HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-01-28 City Council Agenda PacketCITY OF PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting
Council Chambers
January 28, 2013
7:00 PM
Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the
Council Chambers on the Thursday preceding the meeting.
1 January 28, 2013
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.
* The agenda now includes time estimates for each section or item. These are provided as
part of the Council's effort to manage its time at Council meetings. Listed times are
estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is in
progress. The Council reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change
the order of items and/or to continue items to another meeting. Particular items may be
heard before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur in order to best
manage the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public. To ensure
participation in a particular item, we suggest arriving at the beginning of the meeting and
remaining until the item is called.
Call to Order
7:00-7:10 PM
City Manager Comments
Minutes Approval
December 10, 2012
Oral Communications 7:10-7:25 PM
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 of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes.
Consent Calendar 7:25-8:00 PM
Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by two Council Members.
1. Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council
Adopt a Resolution Approving the City of Palo Alto Utilities Legislative
Policy Guidelines for 2013
2. Adoption of a Resolution Approving Amendment No. 1 to the Amended
and Restated Project Agreement No. 5 Between and Among the
Transmission Agency of Northern California and its Participating
Members
2 January 28, 2013
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.
3. Appeal of Director’s Architectural Review Approval of the Co-location by
AT&T Mobility LLC of Pole-Mounted Wireless Communications Equipment
and Associated Equipment Boxes on 20 Existing Utility Poles Within City
Rights-of-Ways Near the Following Locations: 747 Loma Verde Ave;
3284 Cowper; 3412 Ross/ 3374 Ross Rd; 3132 David Ave; 3415 Greer
Rd; 3539 Louis Rd; 2385 Waverley; 3094 Greer Road on Maddux; 390
El Dorado Ave; 452 Loma Verde; 3524 Waverly on E. Meadow; 3706
Carlson Circle; 3757 Corina Wy; 3915 Louis Rd; 631 E. Meadow; 3901
Middlefield Rd; 412 Ferne; 3945 Nelson Ave.; 1772 Hamilton Ave.; 109
Lois Lane - AT&T DAS Phase 3 Project
4. Appeal of Director’s Architectural Review Approval of the Co-location by
AT&T Mobility LLC of Pole-Mounted Wireless Communications Equipment
and Associated Equipment Boxes on 20 Existing Utility Poles Within City
Rights-of-Ways Near the Following Locations: 4131 El Camino Way, 550
Georgia Ave, 4101 Park Blvd (on W. Meadow), 4255 Ruthelma Ave, 669
Maybell Ave, 110 E. Charleston Dr (on Alma), 493 W. Charleston Dr,
4298 Ponce Dr, 429 Monroe, 231 Parkside Dr., opposite 106 Loma
Verde, 516 Barron Ave, 4257 McKellar, 320 Lambert Ave, 3989 La
Donna, 397 Ventura Ave, 3364 Emerson St, 820 Chimalus Dr, 715
Barron Ave, 915 Matadero Ave. AT&T DAS Phase 4 Project
5. Approval of $114,165 for the Consolidated Maintenance Contract
between the City of Palo Alto and Public Safety Systems, Inc. For
Computer Aided Dispatch, Police Records Management, Fire Records
Management, Mobile Data, and Geovalidation
6. Authorization for the City Manager to Enter Into a One-Year Contract
with the Professional Evaluation Group/The Ochoa & Moore Law Firm,
P.C. (PEG/OM) in a Total Amount Not to Exceed $125,000 for Rail
Legislative Advocacy Services
7. Finance Committee Recommendation that Council Adopt Two
Resolutions: 1) Approving the Policy Pertaining to the Purchase of
Energy from Potential Green Waste-to-Energy Facilities and 2)
Amending Utility Rule and Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations)
and the Six Rate Schedules Covering Medium and Large Commercial
Customers (E-4 and E-7) to Include Standby Service Charges
3 January 28, 2013
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
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: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials,
Unfinished Business and Council Matters.
8. Colleagues Memo from Mayor Scharff and Council Member Klein to Add
a 4th Member to the Council’s Committee on Infrastructure
8:00-8:15 PM
9. Review and Input Regarding Scope of Services for Downtown Cap Study
Request for Proposals and Direction Regarding Public Outreach and
Input (Staff requests this item be continued to February 11, 2013)
8:15-8:20 PM
10. Discussion and Adoption of the Agenda for the City Council’s Annual
Retreat on February 2, 2013 for the Possible Purposes of: (a) Setting
the Council’s Priorities with Action Steps for 2013; (b) Discussion and
Possible Action on Core Principles and Guiding Values; (c) Discussion
and Possible Action on Meeting Management and the Length of Council
Meetings; and (d) Other Potential Topics as Determined by the Council
8:20-8:50 PM
Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements 8:50-9:00 PM
Members of the public may not speak to the item(s)
Adjournment
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA)
Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who
would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance.
PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the Public are entitled to directly address the City Council/Committee concerning any item that is
described in the notice of this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address the
Council/Committee on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Council/Committee, but it is very
helpful.
4 January 28, 2013
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Additional Information
Standing Committee Agenda Packets
City Council Rail Committee
Regional Housing Mandate Committee
City Council Retreat
Action Minutes
Action Minutes
Schedule of Meetings
Schedule of Meetings
Tentative Agenda
Tentative Agenda
Informational Report
City of Palo Alto Investment Activity Report for the Second Quarter, Fiscal
Year 2013
Public Letters to Council Set 1 Set 2 Set 3
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3408)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 1/28/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Utilities 2013 Legislative Policy Guidelines
Title: Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council
Adopt a Resolution Approving the City of Palo Alto Utilities Legislative Policy
Guidelines for 2013
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Utilities
Recommendation
Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the City Council adopt the
attached resolution approving the attached Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013.
Executive Summary
The Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 (Attachment B) have been updated from the
2012 guidelines to respond to recent legislative and regulatory trends to: 1) provide direction to
staff in evaluating and responding to legislative action involving Utilities issues, and 2) clarify
approved policy and advocacy direction when active involvement of Palo Alto elected officials is
required. These revisions were reviewed and unanimously approved by the UAC at its
December 5, 2012 meeting.
The guidelines are grouped in five sections: the first addressing legislative policy guidelines that
are common to all utilities (electric, fiber optics, gas, wastewater collection, and water), and the
following four sections addressing those guidelines that are specific to electric, gas, wastewater
collection, and water. There is no section specifically for fiber optics as legislative initiatives are
largely not applicable to Palo Alto’s dark fiber system. Each section includes a set of goals for
the utility and guidelines for Palo Alto staff and elected officials when taking action to achieve
the goals.
Background
The utility industry is a high-profile and heavily regulated industry that is subject to continuous
legislative action at both the state and federal levels. Such legislation can influence, among
other things, the reliability and security of the supply and distribution infrastructure,
commodity procurement practices, customer service and billing, program design, rate design,
and activities and costs associated with climate protection. Representatives of the City
City of Palo Alto Page 2
(appointed and elected officials and staff) participate in Federal and State legislative forums to
advocate positions on energy- and water-related issues that facilitate the City’s current
strategic objectives, as adopted in the 2011 Utilities Strategic Plan: ensuring a reliable and safe
supply of utility resources, providing customer service excellence, managing costs, and ensuring
environmental sustainability. The City also participates in joint action efforts to advocate for
goals and objectives shared by other publicly-owned utilities.
At the state level, hundreds of bills focused on the utility industry can be introduced each year.
