. _~.~~_~~~_~._~~~.~ Impacts NI = No Impact Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures be reformatted for submittal per HABS guidelines for CAD submittals_ • Architectural descriptions of the major exterior features and public rooms within the Stone Building complex as well as descriptions of typical patient, office, laboratory, and operating rooms. • Photographic documentation of the interior and exterior of the Stone Building complex and Thomas Church-designed landscape features" Either HABS standard large format or digital photography may be used. If digital photography is used, the ink and paper combinations for printing photographs must be in compliance with National Register- National Historic Landmark photo expansion policy and have a permanency rating of approximately 115 years. Digital photographs will be taken as uncompressed . TIF file format. The size of each image shall be 1600x1200 pixels at 300 ppi (pixels per inch) or larger, color format, and printed in black and white. The file name for each electronic image shall correspond with the Index to Photographs and photograph label. CR-I.3 Distribute Written and Photographic Docwnentation to Agencies. The written and photographic documentation of historic resources shall be disseminated on archival-quality paper to Stanford University, the Northwest Information Center, and other local repositories identified by the City of Palo Alto. CR-I.4 Prepare Permanent Interpretive DisplayslSignagelPlaques. The SUMC Project sponsors shall install interpretive displays within the SUMC Sites that provide information to visitors and residents regarding the history of the Stone Building complex. These S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Stal~ford University Medical Center Facilities Renev."al and Replacement Draft EIR -SummalY hnpact Significance With lVlitigation S-59 ...... -, ! .',,, ~.~-~ ......... ,.~'--~~~. ~"""""""''''''''''''-''-~-.. --'--'''''''''''--'-'-'-''''''~~.~.~-~~~.-~~-- Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts CR-2. Impacts on Prehistoric or Archaeological Resources. The SUMC Project could potentially encounter archaeological resources and result in a significant impact. Impact Significance Without Mitigation S NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-60 Impact Significance With Mitigation Measures Mitigation displays shall be installed in highly visible public areas such as the property's open space or in public areas on the interiors of buildings. The displays shall include historical data and photographs as well as physical remnants of architectural elements. Interpretive displays and the signage/plaques installed on the property shall be sufficiently durable to Withstand typical Palo Alto weather conditions for at least five years. Displays and signage/plaques shall be lighted, installed at pedestrian- friendly locations, and be of adequate size to attract the interested pedestrian. Maintenance of displays and signage/plaques shall be included in the maintenance program on the property. Location and materials for the interpretative displays shall be subject to review by the Palo Alto Architectural Review Board and approval by the Planning Director. CR-l.5 Implement Protection Documents for the Hoover Pavilion. The SUMC Project sponsors shall ensure the implementation of the Stanford Hoover Pavilion Protection Documents (Documents) prepared by ARG and dated September 21, 2009. The SUMC Project sponsors shall comply with the specifications for the treatment and protection of the Hoover Pavilion during SUMC Project construction activities that could damage the historic fabric of the building as provided in the Documents. MITIGATION MEASURE. Mitigation Measure CR-2.1 provides discovery and evaluation procedures for any previously unknown archaeological resources on the SUMC Sites and requires that a professional archaeologist employ preservation in place, data recovery, or other methods that meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Archaeological Documentation to reduce impacts on unique archaeological resources. Therefore, implementation of the following mitigation measure would ensure the impact remains less than significant. (LTS) S=Significant SU = Significant Ullavoidable Stanford Ulliversity Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary LTS -Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts CR-4. Impacts on Paleontological Resources. The SUMC Project could have a significant impact on unique paleontological resources or unique geologic resources. Impact Significance Without Mitigation S NJ = Nolm;pact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-62 bnpact Significance With Mitigation Measures Mitigation within 100 feet of the human remains should be halted and the Stanford University Archaeologist. City of Palo Alto, and the County coroner notified immediately. according to Section 5097.98 of the State Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of California's Health and Safety. Code. If the remains are determined by the County coroner to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be notified within 24 hours, and the guidelines of the NAHC adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains. The SUMC Project sponsors shall retain a professional archaeologist with Native American burial experience to conduct a field investigation of the specific site and consult with the Most Likely Descendant, if any; identified by the NAHC. As necessary, the archaeologist may provide professional assistance to the City of Palo Alto, including the excavation and removal of the human remains. If the human remains cannot be avoided, and the Most Likely Descendant requests that the human remains be removed from its location, the SUMC Project sponsors shall implement removal of the human remains by a professional archaeologist. The City of Palo Alto shall verify that the mitigation is complete before the resumption of ground-disturbing activities within 100 feet of where the remains were discovered. MITIGATION MEASURE. Mitigation Measure CR-4.1 provides protocol for LTS. encountering paleontological resources and would reduce the potential impacts resulting from disruption to unique paleontological resources to a less-than-significant level. CR-4.1 Conduct Protocol and Procedures for Encountering Paleontological Resources. Should paleontological resources be identified during SUMC Project ground-disturbing activities, the SUMC Project sponsors shall notify the City and the Stanford S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft Em -SummalY Impacts NI = No Impact Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts aild Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures University Archaeologist and cease operations in the vicinity of the potential. resource until a qualified professional paleontologist