The number of bills introduced, the pace at which bills change and new language is negotiated,
and the often surprising speed at which bills can be placed for a vote during the legislative year
requires staff and elected officials to respond quickly if the City is to have any influence on the
resulting legislation. Often, a response to an amended bill is required in a matter of a day or
two. These timing constraints preclude a return to the UAC and Council for approval each time
a response is required. Therefore, a set of policy guidelines is developed each year that
identifies the goals and priorities for the City to be applied by staff when evaluating and
responding to legislation. While the guidelines are used by staff for evaluating legislation, any
advocacy positions taken in alignment with these guidelines will be subject to the approval of
the Utilities Director or City Manager per the City’s legislative advocacy process. Although it is
impractical to return for approval each time a letter is sent in response to a bill amendment,
the issues under debate are known to the UAC and Council through their participation in
legislative committee meetings, and updates from the City Manager, the Utilities Director and
City staff. Formal letters responding to legislative bills or amendments will be distributed to the
UAC and Council.
Discussion
Apart from some reorganization of the structure and non-substantive changes to update the
status of existing initiatives, the major revision was the addition of the following new
guidelines:
Under the electric utility guideline 7, which calls for advocating for Congressional, legislative, or
administrative actions on matters impacting costs or operations of the Western Area Power
Administration, a reference was made to the grid modernization goals of the Department of
Energy’s Secretary Chu March 16, 2012 memo. This is something that could potentially impact
reliability, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and cost. The new guideline directs support of the
grid modernization goals without compromising the primary mission of Western and
recognizing the achievements already made in California without adding duplicate costly
efforts. This supports the Utilities Strategic Plan goals of ensuring a reliable supply of utility
resources, managing costs, and ensuring environmental sustainability.
Two new guidelines were added for the natural gas utility. One mirrors the guidelines on GHG
cap-and-trade market design that is already included under the electric utility guidelines, and
has been added because the City’s gas utility will come under the GHG cap-and-trade
mechanism in 2015. The other new guideline addresses the issues of hydraulic fracturing, or
“fracking”, in recognition of state and national interest in this process. The current language
does not offer a position other than support of “fair application of environmental rules”. Any
City of Palo Alto Page 3
specific advocacy position on this will require further review of the cost, safety and
environmental impacts of any proposed legislation.
One new guideline was added for the water utility that would address possible calls for
increased infrastructure funding and regulations following the floods in the east coast in 2012.
The guideline supports reliability, but calls for fair cost allocation and avoidance of unnecessary
regulations. This supports the utilities strategic plan goals of ensuring a reliable supply while
managing costs.
Commission Review and Recommendation
The Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 were presented to the UAC at its December
5, 2012 meeting. The UAC had a few clarifying questions on the new guidelines, and accepted
Director Fong’s suggestion to reorganize the sections so that the utilities were listed in
alphabetical order. The UAC unanimously approved a motion to recommend that the City
Council approve the Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013. Draft minutes from the UAC
meeting are included as Attachment C.
Resource Impact
There is no direct resource impact associated with adoption of the proposed legislative policy
guidelines. However, actions taken that support the efficient use of the City’s assets and
resources will help control costs, implement the Council’s policies and goals, and protect utility
customers.
Policy Implications
The recommendation is consistent with Council policy and supports the 2011 Utilities Strategic
Plan’s objectives of: ensuring a reliable and safe supply of utility resources, providing customer
service excellence, managing costs, and ensuring environmental sustainability.
Environmental Review
Approval of a resolution adopting the Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 does not
meet the definition of a project pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), thus, no environmental review is required.
Attachments:
Attachment A: RESO Approving 2013 Util Legislative Guidelines (PDF)
Attachment B: 2013 Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines (PDF)
Attachment C: Excerpted Draft UAC Minutes of December 5, 2012 Meeting (PDF)
Attachment D: 2013 Legislative Policy Guidelines with Changes from 2012 Guidelines in
Redline/Strikout Formal (PDF)
ATTACHMENT A
* NOT YET APPROVED*
130107 dm 6051826
Resolution No. _________
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto
Approving the City of Palo Alto Utilities Legislative
Policy Guidelines for 2013
A. The City of Palo Alto Utilities Strategic Plan (“Strategic Plan”), approved by the
Palo Alto City Council on July 18, 2011, [CMR 1880] provides a set of Strategic Objectives for the
City of Palo Alto Utilities Department (CPAU) to follow in ensuring a reliable and safe supply of
utility resources, providing customer service excellence, managing costs, and ensuring
environmental sustainability.
B. CPAU annually identifies Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines that facilitate the
Strategic Plan’s Strategic Objectives, and advocates for utility-related issues at Federal and
State legislative forums in furtherance of those objectives.
C. In December 2012 CPAU staff updated the Legislative Policy Guidelines to
respond to recent legislative and regulatory trends.
D. Action on some of these issues may require active involvement of Palo Alto
elected and appointed officials.
E. The Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 were presented to the UAC at
its December 5, 2012 meeting, and the UAC voted unanimously (6-0) to recommend that the
City Council approve the Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does hereby RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The Council hereby adopts the resolution approving the Utilities
Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013.
//
//
//
//
//
ATTACHMENT A
* NOT YET APPROVED*
130107 dm 6051826
SECTION 2. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not constitute
a project under Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA
Guidelines, and therefore, no environmental assessment is required.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
___________________________ ___________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Senior Deputy City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Director of Utilities
___________________________
Director of Administrative
Services
ATTACHMENT B
Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Advocacy positions taken in alignment with these guidelines will be subject to the approval of the
Utilities Director or City Manager as per the City’s legislative advocacy process
ALL UTILIT IES
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance local accountability in the control and oversight of matters impacting utility
programs and rates for our customers while balancing statewide climate protection goals.
2. Support efforts to maintain or improve the reliability of the supply, transmission, storage and
distribution/collection infrastructures.
3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, and recognizes early voluntary action.
4. Maintain the City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU’s) ability to provide safe, reliable, sustainable, and
competitively-priced utility services.
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service
& Cost
Control
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in joint action efforts.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
2. Communicate the City’s record on
environmental and energy efficiency
programs with Legislature, California
Energy Commission (CEC), California
Air Resources Board (CARB), and
Natural Resources Defense Council
(NRDC) via California Municipal
Utilities Association (CMUA),
Northern California Power Agency
(NCPA), and the Bay Area Water
Supply and Conservation Agency
(BAWSCA).
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 2 of 13
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service
& Cost
Control
3. Support legislation that will result in
the most cost-effective reduction of
GHG emissions, recognition of early
action, and inclusion of more efficient
solutions, fuel switching, and demand
control programs, in integrated
resource plans.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
4. Promote utility legislation and
regulations that support reasonable
reliability standards and compliance
requirements, and effective and
consistent reporting requirements,
customer communications, and goal-
setting.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
Reliability
Councils
5. Oppose cost shifts from Federal or
State budgets and California Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC)
jurisdictional utilities through active
participation in CMUA and NCPA
legislative activities.
Federal,
State, and
CPUC
6. Advocate for State and Federal grants
for local and regional applications of
energy efficiency, conservation,
renewable resources, fiber,
wastewater collection systems and
recycled water projects.
Federal
and State
7. Maintain right of way access for utility
infrastructure.
Federal
and State
8. Protect the value of existing assets
and contracts and local regulatory
approvals of same.
Federal
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 3 of 13
ELECTRIC
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to exercise local accountability and oversight over
matters impacting customer service, programs (such as demand side efficiency and conservation
programs), and rate structure.
2. Preserve/enhance the reliability and security of infrastructure.
3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing greenhouse gas emissions
and encourages early voluntary action.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills.
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
1. Advocate goals through Northern California Power
Agency (NCPA), California Municipal Utilities
Association (CMUA), American Public Power
Association (APPA), Transmission Agency of
Northern California (TANC), and Bay Area
Municipal Transmission Group (BAMx) with
support from Palo Alto staff to speak with a
coordinated voice.
Federal
and
State
2. Support NCPA in its continued efforts to
streamline the state regulatory reporting
responsibilities, to eliminate duplicative data and
report submittals to multiple state regulatory
agencies, including the CEC, CARB, and the
California Independent System Operator (CAISO).
State
3. Advocate for legislation/regulations that provide
local control and support for:
cost-effective clean distributed generation and
cogeneration projects, and standards for
connecting such resources to the local
distribution system;
cost-effective electric efficiency programs;
implementation of renewable portfolio
standards;
cost-effective storage integration;
direct access requirements;
smart meters and smart grid design and
implementation, and
public benefit funds (as allowed in AB1890
(1996)).
Federal
and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 4 of 13
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
4. Support cap-and-trade market designs that:
protect consumers from the exercise of market
power;
allocate allowances that help mitigate impacts
to Palo Alto customers while providing
incentives for utilities to move to lower GHG
emission portfolios;
provide flexible compliance mechanisms such
as banking and borrowing of allowances; and
allocate funds generated from cap-and-trade
markets to GHG related activities, not as a
revenue source for state or federal general
funds.
Federal
and
State
5. Support legislation for renewable portfolio
standards that:
promote the 33% goal for the state;
maintain local compliance authority;
allow utilities to pursue low cost alternatives by
utilizing existing transmission system to access
out-of-state resources, including use of
Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs);
prevent double jeopardy in the assessment of
penalties for non-compliance; and
restrict extension of CEC jurisdiction over
Publicly Owned Utilities.
Local
and
State
6. Support/encourage transmission, generation, and
demand-reduction projects and solutions including
advocating for financing or funding
solutions/options for projects that:
enhance/ensure reliability;
ensure equitable cost allocation (including
protection against imposition of state-owned
electric contract costs on municipal utility
customers);
improve procurement flexibility (e.g. resource
adequacy rules that ensure reliability and
provide flexibility in meeting operational
requirements or flexibility in meeting State
renewable portfolio standards);
improve market transparency (particularly
transparency of IOU’s transmission and
procurement planning and implementation
activities); and
lower the environmental impact on the Bay
Area and the Peninsula.
Local,
State,
and
Federal
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 5 of 13
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
7. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or
administrative actions on matters impacting costs
or operations of the Western Area Power
Administration such as:
support of Congressional Field Hearings to
explore modernizing flood control strategies,
river regulation and generation strategies at
Central Valley Project (CVP) plants to enhance
generation, water delivery, flood control and
fisheries;
protection of the status of Western Power
Marketing Administration and cost-based rates;
provisions for preference customers’ first take
at land available with economic potential for
wind farms;
balancing efforts for competing environmental
improvements in rivers and Delta conditions
with water supply and hydropower impacts;
and
Achieving the grid modernization goals of
Secretary Chu’s March 16, 2012 memo without
compromising the primary mission of Western
and recognizing the achievements already
made in California without adding duplicate
costly efforts.
Federal,
State
and
Regional
8. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or
administrative actions on matters relating to
overly burdensome reporting and compliance
requirements established by the North American
Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) or the Western
Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC).
Federal,
State
and
Regional
9. Support fair and reasonable assessment of grid
reliability established by NERC, WECC, or FERC and
seek Congressional remedies (if needed) for
punitive application of fees and fines.
Federal
and
Regional
10. Work with California Independent System
Operator (CAISO) or through FERC:
to give buyers of renewable intermittent
resources relief from imbalance penalties; and
to promote financial and operational changes
that result in timely and accurate settlement
and billing.
Federal
and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 6 of 13
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
11. Monitor cyber security issues to ensure that CPAU,
which currently does not have critical cyber assets,
is not subject to NERC cyber security standards
and support NCPA to protect it and its member
agencies from unnecessary cyber security
regulations.
Federal
and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 7 of 13
GAS
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to develop their own demand side efficiency and
conservation programs, alternative gas supplies, and rate structure.
2. Increase the security and reliability of the gas supply and transmission infrastructure. This includes
retaining access to intra- and interstate gas transmission systems to reliably serve customers.
3. Support efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills.
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals
1. Local
Authority
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
3.
Environ
-ment
4. Cost
Control
1. Advocate most of these goals mainly
through the American Public Gas
Association (APGA) with minor support
from Palo Alto staff.
Primarily
Federal with
minor advocacy
at State level
2. Work with Northern California Power
Agency (NCPA) and California Municipal
Utilities Association (CMUA) to the extent
that the City’s goals as a gas distributor
align with generators’ use of natural gas.
Federal and
State
3. Support increased production/incentives
for renewable gas supplies from in or out of
state.
Federal and
State
4. Advocate for financing or funding for cost-
effective natural gas efficiency and solar
water heating end uses.
Federal and
State
5. Support market transparency and efforts to
eliminate market manipulation through
reasonable oversight
Federal
6. Support municipal utilities’ ability to enter
into pre-pay transactions for gas supplies.
Federal
7. Support efforts to improve pipeline safety.
Work with partners to discourage extension
of CPUC regulatory authority over
municipal gas operations. Oppose
legislative proposals resulting in
unreasonable costs for Palo Alto’s
customers.
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 8 of 13
1. Local
Authority
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
3.
Environ
-ment
4. Cost
Control
8. Support cap-and-trade market designs that:
protect consumers from the exercise of
market power;
allocate allowances that help mitigate
impacts to Palo Alto customers while
providing incentives for natural gas
utilities to move to lower GHG emission
portfolios;
provide flexible compliance mechanisms
such as banking and borrowing of
allowances; and
allocate funds generated from cap-and-
trade markets to GHG related activities,
not as a revenue source for state or
federal general funds.
Federal and
State
9. Advocate for the fair application of Clean
Water Act rules and other existing
environmental rules on the practice of
hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” for natural
gas development.
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 9 of 13
WASTEWATER COLL ECTION
Goals
1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the imposition of non-volumetric
customer meter or infrastructure charges for wastewater collection service.
2. Increase the reliability of the local wastewater collection systems.
3. Maintain the provision of an environmentally sustainable, reliable high quality wastewater collection
service at a fair price.
4. Support equal comparisons of wastewater collection systems by regulatory agencies in order to
minimize and reduce onerous, costly and time-intensive reporting requirements and improve value
and accuracy of information reported to the public.
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals
1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
infrastructure
3. Maintain
service
4.Valuable
Reporting
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in the Association of Bay
Area Governments (ABAG).
Local,
Regional
& State
2. Advocate to ensure that legislative
actions regarding the comparison of
wastewater collections systems for future
regulations include the following
requirements:
timely rebuilding of the local
wastewater systems;
maintains the quality of delivered
wastewater collection service;
minimizes any increase in the cost of
wastewater collection service;
creates no additional exposure to
more frequent or severe wastewater
overflows;
supports the existing wastewater
collections systems and their
operation.