can complete the following actions when appropriate: . • Identify and evaluate paleontological resources by intense field survey where impacts are considered high; • Assess effects on identified resources; and • Consult with the City of Palo Alto and the Stanford University Archaeologist. Before operations in the vicinity of the potential resource resume, the SUMC Project sponsors shall comply with the paleontologist's recommendations to address any significant adverse effects where determined by the City of Palo Alto to be feasible. In considering any suggested mitigation proposed by the consulting paleontologist, the SUMC Project sponsors shall consult with the Stanford University Archaeologist and the City to determine whether avoidance is necessary and feasible in light of factors such as the nature of the find, project design, cost policies and land use assumptions, and other considerations. If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g. data recovery) shall be instituted to avoid a significant impact. Work may proceed in other parts of the SUMC Sites while mitigation for paleontological resources is completed. S=Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Impact Significance With Mitigation S-63 Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts CR-S. Cumulative Impacts on Historic Resources. The SUMC Project, in combination with other past, current, and probable future development in the City, would cause a substantial change in the significance of the City'S historic resources and thus have a significant cumulative impact. The SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative impact would be cumulatively considerable. CR-6. Cumulative Impacts on Prehistoric andlor Archaeological Resources and Human Remains. The SUMC Project, in combination with other reasonably foreseeable probable future development, could cause a substantial change in the significance of prehistoric and/or archaeological resources or human remains and thus contribute to a significant cumulative impact. The SUMC Project is conservatively assumed to have a considerable contribution. CR-7. Cumulative Impacts on Paleontological Resources. The SUMC Project, in combination with other reasonably foreseeable probable future development where the Pleistocene-age creek bed may occur, could have a significant cumulative impact. Such an impact would occur if the buried Pleistocene-age creek bed is exposed in lengths greater [han approximately 100 feet (or a sufficient length to support detailed hydrological study) and if such deposits contain substantially intact skeletons of extinct species. These conditions would represent a major find for regional paleontology. In the case that significant paleontological finds-such as stretches of buried Pleistocene-age creek bed greater than 100 feet in length and containing intact skeletons of extinct species-are made on the SUMC Site, then the Impact Significance Without Mitigation S S S NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-64 Impact Significance With Mitigation Measures Mitigation MITIGATION MEASURES. Due to the d.emolition of the Stone Building SU complex, the SUMC Project's contribution would remain cumulatively considerable as this impact cannot be avoided. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1.2 through CR-1.4 would reduce the SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative impact, but not to a less than cumulatively considerable level. MITIGATION MEASURES. Compliance with Mitigation Measures CR-2.1 LTS and CR-3.1 would reduce the SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative impact to a less than cumulatively considerable level. MITIGATION MEASURE. Compliance with Mitigation Measure CR-4.1 LTS would reduce the SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative impact to a less than cumulatively considerable level. S=Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal alld Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Impacts LVI = No Impact S-66 __ I Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significam Mitigation Measures BR-l.3 Develop and Employ Bat Nest Box Plan. If special-status bats are found in structures to be removed, the SUMC Project sponsors shall develop a bat nest box plan for the SUMC Sites employing state-of-the-art bat nest box technology. The design and placement of nest boxes shall be· reviewed by a qualified bat . biologist. BR-l.4 Avoid Tree Removal During Nesting Season. Tree removal or pruning shall be avoided from February 1 through August 31, the nesting period for Cooper's hawk, to the extent feasible. If no tree removal or pruning is proposed during the nesting period, no surveys are required. BR-l.5 Protect Cooper's Hawk in the Event of Nest DiscovelY. If tree removal or pruning is unavoidable during the nesting season, the SUMC Project sponsors shall hire a qualified biologist to conduct a survey for nesting Cooper's hawk within five days prior to the proposed start of construction. If active Cooper's hawk nests are not present. project activities can take place as scheduled. The qualified' biologist shall visit the site daily to search for nests until all nesting substrates are removed. This will avoid impacts to Cooper's hawk that may have moved into the site and initiated nest-building after the start of tree removal activities. Additionally, if more than 5 days elapses between the initial nest search and the tree removal, it is possible for new birds to move into the construction area and begin building a nest. If there is such a delay, another nest survey shall be conducted. If any active Cooper's hawk nests are detected, the SUMC Project sponsors shall delay removal of the applicable tree or shrub while the nest is occupied with eggs or young who have not fledged. A qualified biologist shall monitor any occupied nest to determine when the Cooper's hawk nest is no longer used. S = Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With lVlitigation Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary j ..... J ..... "_.~."."._~. ~. ~.~~"." ...... ~.,~.~~~~.