Local,
Regional
& State
3. Support provision of sufficient resources
for ABAG to enable it to advocate for:
environmentally sustainable, reliable
wastewater collection service at a fair
price;
regional comparisons of wastewater
collection projects for future state
grant funding.
Local and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 10 of 13
1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
infrastructure
3. Maintain
service
4.Valuable
Reporting
4. Support infrastructure security and
reliability including equitable allocation of
funds for increasing the security of
infrastructure.
Regional,
and State
5. Advocate for funding and local
regulations for wastewater collections
system projects and requirements that
reduce overflows and improve collection
system efficiency.
Regional,
State and
Federal
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 11 of 13
WATER
Goals
1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the ability to optimize volumetric and
fixed charges to balance the goals of revenue certainty and water use efficiency.
2. Increase the security and reliability of the regional water system owned and operated by the San
Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC).
3. Support efficiency and recycled water programs in order to minimize the use of imported supplies.
4. Maintain the provision of an environmentally sustainable, reliable supply of high quality water at a
fair price.
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals
1. Local
Authority
2.
Reliable
infrastructure
3.
Minimize
imports
4.
Supplies
at fair
cost
1. Advocate goals through active participation in
the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation
Agency (BAWSCA) and California Municipal
Utilities Association (CMUA), with support from
Palo Alto staff for BAWSCA and the San
Francisco Bay Area Regional Water System
Financing Authority (RFA).
Local,
Regional
& State
2. Participate in California Urban Water
Conservation Council (CUWCC) Best
Management Practice (BMP) revisions and
development to ensure that aggressive and cost-
effective efficiency goals are incorporated and
operating proposals are reasonable, achievable,
and cost-effective.
State
3. Advocate to ensure that legislative actions
regarding the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and
conveyance system include the following
requirements:
timely rebuilding of the regional water
system;
maintains the quality of delivered water;
minimizes any increase in the cost of water;
creates no additional exposure to more
frequent or severe water shortages;
supports the existing water system and its
operation.
Local,
Regional
& State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 12 of 13
1. Local
Authority
2.
Reliable
infrastructure
3.
Minimize
imports
4.
Supplies
at fair
cost
4. Advocate for interpretations or implementation
of Water Code provisions (such as those enacted
by AB 1823 (2002), AB 2058 (2002) and SB 1870
(2002)) that maintain or reinforce the authorities
and protections available to the City and
BAWSCA members outside of San Francisco.
Local,
Regional
and
State
5. Support provision of sufficient resources for
BAWSCA to enable it to advocate for:
an environmentally sustainable, reliable
supply of high quality water at a fair price;
preservation of Palo Alto’s existing
contractual water allocation and
transportation rights on the SFPUC Hetch
Hetchy system;
regional planning for conservation, recycled
water, and other water supply projects.
Local
and
Regional
6. Advocate for:
actions that preserve Palo Alto’s existing
contractual rights
supporting actions that preserve local
control over water use and limit
encroachment from outside jurisdictions
Local
and
Regional
7. Support infrastructure security and reliability
including an interconnection between the
SCVWD West Pipeline with the SFPUC’s Bay
Division Pipelines 3 and 4.
Regional
and
State
8. Support notification requirements that aid
residents/customers but do not inflict undue or
unobtainable requirements on the utility.
State
9. Support local control of public benefit funds
funding levels and program design.
State
10. Support beneficiary pays methodologies to
prevent taxes or fees, in particular those
imposed on SFPUC customers, to fund
infrastructure improvements and costs of other
water sources such as the Delta.
State
11. Advocate for financing or funding for water
conservation programs and recycled water
projects that meet end-use needs and conserve
potable water and oppose legislation that would
reduce such funding.
State,
Regional
and
Federal
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 13 of 13
1. Local
Authority
2.
Reliable
infrastructure
3.
Minimize
imports
4.
Supplies
at fair
cost
12. Support infrastructure security and reliability
that includes equitable allocation of funds for
increasing the security of infrastructure and that
protects the City from unnecessary regulations.
EXCERPTED DRAFT MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 5, 2012
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
ITEM 2: ACTION: Staff Recommendation that the Utilities Advisory Commission Recommend
that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Approving the City of Palo Alto Utilities Legislative
Policy Guidelines for 2013
Senior Resource Planner Debbie Lloyd provided a summary of the legislative guidelines,
specifically identifying the changes in the 2013 guidelines from the 2012 guidelines. She noted
the new guidelines added for the water and wastewater collection utilities to reflect
Commissioner Hall’s suggestions from the UAC’s November meeting regarding emergency
preparedness and possible introduction of Federal standards on water reliability given the
extent of damage following the East coast storms this year. She also highlighted the new gas
utility guidelines on greenhouse gas cap-and-trade market design and hydraulic fracturing, and
inclusion of the Department of Energy, Secretary Chu’s memo in the electric utility guidelines.
Commissioner Waldfogel asked to have clarified that the absence of a section for the fiber
utility was an affirmative decision. He also suggested that he would like to see how the new
guidelines align with the strategic plan goals. He would like to be sure that the guidelines do
not diverge from what we've done strategically.
Commissioner Melton asked about the new gas guideline on fracking. He asked why we added
this guideline, which he found very nebulous. Director Fong noted that the issue was coming
up at the American Public Gas Association and there may be legislation coming up at the
federal level. Lloyd stated that the guideline is a placeholder and, if an actual proposal were to
arise, staff may need to return to the UAC and Council to determine the City's position.
Commissioner Melton commented on the new water guideline 12, which seemed to cover two
different subjects: infrastructure needs and associated funding, and protecting the city from
unnecessary regulations. Lloyd referred back to the issue raised by Commissioner Hall that the
floods in the east coast this year may lead to increased calls for infrastructure funding and
regulations, and according to the goals the City would support reliability with fair cost allocation
and avoiding unnecessary regulations.
Director Fong suggested a non-substantive change to the guidelines to list the utilities in
alphabetical order.
ACTION:
Vice Chair Foster moved to support the staff's recommendation. Commissioner Chang
seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously (6-0) with Commissioner Hall absent.
ATTACHMENT D
Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Advocacy positions taken in alignment with these guidelines will be subject to the approval of the
Utilities Director or City Manager as per the City’s legislative advocacy process
ALL UTILIT IES
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance local accountability in the control and oversight of matters impacting utility
programs and rates for our customers while balancing statewide climate protection goals.
2. Support efforts to maintain or improve the reliability of the supply, transmission, storage and
distribution/collection infrastructures.
2.3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, and recognizes early voluntary action.
3. Support efforts to maintain or improve the reliability of the supply, transmission, storage and
distribution/collection infrastructures.
4. Maintain the City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU’s) ability to provide safe, reliable, sustainable, and
competitively-priced utility services.
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability
&
Infrastructure
23.
Climate
Protection
4. Service
& Cost
Control
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in joint action efforts.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
2. Communicate the City’s record on
environmental and energy efficiency
programs with Legislature, California
Energy Commission (CEC), California
Air Resources Board (CARB), and
Natural Resources Defense Council
(NRDC) via California Municipal
Utilities Association (CMUA),
Northern California Power Agency
(NCPA), and the Bay Area Water
Supply and Conservation Agency
(BAWSCA).
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 2 of 13
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability
&
Infrastructure
23.
Climate
Protection
4. Service
& Cost
Control
3. Support legislation that will result in
the most cost-effective reduction of
GHG emissions, recognition of early
action, and inclusion of more efficient
solutions, such as cogeneration,
distributed resources fuel switching,
and demand control programs, in
integrated resource plans.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
4. Promote utility legislation and
regulations that support reasonable
reliability standards and compliance
requirements, and effective and
consistent reporting requirements,
customer communications, and goal-
setting.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
Reliability
Councils
5. Oppose cost shifts from Federal or
State budgets and California Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC)
jurisdictional utilities through active
participation in CMUA and NCPA
legislative activities.
Federal,
State, and
CPUC
6. Advocate for State and Federal grants
for local and regional applications of
energy efficiency, conservation,
renewable resources, fiber,
wastewater collection systems and
recycled water projects.
Federal
and State
7. Maintain right of way access for utility
infrastructure.
Federal
and State
8. Protect the value of existing assets
and contracts and local regulatory
approvals of same.
Federal
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 3 of 13
WATER
Goals
1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the ability to optimize volumetric and
fixed charges to balance the goals of revenue certainty and water use efficiency.
1.2. Increase the security and reliability of the regional water system owned and operated by the San
Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC).
3. Support efficiency and recycled water programs in order to minimize the use of imported supplies.
2.4. Maintain the provision of an environmentally sustainable, reliable supply of high quality water at a
fair price.
3. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the ability to optimize volumetric and
fixed charges to balance the goals of revenue certainty and water use efficiency.
4. Support efficiency and recycled water programs in order to minimize the use of imported supplies.
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals
1. Local
Authority
12.
Reliable
infrastructure
3.
Minimize
imports
24.
Supplies
at fair
cost
1. Advocate goals through active participation in
the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation
Agency (BAWSCA) and California Municipal
Utilities Association (CMUA), with support from
Palo Alto staff for BAWSCA and the San
Francisco Bay Area Regional Water System
Financing Authority (RFA).
Local,
Regional
& State
2. Participate in California Urban Water
Conservation Council (CUWCC) Best
Management Practice (BMP) revisions and
development to ensure that aggressive and cost-
effective efficiency goals are incorporated and
operating proposals are reasonable, achievable,
and cost-effective.
State
3. Advocate to ensure that legislative actions
regarding the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and
conveyance system include the following
requirements:
timely rebuilding of the regional water
system;
maintains the quality of delivered water;
minimizes any increase in the cost of water;
Local,
Regional
& State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 4 of 13
1. Local
Authority
12.
Reliable
infrastructure
3.
Minimize
imports
24.
Supplies
at fair
cost
creates no additional exposure to more
frequent or severe water shortages;
supports the existing water system and its
operation.
4. Advocate for interpretations or implementation
of Water Code provisions (such as those enacted
by AB 1823 (2002), AB 2058 (2002) and SB 1870
(2002)) that maintain or reinforce the authorities
and protections available to the City and
BAWSCA members outside of San Francisco.
Local,
Regional
and
State
5. Support provision of sufficient resources for
BAWSCA to enable it to advocate for:
an environmentally sustainable, reliable
supply of high quality water at a fair price;
preservation of Palo Alto’s existing
contractual water allocation and
transportation rights on the SFPUC Hetch
Hetchy system;
regional planning for conservation, recycled
water, and other water supply projects.
Local
and
Regional
6. Advocate for:
actions that preserve Palo Alto’s existing
contractual rights
supporting actions that preserve local
control over water use and limit
encroachment from outside jurisdictions
Local
and
Regional
7. Support infrastructure security and reliability
including an interconnection between the
SCVWD West Pipeline with the SFPUC’s Bay
Division Pipelines 3 and 4.
Regional
and
State
8. Support notification requirements that aid
residents/customers but do not inflict undue or
unobtainable requirements on the utility.
State
9. Support local control of public benefit funds
funding levels and program design.
State
10. Support beneficiary pays methodologies to
prevent taxes or fees, in particular those
imposed on SFPUC customers, to fund
infrastructure improvements and costs of other
water sources such as the Delta.
State
11. Advocate for financing or funding for water State,
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 5 of 13
1. Local
Authority
12.
Reliable
infrastructure
3.
Minimize
imports
24.
Supplies
at fair
cost
conservation programs and recycled water
projects that meet end-use needs and conserve
potable water and oppose legislation that would
reduce such funding.
and
Federal
12. Support infrastructure security and reliability
that includes equitable allocation of funds for
increasing the security of infrastructure and that
protects the City from unnecessary regulations.
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 6 of 13
GAS
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to develop their own demand side efficiency and
conservation programs, alternative gas supplies, and rate structure.
2. Increase the security and reliability of the gas supply and transmission infrastructure. This includes
retaining access to intra- and interstate gas transmission systems to reliably serve customers.
2.3. Support efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment.
3. Increase the security and reliability of the gas supply and transmission infrastructure. This includes
retaining access to intra- and interstate gas transmission systems to reliably serve customers.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills.
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals
1. Local
Authority
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
23.
Environ
-ment
4. Cost
Control
1. Advocate most of these goals mainly
through the American Public Gas
Association (APGA) with minor support
from Palo Alto staff.
Primarily
Federal with
minor advocacy
at State level
2. Work with Northern California Power
Agency (NCPA) and California Municipal
Utilities Association (CMUA) to the extent
that the City’s goals as a gas distributor
align with generators’ use of natural gas.
Federal and
State
3. Support increased production/incentives
for renewable gas supplies from in or out of
state.
Federal and
State
4. Advocate for financing or funding for cost-
effective natural gas efficiency and solar
water heating end uses.
Federal and
State
5. Support market transparency and efforts to
eliminate market manipulation through
reasonable oversight
Federal
6. Support municipal utilities’ ability to enter
into pre-pay transactions for gas supplies.
Federal
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 7 of 13
1. Local
Authority
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
23.
Environ
-ment
4. Cost
Control
7. Support efforts to improve pipeline safety
in light of recent incidents on the PG&E
system and elsewhere. Work with partners
to discourage extension of CPUC regulatory
authority over municipal gas operations.
Oppose legislative proposals resulting in
unreasonable costs for Palo Alto’s
customers.
Federal and
State
8. Support cap-and-trade market designs that:
protect consumers from the exercise of
market power;
allocate allowances that help mitigate
impacts to Palo Alto customers while
providing incentives for natural gas
utilities to move to lower GHG emission
portfolios;
provide flexible compliance mechanisms
such as banking and borrowing of
allowances; and
allocate funds generated from cap-and-
trade markets to GHG related activities,
not as a revenue source for state or
federal general funds.
Federal and
State
9. Advocate for the fair application of Clean
Water Act rules and other existing
environmental rules on the practice of
hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” for natural
gas development.
Federal and
State
y
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 8 of 13
ELECTRIC
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to exercise local accountability and oversight over
matters impacting customer service, programs (such as demand side efficiency and conservation
programs), and rate structure.
2. Preserve/enhance the reliability and security of infrastructure.
3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing greenhouse gas emissions
and encourages early voluntary action.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills.
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
1. Advocate goals through Northern California Power
Agency (NCPA), California Municipal Utilities
Association (CMUA), American Public Power
Association (APPA), Transmission Agency of
Northern California (TANC), and Bay Area
Municipal Transmission Group (BAMx) with
support from Palo Alto staff to speak with a
coordinated voice.
Federal
and
State
2. Support NCPA’s in their continued efforts
legislative initiative to streamline the state
regulatory reporting responsibilities, to eliminate
duplicative data and report submittals to multiple
state regulatory agencies, including the CEC, CARB,
and the California Independent System Operator
(CAISO).