~~~~ Table 8-4 SUMe Project Suminary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts BR-2. Loss of Riparian or Otber Sensitive Habitats, . Including Wetlands as Defined by Section 404 of tbe Clean Water Act. Construction of the SUMC Project would have a less-tban-significant impact on riparian or other sensitive habitat resources, including wetlands. BR-3. Interference with the Movement of Any Native Resident or Migratory Fish or Wildlife Species or with Established Native Resident or Migratory Wildlife Corridors, or Use of Native Wildlife Nursery Sites. The SUMC Project would have no impact on the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or use of native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, but could impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites and thus result in a significant impact. / Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS S NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures None required. MmGATION MEASURES. Mitigation Measures BR-3.1 and BR-3.2, below, would reduce the SUMC Project's impact on nesting migratory birds to a less-than-significant level. BR-3.1 Avoid Tree Removal During Nesting Season. Tree or shrub removal or pruning shall be avoided from February 1 through August 31, the bird-nesting period, to the extent feasible. If no tree or shrub removal or pruning is proposed during the nesting period, no surveys are required. BR-3.2 Protect Birds in the Event of Nest Discovery. If tree and shrub removal or pruning is unavoidable during the nesting season, the SUMC Project sponsors shall hire a qualified biologist to conduct a survey for nesting raptors and other birds witbin five days prior to tbe proposed start of construction. If active nests are not present, SUMC Project activities can take place as scheduled. The qualified biologist shall visit the site daily to search for nests until all nesting substrates are removed. These procedures would avoid impacts to any birds that may have moved into the sites and initiated nest-building after the start of tree and shrub removal activities. Additionally, if more than five days elapses between the initial nest search and the vegetation removal, it is possible for new birds to move into the construction area and begin building a nest. If there is such a delay, another nest survey shall be conducted. If any active nests are detected, the SUMC Project sponsors shall delay removal of the applicable S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Impact Significance With Mitigation N/A LTS S-67 .1. . .. "_"_~~_"'~ __ """' ____ "_~~._~~,_~, __ ~, ~_ Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts BR-4. Result in a Substantial Adverse Effect on any Protected Tree as Defined by the City of Palo Alto's Tree Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 8.10). The SUMC Project could have a significant impact on Protected Trees. Impact Significance Without Mitigation S NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-68 Mitigation Measures tree or shrub while the nest is occupied with eggs or young who have not fledged. A qualified biologist shall monitor any occupied nest to determine when the nest is no longer used. MmGATION MEASURES. Mitigation Measures BR-4.1 through BR-4.5, below, to be implemented by the SUMC Project sponsors, would reduce the SUMC Project's impact on Protected Trees. In addition, Mitigation Measure BR-4.6 would require minor SUMC Project site plan adjustments to avoid removal of some biologically and aesthetically significant Protected Trees. However. the new Hospital District under the SUMC Project would allow the removal of up to 48 Protected Trees that are protected under the Municipal Code. In addition, minor modifications to the SUMC Project site plans would not be able to avoid the nine biologically and aesthetically significant Protected Trees in the Kaplan Lawn area. Therefore, the SUMC Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to Protected Trees. BR-4.1 Prepare a Tree Preservation Reponjor all Trees to be Retained. An updated tree survey and tree preservation report (TPR) prepared by a certified arbolist shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the City Urban Forester. For reference clarity, the tree survey shall include (list and field tag) all existing trees within the SUMC Sites, including adjacent trees overhanging the SUMC Sites. The approved TPR shall be implemented in full, including mandatory inspections and monthly reporting to City Urban Forester. The TPR shall be based on latest SUMC plans and amended as needed to address activity or within the dripline area of any existing tree to be preserved, including incidental work (utilities trenching, street work, lighting, irrigation, etc.) that may affect the health of a preserved tree. The SUMC Project shall be modified to address recommendations identified to reduce impacts to existing ordinance-regulated trees. The S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With Mitigation SU StO/liord University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary 25 . Impacts Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ·. L Impact Significance With Impact Significance Without Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation TPR shall be consistent with the criteria set forth in the Tree Preservation Ordinance, Palo Alto Municipal Code Section .8.10.030, and the City Tree Technical Manual, Section 3.00, 4.00 and 6.30.25 To avoid improvements that may be detrimental to the health of regulated trees, the TPR shall review the SUMC Project sponsors' landscape plan to ensure the new landscape is consistent with Tree Technical Manual, Section 5.45 ~ and Appendix L, Landscaping under Native Oaks. BR-4.2 Prepare a Solar Access Study (SAS) of Short and Long Tenn Effects on Protected Oaks. The SUMC Project sponsors shall prepare a SAS of Short and Long Term Effects on Protected Oaks. The SAS shall be prepared by a qualified expert team (horticulturalist, architect designer, consulting arborist) capable of determining effects, if any, to foliage, health, disease susceptibility and also prognosis for longevity. The SAS shall provide alternative massing scenarios to provide sufficient solar access and reduce shading detriment at different thresholds of tree health/decline, as provided for in the SAS. The SAS adequacy shall be subject to peer review as determined necessary by the City. The SAS design alternatives shall be the subject of specific discussioil at all levels of ARB, Planning Commission, CitY, Council, and public review in conjunction with the SUMC Project sponsors, the City Urban Forester, and Director of the Planning and Community Environment Department, until a final design is approved. Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 8.10.030 and the City. Tree Technical Manual, Section 3.00, 4.00 and 6.30 is available at: http://www . cityofpaloalto. org/ environment/urban_canopy. asp. NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary S-69 Impacts NI = No Impact S-70 Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures BR-4.3 Prepare a Tree Relocation Feasibility Plan for Any Protected Tree Proposed for Relocation and Retention. Because of inherent mortality associated with the process of moving mature trees, a Tree Relocation and Maintenance Plan (TRMP) shall be prepared subject to Urban Forester's approval. The SUMC Project sponsors shall submit a TRMP to determine the feasibility of moving the Protected Trees to an appropriate location on site. Feasibility shall consider current site and tree conditions, a tree's ability to tolerate moving, relocation measures, optimum needs for the new location, aftercare, irrigation, and other long-term needs. If the relocated trees do not survive after a period of five years, the tree canopy shall be replaced with a tree of equivalent size or security deposit value. The TRMP shall be inclusive of the following mmlmUill information: appropriate irrigation, monitoring inspections, post relocation tree maintenance, and for an annual arborist report of the condition of the relocated trees. If a tree is disfigured, leaning with supports needed, in decline with a dead top or dieback of more than 25 percent, the tree shall be considered a total loss and replaced in kind and size. The fmal annual arborist report shall serve as the basis for return of the Tree Security Deposit (see Mitigation Measure BR-4.4, below, for a discussion of the Tree Security Deposit). BR-4.4 Provide a Tree Preservation Bond/Security Guarantee. The natural tree resources on the SUMC Site include significant Protected Trees and those that provide neighborhood screening, including two trees proposed for relocation. Prior to building permit submittal, the Tree Security Deposit for the total value of the relocated trees, as referenced in the Tree Technical Manual, Section 3.26, Security Deposits, shall be posted to the City S=Significan/ SU= Significant Unavoidable hnpact Significance With Mitigation Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Impacts NI = No Impact ._1 Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Impact Significance With Mitigation Measures lVlitigation , Revenue Collections in a form acceptable by the City Attorney. As a security measure, the SUMC Project sponsors shall be subject to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Palo Alto and the SUMC Project sponsors describing a tree retention amount, list of trees. criteria and timeline for return of security, and conditions as cited in the Record of Land Use Action for the SUMC Project. The SUMC Project sponsors and SUMC Project arborist, to be retained by the SUMC Project sponsors, shall coordinate with the City Urban Forester to determine the amount of bonding required to guarantee the protection and/or replacement of the regulated trees on the site during construction and within five years after occupancy. The SUMC Project sponsors shall bond for 150 percent of the value for the relocated trees, and 50 percent of the value of the remaining trees to be protected during construction (as identified in the revised and fmal approved Tree Protection Report). The SUMC Project sponsors 'shall provide an appraisal of the trees with the proposed level of bonding in a tree value table to be reviewed and accepted by the Director of Planning and Community Environment with the description of each tree by number. value, and total combined value of all the trees to be retained. A return of the guarantee shall be subject to an annual followed by a final tree assessment report on all the relocated and retained trees from the SUMC Project arborist, as approved by the City Urban Forester. five years following fmal inspection for occupancy, to the satisfaction of the Director of the Planning and Community Environment Department. BR-4.5 Provide Optimum Tree Replacement for Loss of Publicly-Owned Trees Regulated Tree Category. There are many publicly owned trees growing in the right-of-way along various frontages (Welch Road, Pasteur Drive, Quarry Road, Sand Hill Road, etc.). S=Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities ReneM-'al and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary S-71 26 Impacts Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation hnpact Significance With Mitigation Measures Mitigation These trees provide an important visual and aesthetic value to the streetscape and represent a significant investment from years of public resources to maintain them. As mitigation to offset the net benefits loss from removal of mature trees, and to minimize the future years to achieve parity with visual and infrastructure service benefits (C02 reduction, extended asphalt life, water runoff management, etc.) currently provided by the trees, the new public trees on all roadway frontages shall be provided with best practices design and materials, including, but not limited to, the following elements: • Consistency with the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department Street Tree Management Plan, in consultation with Canopy, InC.26 • Provide adequate room for natural tree canopy growth and adequate root growing volume. For large trees, a target goal of 1,200 cubic feet of soil shall be used. • For pedestrian and roadway areas that are to include tree planting or adjacent to existing trees to be retained, utilize City-approved best management practices for sustainability products, such as permeable ADA sidewalk surfaces, Silva Cell base support planters, engineered soil mix base, and other advantage methods. Canopy, Inc. is a non-profit organization that advises the City with regards to public trees. The City typically interfaces between applicants and rhe '~Canopy, Inc., but it is recommended that the SUMC Project sponsors consult with Canopy, Inc. as well. NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Signijicam S=Signijicam SU= Signijicam UnClVoidable S-72 StQJiford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacemem Draft EIR-SummaJY "".1 Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts BR-S. Conflict with any Applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan. The SUMC Project would have no impact on any applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan. BR-6. Cumulative Impacts on Special-Status Wildlife Resources. The SUMC Project, in combination with other foreseeable development, would have a less-than-significant impact on Special-Status Plant Resources. BR-7. Cumulative Loss of Riparian or Other Sensitive Habitats, Including Wetlands as Defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Cumulative impacts on riparian or other sensitive habitats could be significant. However, the SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative impact would be less than cumulatively considerable. BR-S. Cumulative Interference with the Movement of Any Native Resident or Migratory Fish or Wildlife Species or With Established Native Resident or Migratory Wildlife Corridors, or Use of Native Wildlife Nursery Sites. Cumulative interference with movement of resident or migratory species or with established migratory corridors could be significant. However, the SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative impact would be less than cumulatively considerable. Impact Significance Without Mitigation NI LTS LTS LTS NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures BR-4.6 Implement Minor Site Modifications to Preserve Biologically and Aesthetically Significant Protected Trees. The SUMC Project sponsors shall design and implement modifications to building design, hardscape, and landscape to incorporate the below and above ground area needed to preserve as many biologically and aesthetically significant Protected Trees as possible. None required. None required. None required. None required. S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -SummalY hnpact Significance With Mitigation N/A N/A N/A N/A S-73 ... I Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts HW-4. Stormwater Runoff and Erosion. The SUMC Project would have a less-than-significant impact on stonnwater runoff and erosion. HW-5. Flooding and Stormwater Conveyance Capacity. The SUMC Project would have a less-than-significant impact on flooding and storm water conveyance capacity. HW-6. Streanlbank Instability. The SUMC Project would have a less-than-significant impact on streambaJ:l1( instability. Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS LTS LTS NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Signijicam S-76 Mitigation Measures Substances Contingency Plan (the "National Contingency Plan" [NCP)). The SUMC Project sponsors, or their representative, shall be responsible for submitting the workplan for the DTSC's review and approval prior to implementing field activities. The workplan must include all information necessary for implementing field work. The workplan shall include a Site Safety Plan (SSP) and a Sampling Work Plan (SWP). The SSP must be submitted to the DTSC in conjunction with the submittal of the SWP. The objective of the SSP is to ensure protection of the investigative team as well as the general public during sampling activities. If risk to human or ecological health is identified, the SUMC Project sponsors shall prepare and implement a Removal Action Workplan (SB 1706 Stats. 1994, Chapter 441) (non-emergency removal action or remedial action at 'a hazardous substance release site which is projected to cost less than $1,000,000) that is consistent with the NCP. None required. None required. None required. S=Signijicant SU= Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With Mitigation N/A N/A N/A Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts HW-7. Degradation of Surface Water QUality. TIle SUMC Project would have a less-than-significant impact on degradation of surface water quality. HW-S. Dam Failure Inundation. TIle SUMC Project would have a less-than-sigl1ificant impact regarding dam failure inundation. HW-9. Violation of Any Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs). The SUMC Project would have a less-than-significant impact regarding water quality standards or WDRs. HW -10. Cumulative Groundwater Recharge and Local Water Table. The SUMC Project, in combination with reasonably foreseeable probable future development, would have a less- than-significant cumulative considerable impact on groundwater recbarge and the local groundwater table. HW-ll. Cumulative Groundwater Quality Impacts. The SUMC Project, in combination with reasonably foreseeable probable future development, would have a less-tban- significant cumulative impact on groUlidwater qUality. HW-12.Cumulative Stonnwater Runoff and Erosion. The SUMC Project, in combination with reasonably foreseeable probable future development, would have a less-than- significant cumulative impact on stormwater runoff and erosion. Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS LTS LTS LTS LTS LTS NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant None required. None required. None required. None required. None required. None required. S=Significant Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Mitigation Measures SU= Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With Mitigation N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A S-77 Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts HM-3. Exposure to Contaminated Soil and/or Groundwater During Construction. The SUMC Project could expose construction personnel and public to existing contaminated groundwater and/or soil. Impact Significance Without Mitigation S NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-80 Mitigation Measures MITIGATION MEASURES. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HM-3.1 through HM-3.4, below, the significant impact on construction personnel and the public due to exposure to contaminated soil and/or groundwater at the SUMC Sites would be reduced to less-than-significant levels. In addition, Mitigation Measure HW-3.1 in Section 3.11, Hydrology, would require the SUMC Project sponsors to develop a work plan for any unknown contaminated site, wruch would further reduce the imp,!cts to less than significant. Mitigation Measure HM-3.4 would require specification of measures to prevent hazards from any remediation itself. As such, these would be less-than-significant impacts from any remediation. HM-3.1 Perfoml a Phase II ESAfor the 701 Welch Site. A Phase n ESA shall be performed at 701 Welsh Site Building B. The Phase IT ESA shall include sampling and analysis of soil, groundwater, wastewater, and residues on surfaces such as laboratories countertops, fume hoods, sinks, sumps, floors, and drain lines. The County DEH and P AFD shall be notified by the Project sponsors if contamination is discovered. If contamination is discovered, the SUMC Project sponsors shall prepare a site remediation assessment that (a) specifies measures to protect workers and the public from exposure to potential site hazards and (b) certifies that the proposed remediation measures would . clean up contaminants, dispose of the wastes, and protect public health in accordance with federal, State, and local requirements. Site excavation activities shall not proceed until the site remediation has been approved by the County DEH and implemented by the SUMC Project sponsors. Additionally, the Site Remediation Assessment shall be subject to review and approval by the San Francisco Bay RWQCB. All appropriate agencies shall be notified. S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With Mitigation LTS Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Impacts NI = No Impact L"_ ..... Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures HM-3.2 Excavate Contaminated Soil from the 703 Welch Site. For the 4- to 9-square-foot area near every discharge point from the building, soil samples shall be performed and contaminated soil excavated, removed, and transported to an approved disposal facility. in compliance with OSHA requirements. The County DEH and the PAFD shall be notified by the SUMC Project sponsors if contamination is encountered during construction. HM-3.3 Conduct a Soil Vapor Program at the Hoover Pavilion Site. A qualified consultant, under the SUMC Project sponsors' direction, shall undertake the following activities: • Remove all buried underground storage tanks from the property after sheds and storage buildings on the Hoover Pavilion Site have been demolished; • To the extent necessary, additional soil sampling shall be collected to determine health risks and to develop disposal criteria; • If warranted based on soil sampling, a human health risk assessment shall be prepared and implemented to detennine potential for impacts on construction workers as well as to develop measures to ensure it is safe ,to redevelop the Hoover Pavilion Site within engineering controls (e.g., SVE or vapor barriers); and • To the extent required based upon the results of soil sampling and the results of a health risk assessment (if applicable), a Site Health and Safety Plan to ensure worker safety in compliance with OSHA requirements shall be developed by the Project sponsors, and in places prior to commencing work on any contaminated site. S=Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Stal\ford University Medical Center Facilities Renel",'al and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary Impact Significance With Mitigation S-81 Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts HM-4. Hazardous Waste Generation and Disposal Resulting in Increased Exposure Risk. The SUMC Project would not substantially increase exposure risk related to hazardous waste generation. HM-5. Emit Hazardous Emissions or Handle Hazardous Materials Within One-Quarter Mile of a School. The SUMC Project would not emit or handle hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of school. HM-6. Construct a School OJ;l a Property that is Subject to Hazards from Hazardous Materials Contamination, Emissions or Accidental Release. The SUMC Project would not construct a school that is subject to hazards from hazardous materials contamination, emissions or accidental release. Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS LTS N1 NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-82 Mitigation Measures The SUMC Project sponsors shall cooperate with the County DEH to proceed with closure of the Hoover Pavilion Site. HM-3.4 Develop a Site Management Plan for the Hoover Pavilion Site. The SUMC Project sponsors shall prepare a site remediation assessment that (a) specifies measures to protect workers and the public from exposure to potential site hazards, including hazards from . remediation itself, and (b) certifies that the proposed remediation measures would clean up contaminants, dispose of the wastes, and protect public health in accordance with federal, State. and local requirements. Site excavation activities shall not proceed until the site remediation has been approved by the County DEH and implemented by the SUMC Project sponsors. Additionally, the Site Remediation Assessment shall be subject to review and approval by the San Francisco Bay RWQCB. All appropriate agencies shall be notified. None required. None required. None required. S=Significant . SU = Significant Unavoidable hnpact Significance With Mitigation N/A N/A N/A Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EIR -SummalY Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts HM-7. Occur on a Site Included on the Cortese List, a List of Hazardous Materials Sites. The SUMC Project would result in construction of facilities on a site included on the Cortese List. HM-S. Wildland Fire Risk. The SUMC Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. HM-9. Occur on a Site Located Within an Airport Land Use Plan or Within Two Miles of a Public Airport, and Result in a Safety Hazard. The SUMC Project would not be located within an Airport Land Use Plan or within 2 miles of a Public Airport. HM~lO. Impairment of Emergency Plans. The SUMC Project could impair implementation or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. Impact Significance Without Mitigation S NI Nl S NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant Mitigation Measures MmGATION MEASURES. Implementation of Mitigation Measures HM-3.3 and HM-3.4, which involve the implementation of a soil vapor program and development of a site management plan, would reduce the potential for exposure to hazardous materials. at the Hoover Pavilion Site to less-than- significant levels. Additionally, compliance with current federal, State and local regulations would help prevent any further exposure to hazardous materials. None required. None required. MITIGATION MEASURES. Mitigation Measure HM-lO.l requires advance coordination with the City of Palo Alto on construction routes or roadway closures. This measure, together with Mitigation Measures TR-l.l, TR-l.4 through TR-1.6, and TR-1.S, which all involve construction-period traffic controls, would reduce the significant construction-period impacts to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure TR-9.1, would involve the installation of emergency vehicle traffic signal priority (OptiCom) at all intersections significantly impacted by the SUMC Project. Mitigation Measure TR-9.1 would reduce impacts on emergency access during operation. Implementation of these measures would reduce the SUMC Project's impact to emergency evacuation and response plans to a less-than- significant level. S = Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renel1!al and Replacement Draft EIR -Summary hnpact Significance With Mitigation LTS N/A N/A LTS S-83 TabJe S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts PH-3. Impacts on Jobs to Employed Residents Ratio. The SUMC Project would have an adverse impact on the City's jobs to employed residents ratio because it would exceed the existing Comprehensive Plan and zoning allowances for the SUMC Sites and thus require amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and rezoning, and it would increase the City's jobs to employed residents ratio by more than 0.01. However, this impact is not, itself, an environmental impact. This impact will result in secondary environmental inlpacts relating to additional commute traffic, including the significant and unavoidable impacts on air quality and climate change, as identified in Sections 3.5 and 3.6. The present analysis of impacts to the "jobs to employed residents" ratio is presented for informational purposes, and for the purpose of identifying additional mitigation measures for those identified impacts. Impact Significance Without Mitigation N/A NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-86 Mitigation Measures MmGATION MEASURE. Implementation of Mitigation Measure PH-3.1 would reduce the impact on the City's jobs to employed residents ratio; however, such implementation would not fully avoid the SUMC Project's impact on the jobs to employed residents ratio because (1) the measures would not guarantee provision of housing units to cover the demand from the 1,052 households (or 8 percent thereof), and (2) due. to the various factors that people consider in choosing where to live, it caDIlot