State
3. Advocate for legislation/regulations that provide
local control and support for:
cost-effective clean distributed generation and
cogeneration projects, and standards for
connecting such resources to the local
distribution system;
cost-effective electric efficiency programs;
implementation of renewable portfolio
standards;
cost-effective storage integration;
direct access requirements;
smart meters and smart grid design and
implementation, and
public benefit funds (as allowed in AB1890
(1996)).
Federal
and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 9 of 13
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
4. Support cap-and-trade market designs that:
protect consumers from the exercise of market
power;
allocate allowances that help mitigate impacts
to Palo Alto customers while providing
incentives for utilities to move to lower GHG
emission portfolios;
provide flexible compliance mechanisms such
as banking & and borrowing of allowances; and
allocate funds generated from cap-and-trade
markets to GHG related activities, not as a
revenue source for state or federal general
funds.
Federal
and
State
5. Support legislation for renewable portfolio
standards that:
promote the 33% goal for the state;
maintain local compliance authority;
allow utilities to pursue low cost alternatives by
utilizing existing transmission system to access
out-of-state resources, including use of
Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs);
prevent double jeopardy in the assessment of
penalties for non-compliance; and
restrict extension of CEC jurisdiction over
Publicly Owned Utilities.
Local
and
State
6. Support/encourage transmission, generation, and
demand-reduction projects and solutions including
advocating for financing or funding
solutions/options for projects that:
enhance/ensure reliability;
ensure equitable cost allocation (including
protection against imposition of state-owned
electric contract costs on municipal utility
customers);
improve procurement flexibility (e.g. resource
adequacy rules that ensure reliability and
provide flexibility in meeting operational
requirements or flexibility in meeting State
renewable portfolio standards);
improve market transparency (particularly
transparency of IOU’s transmission and
procurement planning and implementation
activities); and
lower the environmental impact on the Bay
Area and the Peninsula.
Local,
State,
and
Federal
7. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or Federal,
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 10 of 13
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
administrative actions on matters impacting costs
or operations of the Western Area Power
Administration such as:
support of Congressional Field Hearings to
explore modernizing flood control strategies,
river regulation and generation strategies at
Central Valley Project (CVP) plants to enhance
generation, water delivery, flood control and
fisheries;
protection of the status of Western Power
Marketing Administration and cost-based rates;
provisions for preference customers’ first take
at land available with economic potential for
wind farms; and
balancing efforts for competing environmental
improvements in rivers and Delta conditions
with water supply and hydropower impacts;
and.
Achieving the grid modernization goals of
Secretary Chu’s March 16, 2012 memo without
compromising the primary mission of Western
and recognizing the achievements already
made in California without adding duplicate
costly efforts.
State
and
Regional
8. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or
administrative actions on matters relating to
overly burdensome reporting and compliance
requirements established by the North American
Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) or the Western
Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC).
Federal,
State
and
Regional
9. Support fair and reasonable assessment of grid
reliability established by NERC, WECC, or FERC and
seek Congressional remedies (if needed) for
punitive application of fees and fines.
Federal
and
Regional
10. Work with California Independent System
Operator (CAISO) or through FERC:
to give buyers of renewable intermittent
resources relief from imbalance penalties; and
to promote financial and operational changes
that result in timely and accurate settlement
and billing.
Federal
and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 11 of 13
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
11. Monitor cyber security issues to ensure that CPAU,
which currently does not have critical cyber assets,
is not subject to NERC cyber security standards
and support NCPA to protect it and its member
agencies from unnecessary cyber security
regulations.
Federal
and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 12 of 13
WASTEWATER COLLECTIO N
Goals
1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the imposition of non-volumetric
customer meter or infrastructure charges for wastewater collection service.
12. Increase the reliability of the local wastewater collection systems.
23. Maintain the provision of an environmentally sustainable, reliable high quality wastewater collection
service at a fair price.
3. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the imposition of non-volumetric
customer meter or infrastructure charges for wastewater collection service.
4. Support equal comparisons of wastewater collection systems by regulatory agencies in order to
minimize and reduce onerous, costly and time-intensive reporting requirements and improve value
and accuracy of information reported to the public.
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals
1. Local
Authority
12. Reliable
infrastructure
23.
Maintain
service
4.Valuable
Reporting
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in the Association of Bay
Area Governments (ABAG).
Local,
Regional
& State
2. Advocate to ensure that legislative
actions regarding the comparison of
wastewater collections systems for future
regulations include the following
requirements:
timely rebuilding of the local
wastewater systems;
maintains the quality of delivered
wastewater collection service;
minimizes any increase in the cost of
wastewater collection service;
creates no additional exposure to
more frequent or severe wastewater
overflows;
supports the existing wastewater
collections systems and their
operation.
Local,
Regional
& State
3. Support provision of sufficient resources
for ABAG to enable it to advocate for:
environmentally sustainable, reliable
wastewater collection service at a fair
Local and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013
Page 13 of 13
1. Local
Authority
12. Reliable
infrastructure
23.
Maintain
service
4.Valuable
Reporting
price;
regional comparisons of wastewater
collection projects for future state
grant funding.
4. Support infrastructure security and
reliability including equitable allocation of
funds for increasing the security of
infrastructure.
Regional,
and State
5. Advocate for funding and local
regulations for wastewater collections
system projects and requirements that
reduce overflows and improve collection
system efficiency.
Regional,
State and
Federal
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3409)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 1/28/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Amendment to TANC Project Agreement 5
Title: Adoption of a Resolution Approving Amendment No. 1 to the Amended
and Restated Project Agreement No. 5 Between and Among the Transmission
Agency of Northern California and its Participating Members
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Utilities
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached resolution approving Amendment No. 1 to
the Amended and Restated Project Agreement No. 5 Between and Among the Transmission
Agency of Northern California and its Participating Members, and granting the City Manager the
authority to approve future operational amendments to the agreement.
Executive Summary
The Transmission Agency of Northern California (TANC), of which the City of Palo Alto is a
member, is requesting that the City execute an amendment to TANC’s Project Agreement No. 5
for participation in an organized system for reserving space on the transmission system. The
minor amendment will allow an annual transmission product to be provided through TANC’s
system. The TANC Commission approved the amendment at its November 28, 2012 meeting
and the TANC Commission memo and resolution is provided in attachment C. Although the
City assigned its interests in TANC to other members in 2009 for a fifteen year term, the City, as
a party to the original agreement, must execute any amendment to the agreement for it to take
effect. Once the assignment period has ended, the amended Project Agreement No. 5 will once
again apply to the City’s transmission transactions with TANC and its members.
Background
The City of Palo Alto is a member of TANC, a California Joint Powers Agency that currently owns
about 87 percent of the California-Oregon Transmission Project (COTP), a 1600 megawatt
(MW), 340-mile long electric transmission line from the California-Oregon Border to the 500
kilovolt Tracy Substation in Northern California. The City has an approximately 50 MW share of
the COTP. In January, 2009 (Resolution No. 8900) the City entered into an agreement for a
fifteen-year assignment of the City’s share of the COTP to three other TANC members, the
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Modesto Irrigation District (MID), the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) and the Sacramento
Municipal Utility District (SMUD).
In 2004, the City entered into TANC’s Project Agreement No. 5 (PA-5) for participation in an
Open Access Same Time Information System (OASIS)1 (Resolution No. 8467). The purpose of
participation in the OASIS was to enhance transmission availability in California by making
unused transmission capacity on COTP available for use by other entities in an open and
efficient manner.
Discussion
At its December 28, 2012 meeting, the TANC Commission approved a minor amendment to PA-
5 that will allow an annual transmission product to be provided through TANC’s OASIS. PA-5
currently requires that PA-5 signatories waive their rights of first refusal to purchase
transmission capacity offered by certain other COTP owners, provided that the capacity product
offered is for a period of “less than twelve (12) months”. The proposed amendment will change
this right of first refusal language to align PA-5’s terms with TANC’s recent implementation of
an annual transmission product offering. The amended language will permit PA-5 participants
to sell annual transmission products to other entities through the OASIS, because the waiver of
the right of first refusal is amended to apply to capacity products offered for a period of “up to
twelve (12) months”. Although the City has assigned its share of the COTP to TID, MID and
SMUD, it is still a signatory to PA-5 and therefore must execute the amendment to the
agreement for it to take effect.
The resolution also grants the City Manager the authority to approve future operational
amendments to PA-5, during the remainder of the fifteen-year assignment period, through
January 31, 2024. Such authority will be limited to amendments requested by MID, TID, and
SMUD that do not change the City’s post-layoff period standing or contractual rights.
Resource Impact
There is no immediate resource impact from this action. When the City takes back its share of
the COTP in 2024 at the end of the term of the assignment, this amendment to PA-5 will
provide the City’s electric utility more options for selling and capturing the value of any unused
transmission capacity on the COTP.
Policy Implications
This recommendation is consistent with the Council-approved Utilities Strategic Plan with
regard to maximizing the value of assets and promoting efficient use of resources.
1 The Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) is an Internet-based system for obtaining services
related to electric power transmission in North America. It is the primary means by which high-voltage
transmission lines are reserved for moving wholesale quantities of electricity.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Environmental Review
Approval of this amendment does not meet the California Environmental Quality Act’s
definition of a “project” under Public Resources Code Section 21065, thus environmental review
is not required.
Attachments:
Attachment A: RESO TANC Staff Report Approving Amendment to TANC PA5 (PDF)
Attachment B: Amendment No. 1 to PA-5 (PDF)
Attachment C: TANC Commission Report and Resolution (PDF)
Attachment D: PA-5 Effective 5-1-06 (PDF)
*NOT YET APPROVED*
130108 dm 6051868
Resolution No. _________
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto
Approving Amendment No. 1 to the Amended and
Restated Project Agreement No. 5 Between and Among
the Transmission Agency of Northern California and its
Participating Members
R E C I T A L S
A. The City of Palo Alto (“City”), a municipal utility and a chartered city, is a member
of the Transmission Agency of Northern California (“TANC”), a joint power agency engaged in
interstate transmission of power that currently owns about 87 percent of the California-Oregon
Transmission Project (“COTP”), a 1600 megawatt (“MW”), 340-mile long electric transmission
line from the California-Oregon Border to Northern California.
B. The City has an approximately 50 MW share of the COTP.
C. In 2004, TANC and its Members, the Cities of Alameda, Healdsburg, Lodi,
Lompoc, Palo Alto, Redding, Roseville, Santa Clara, and Ukiah, the Modesto Irrigation District,
the Turlock Irrigation District, and the Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative (“Participating
Members”) entered into TANC Project Agreement No. 5 (“PA-5”) for Participation in an Open
Access Same Time Information System (“OASIS”),(City of Palo Alto Resolution No. 8467).
D. PA-5 establishes and describes how unused transmission capacity on COTP will
be made available for sale pursuant to Federal laws and regulations that govern open access to
wholesale transmission capacity.
E. PA-5 exempts certain sales from other Participating Members’ “Right of Refusal”
provisions. These “Right of Refusal” provisions establish a formal process by which other COTP
participants have the first right to purchase (or refuse) transmission products before such
products are offered to non-participants. The maximum waiver of such rights under the current
language of PA-5 is for transmission products of “less than twelve (12) months”, which limits
offerings through the OASIS to monthly, weekly, daily and hourly products.
F. In October 2012, the TANC Commission approved a new annual transmission
product for sale through the OASIS, which requires an amendment to PA-5’s waiver of the
“Right of Refusal” provision.
G. This Amendment No. 1 will change Section 14 of PA-5 to exempt sales of COTP
transmission capacity products of “up to twelve-months” in term from the “Right of Refusal”
provisions.
*NOT YET APPROVED*
130108 dm 6051868
H. In January of 2009 (Resolution No. 8900) the City entered into an agreement for
a fifteen-year assignment of the City’s share of the COTP to the Modesto Irrigation District
(MID), the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) and the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD).
I. Despite the long term assignment, the City remains a signatory to PA-5 and
must approve any amendments for them to be effective.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does hereby RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The Council hereby adopts the resolution approving Amendment No. 1 to
the Amended and Restated Project Agreement No. 5 Between and Among the Transmission
Agency of Northern California and its Participating Members. The City Manager is hereby
authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the City.
SECTION 2. The Council further grants the City Manager the authority to approve
future operational amendments to PA-5, during the remainder of the fifteen-year assignment
period through January 31, 2024. Such authority will be limited to amendments that do not
change the City’s post-layoff period standing or detrimentally impact the City’s contractual
rights.
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
*NOT YET APPROVED*
130108 dm 6051868
SECTION 3. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not constitute
a project under Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA
Guidelines, and therefore, no environmental assessment is required.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
___________________________ ___________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Senior Deputy City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Director of Utilities
___________________________
Director of Administrative
Services
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3435)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 1/28/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Appeal of AT&T DAS Phase 3
Title: Appeal of Director’s Architectural Review Approval of the Co-location
by AT&T Mobility LLC of Pole-Mounted Wireless Communications Equipment
and Associated Equipment Boxes on 20 Existing Utility Poles Within City
Rights-of-Ways Near the Following Locations: 747 Loma Verde Ave; 3284
Cowper; 3412 Ross/ 3374 Ross Rd; 3132 David Ave; 3415 Greer Rd; 3539
Louis Rd; 2385 Waverley; 3094 Greer Road on Maddux; 390 El Dorado Ave;
452 Loma Verde; 3524 Waverly on E. Meadow; 3706 Carlson Circle; 3757
Corina Wy; 3915 Louis Rd; 631 E. Meadow; 3901 Middlefield Rd; 412 Ferne;
3945 Nelson Ave.; 1772 Hamilton Ave.; 109 Lois Lane - AT&T DAS Phase 3
Project
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council: 1) uphold the Director of Planning and Community
Environment’s decision to approve the Architectural Review application for the Phase 3 project
based upon the findings and conditions of approval described in the Record of Land Use Action
(Attachment A), excluding the proposed installation adjacent to 3706 Carlson Circle; and 2)
direct staff to work with AT&T and residents to evaluate alternative locations/options for the
3706 Carlson Circle installation.
Executive Summary
AT&T’s application is for Architectural Review of 20 wireless communication facilities (WCFs)
collocated on utility poles within City rights-of-way and jointly owned by the City and Pacific
Bell Telephone Company dba AT&T of California, known as the Palo Alto Outdoor DAS
(Distributed Antenna System) project Phase 3. The 20 installations propose one antenna placed
on a pole extension at the top of each pole, and equipment cabinets placed lower down on the
pole (between 10 feet and 20 feet above grade). The pole locations were reviewed regarding
City of Palo Alto Page 2
their aesthetic impacts and consistency with the Phase 1 design approval by Council on January
23, 2012, and on December 18, 2012 the staff level Architectural Review approval was issued
for the project. Staff received five appeals of this decision from residents who cited concerns
regarding impacts to property values, aesthetics, noise, health, AT&T’s procedures for site
selection, and the City’s review process. These are topics similar to those that have been raised
in the Phase 1 and Phase 2 appeals that Council reviewed and approved in 2012. Staff believes
the Director’s decision is appropriate for all of the sites, with the exception of the 3706 Carlson
Circle site, which involves relocation of the utility pole from a public utility easement (PUE) to
the street frontage. Staff recommends that this request be referred back to staff and AT&T to
work with the residents to evaluate alternative sites. A subsequent decision on that particular
site would then be issued and would again be appealable to Council.