be ascertained that the 1,810 workers would choose to live in Palo Alto. Due to the high concentration of jobs in Palo Alto, it is possible that a strong affordable housing program would result in reduced traffic congestion, vehicle miles traveled, and greenhouse gas emissions. Implementation of Mitigation Measure PH-3.1 is not directly required in order to mitigate a significant environmental impact, but rather should be considered as possible additional mitigation for Impacts A Q-2, A Q-7 , CC-1, and CC-2, as discussed in Section 3.5, Air Quality, and Section 3.6, Climate Change, of this EIR. However, it should be stressed that these measures are presented here only in conceptual terms, and the City may find that some or all of them are not feasible for various legal, practical, or other reasons. As sucb, Mitigation Measure PH-3.1 is presented for informational purposes, and to ensure that all possible options for mitigation of tllese inlpacts are adequately considered. PH-3.1 Reduce the Impacts OIL the Jobs to Employed Residents Ratio. In order to reduce tile SUMC Project's impacts on the City's jobs to employed residents ratio, one or more of the following measures shall be implemented by both the City and the SUMC Project sponsors: • The City shall explore amending the Zoning Code to permit more residential uses, particularly multifamily residential use; S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable hnpact Significance With Mitigation N/A Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal alld Replacement Draft EIR -SummaJY ... _ .. ~~·~~-=.·,-__ ~L...._._"""' .. ~ .• ".~~,,,,,,,,,,,,u._,.~_ .. _."""~_ ... u.L~L _......L...i4 __ '-__ ..... _ ..... ,~~· "'--_.~,-' __ Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures . Impact'> PS-2. Impacts from Police Protection Facilities. The SUMC Project would require an increased lever of police services. However, the increased level of police services would not be large enough to trigger the need for construction of new facilities, which could adversely affect the physical environment. Impacts would be less than significant. PS-3. Impacts Related to School Facilities. An increase in students, which would require school e},.-pansions, would result as a tertiary impact of the SUMC Project, since increased employment from the SUMC Project could induce additional housing units within the City. Both the SUMC Project and induced housing projects would be subject to SB 50 School Impact Fees, which would mitigate impacts to less than significant. PS-4. Impacts Related to Construction of New or Altered Parks and Recreation Facilities. The SUMC Project would not result in the construction or expansion of new parks or fields, which would in turn result in adverse environmental inlpacts. The SUMC Project would be required to pay a City Community Facility Fee, which would be used to fund new parks or an alteration to an existing park, and would mitigate impacts to less than significant. PS-S. Deterioration of Park and Recreation Facilities. Increased recreational demand from SUMC Project employees could accelerate the physical deterioration of the City's parks and fields. The SUMC Project would be required to pay a City Community Facility Fee, which reduce or avoid any such deterioration, and would mitigate impacts to less than significant. Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS LTS LTS LTS NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Significant S-88 Mitigation Measures None required. None required. None required. None required. S=Significant SU= Significant Unavoidable Impact Significance With Mitigation N/A N/A N/A N/A Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft EJR -SUfnJ1'laJY Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts PS-6. Cumulative Fire Protection Demand and Emergency Medical Facilities. Cumulative growth would increase demand for fire protection and emergency response services within the P AFD' s service area; however, no new P AFD facilities would need to be constructed. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant. PS-7. Cumulative Police Protection Demand. Cumulative growth in the City could necessitate construction of new or expanded police facilities in order to meet increased demand for services. Construction of new or expanded police facilities could result in significant environmental impacts. As such, cumulative impacts related to police service could be significant. However the SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative need for new or expanded police facilities would be less than cumulatively considerable. PS-8. Cumulative School Demand. Cumulative development in the City can be expected to necessitate expansion of school facilities, which could have adverse physical environmental impacts. TIris cumulative impact is conservatively assumed to be significant, although the SUMC Project's contribution to this cumulative impact would be less than cumulatively considerable. PS-9 Cumulative Demand for Parks and Recreation Facilities, and for New Parks. Cumulative impacts related to park deterioration would be less than significant due to the City's Community Facility Fee. Cumulative growth in the City would necessitate acquisition or development of new parklands. which could result in significant environmental impacts; however, the contribution of the SUMC Project to Impact ~ Significance Without Mitigation LTS LTS LTS LTS NI = No Impact LTS = Less-than-Signijicant None required. None required. None required. None required. S=Signijicant Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renev.'al and Replacement Draft ElR -Summary Mitigation Measures SU= Signijicant Unavoidable hnpact Significance~ With Mitigation N/A N/A N/A N/A S-89 Table S-4 SUMC Project Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts replacement or maintenance of storm drain facilities. However, general replacement and maintenance of storm drain facilities is included in City plans and would comply with applicable environmental regulations. Therefore, cumulative development would have a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to the capacity or deterioration of storm drain facilities. UT-9. Cumulative Solid Waste Impacts. Cumulative development would generate solid waste within the permitted capacity of the SMART Station and Kirby Canyon Landfill. Cumulative development would not result in substantial deterioration of solid waste facilities. As such, cumulative impacts related to solid waste generation would be less than significant. UT-lO. Cumulative Energy Demand. Cumulative development in the City of Palo Alto would consume additional energy and, therefore, would increase the demand for energy. The City' s electrical and natural gas facilities are projected to have adequate capacity to serve the City's increased demand for energy. The increased level of energy demand may trigger the need for the replacement or maintenance of energy facilities. However, general replacement and maintenance of energy facilities is expected and would comply with applicable environmental regulations. Therefore, cumulative development would not have a significant cumulative impact related to energy demand and energy facilities. Impact Significance Without Mitigation LTS LTS NI = No Impact LTS = l_ess-than-Signijicant S-92 Mitigation Measures None required. None required. S=Signijicant SU~ Signijicant Unavoidable ~--- hnpact Significance With :Mitigation N/A N/A Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft ElR -SummalY , J TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER DATE: JUNE 7,2010 CMR: 267:10 REPORT TYPE: ACTION SUBJECT: Approval of Recommendation from the High Speed Rail Committee to Endorse Peninsula Cities Consortium Revised Core Message and to Approve City Manager's Proposed High Speed Rail Staffing and Appropriating $90,000 from the Council's 2010 Contingency . RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council: 1. Approve recommendation from High Speed Rail Committee to endorse Peninsula Cities Consortium Revised Core message (5/28/1 0) and; ., 2. Approve City Manager's proposed high speed rail staffing and appropriating $90,000 from the Council's contingency to fund the proposed staff costs. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION Peninsula Cities Consortium Core Message The Peninsula Cities Consortium (PCC) has drafted a document titled "Core Message" that is similar to Palo Alto's Guiding Principles. It is intended to summarize the PCC core beliefs and concerns and to provide policy direction to the PCC members. On May 28, the PCC reviewed the draft and suggested a few changes to the document. A revised version incorporating the Consortium's changes is provided as Attachment A. The PCC has requested that member cities review and comment on the draft prior to its next regular meeting on June 11. The CouncilHSR Committee is scheduled to discuss the revised draft on June 3. The Committee will provide a verbal report and staff will provide an at-places edited version of the document with the Committee's recommended edits to the Council on June 7. CMR: 267:10 Page 1 of3 Proposed High Speed Rail Staffing Plan Staff has evaluated the project workload impacts of High Speed Rail and has identified the need to develop a formalized staffing plan. With the release of the alternatives analysis and the pending release of the draft Environmental Impact Report, the project management and staffing needs will increase significantly. In addition, the current part-time project manager, retired Transportation Manager Gayle Likens, will be leaving at the end of June and will be unable to continue her work on the project. As such, staff in the City Manager's Office and Planning & Community Environment have developed a plan to address both the short and longer term staffing needs for the project. At a minimum, the short term staffing plan will require additional funding, which staff recommends appropriating from the City Council contingency fund. The details of the needed funding are outlined below. Project Manager: As an interim step until the recruitment process for the Transportation Manager is complete, the City would hire a project manager to coordinate and manage the City's High Speed Rail efforts. This individual would work up to 40 hours pei week for the next six months and would be paid at an hourly rate of between $65-70 per hour. The individual would be responsible for: coordinating and managing work of technical consultants hired by City to assist with the project (e.g. Engineering/Planning/lobbyist); serving as internal point of contact for departmental liaisons; preparing High Speed Rail Council Committee meeting agendas and managing follow up actions; and serving as a central point of contact for community who would coordinate sharing of important information. The project manager would also supervise the work of the intern position described below. Intern: The City would also hire an intern who could work up to full-time through the summer and may continue this work into the fall. The intern would be paid at an hourly rate of between $15-20 per hour. The intern's key tasks would include: coordinating the City's public information efforts related to the High Speed Rail project, which include posting information to City's website and disseminating information to other sources; supporting project manager on analytical and administrative tasks; and other administrative and analytical support functions as necessary. Deputy City Manager, Steve Emslie, will continue to provide overall leadership for the project out of the City Manager's Office and would oversee the work of these temporary employees. Based on the assumptions made above, the maximum estimated six month budget for this staffing plan is approximately $90,000. Staff is requesting the maximum budget for the plan as it allows flexibility to adjust staffing hours to the current project workload. These positions would add needed staff capacity for a project that is a top priority for the Council and the community. The positions would be temporary and could be eliminated at any time if the staffing needs for the HSR project change for any reason. As funding is not currently available in the City Manager's Office budget to support this plan, staff is requesting an appropriation of $90,000 from the Council contingency to cover these costs. CMR: 267:10 Page 2 of3 / • Assure that the Alternatives Analysis is based on complete and accurate information, allow adequate time (a minimum of 90 days) to fully involve the public in Alternatives Analysis and EIR discussions, and conduct these reviews at separate times • If Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) is employed, allow sufficient time and funds to carry out this very thorough eight-step process, and ensure that the timing of CSS complements the Alternatives Analysis and California Environmental Quality Act processes • Answer questions from community members promptly and accurately, and post these answers on a website where others can read the answers • Treat community members with respect and refrain from labeling them To expedite the process, we believe the Authority should: • Secure funding that will allow the full range of alternatives to be considered without expecting local cities to contribute substantially to the cost • Provide funding to allow cities to compensate staff and experts to study reports requiring feedback • Provide funding to allow cities to' engage community members and accurately capture their concerns and suggestions • Provide realistic renderings of what various alternatives will look like in each community and sound/vibration simulations that accurately reflect their impact