Background
On March 29, 2012, AT&T submitted an application for Architectural Review for the Phase 3
DAS installations at 20 locations. The project was determined to be a collocation project and,
according to Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.42.110, requires approval of an
Architectural Review application, followed by the issuance of encroachment permits. The use
itself is considered a permitted use, such that no Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is needed.
In January 2012, the Council, on appeal, reviewed the Phase 1 DAS project for 20 installations
and upheld the Director’s decision to approve the project sites (CMR #2393). At that time the
issues that were raised by the appellants focused on the need for a wireless master plan for the
entire city, and concerns for aesthetic impacts, potential health risks, noise, impacts on
property value, type of technology proposed, and the safety and reliability of the actual
installations. These issues were discussed in the associated CMR and can be viewed online for
additional details. The Council approved all of the applications.
On November 5, 2012, the Phase 2 DAS project approval was forwarded to Council on appeal to
consider (on the Consent Calendar) at their meeting. An appeal was filed by Mr. Tony Kramer, a
resident, citing concerns about the project’s compliance with the City’s Noise Ordinance. The
City Council did not remove it from the Consent Calendar and voted to uphold the Director’s
decision to approve the 15 project sites (CMR #3239).
There are a total of four phases in AT&T’s citywide DAS project, including a total of 75
installations. The Phase 3 and 4 projects were both approved on December 18, 2012. Phase 1 is
nearing completion of construction and Phase 2 installations are nearing construction. These
four phases are a part of AT&T’s build-out to provide adequate coverage and/or additional
capacity for wireless communications. AT&T is subject to a license agreement that allows AT&T
to collocate the DAS antennas and equipment on the City’s portion of the utility poles. The
Council approved the standard license agreement on July 25, 2011 (CMR #1756).
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Following the Council’s decision on the Phase 1 application, subsequent Architectural Review
(AR) applications for DAS installations, following the same prototype design as the approved
design, were to be reviewed at staff level and be subject to public notice and Council appeal,
but ARB public hearings were not required, according to the Zoning Code. Neighbor notification
is provided and public comments are reviewed by staff for each location. Actions by the
Director of Community Environment on the applications are posted on the City’s website and
courtesy notices of the actions are mailed to neighbors within 300 feet of each pole. The
Director’s decisions on staff level AR applications are also noted on the next available ARB
meeting agenda.
Review Process
The standard procedure for the review of an appealed Architectural Review application is for
placement on the Council Consent Calendar within 30 days of the filing of an appeal. Section
18.76.020(b)(3)(D) of the Zoning Code specifies that wireless communication facilities are
considered “minor projects” to be reviewed by staff. Section 18.77.070(b)(5) of the Zoning Code
specifically requires consideration by the Council on appeal of a staff approval of such a facility,
rather than hearing before the ARB. Council may decide to pull the item off Consent only if at
least three Councilmembers concur, and then the project is scheduled for a future public
hearing date (PAMC 18.77.070(f)). The Council meeting on March 4, 2013 has been targeted for
this public hearing, if Council determines to set a hearing.
Project Description
The approved design for the DAS installations is shown in the attached plans (Attachment G).
The existing utility poles range in height from 28 to 52 feet and the pole top extension, on
average, is about 8.25 feet. The equipment proposed on the pole face is the same for all the
poles and is comprised of (1) a power disconnect box located nine feet above grade; (2) a
remote prism cabinet (52.4”H x 12.15”W x 10.125”D) located approximately 10’-5” above
grade; (3) a back-up battery cabinet (27”H x 22”W x 18”D) located approximately 15’-9” above
grade; (4) an optical network interface box (13”H x 13”W x 3.75”D) located approximately 19’
above grade; and (5) related wiring. At the top of the pole extension, one antenna radome
(24”H x 16” Base Diameter) would be placed in-line with the pole.
The Phase 3 DAS project includes two sites where the existing poles, which are within a PUE
and located close (3-5 feet) to the existing residential buildings, are proposed to be relocated
out to the sidewalk right-of-way. With this pole relocation, the DAS installation would be
consistent with the other sites throughout the city.
Discussion
City of Palo Alto Page 4
There were five appeals filed for this project and these are included as Attachment C. With the
exception of one (Kramer), the appellants all requested that another location for the DAS
equipment be considered, other than the sites indicated in their appeal request.
1. The first appeal, submitted by Dorianne and Roy Moss, was directed at the proposed
installation near 747 Loma Verde. This installation is over 150 feet away from the Moss’
rear property line, and is separated by a street and one single-family property. The
concerns that were raised in the appeal were the potential impacts to property value
and AT&T’s lack of consideration (in determining the equipment location) of the
project’s impacts to their second-story master bedroom window view.
2. The second appeal was filed by Scott and Elaine Keller and focused on the installation
adjacent to their home at 3945 Nelson Drive. This installation is at least 35 feet away
from the rear of the house. The Kellers raised concerns about the project’s noise
impacts and the design aesthetics.
3. The third appeal, submitted by Bala Ganesh and Albert Ovadia, was specific to the DAS
installation on the pole adjacent to 631 E. Meadow Drive. The installation is
approximately 18 feet away from Mr. Ganesh’s garage and 25 feet away from Mr.
Ovadia’s home. The appeal stated their concern was about the potential health impacts
from the installation and the possible reduction in property value due to aesthetics.
4. The fourth appeal, submitted by Tony Kramer, was directed at the entire project. Mr.
Kramer stated that he is appealing the decision because “AT&T has not met all the
conditions of the Planning Department’s Notice of Incomplete”, dated April 27, 2012,
and therefore should not be approved. This is in regards to the City requiring AT&T to
submit an updated noise study for the DAS equipment. There is no DAS installation
proposed adjacent to Mr. Kramer’s home.
5. The fifth appeal, submitted by Roger Petersen, was specific to the installation near 3706
Carlson Circle. This DAS installation is one of the two proposed pole relocations in Phase
3 and would move the existing utility pole approximately 22 feet away from the current
location (that is approximately four feet away from the garage at 3704 Carlson Circle)
out toward the street. This site also has a condition of approval that requires the
installation of a new street tree for future screening. The concern that Mr. Petersen
cites in his appeal is that the relocation of the utility pole out onto the street would be
unattractive, since there currently are no utility poles located along Carlson Circle.
City of Palo Alto Page 5
Staff Responses to Appeal Issues
Property Value and Health Impacts
The Federal Telecommunications Act (TCA) of 1996 limits the City’s authority in the review of
wireless telecommunications projects. The City may only focus on the aesthetic and zoning
code aspects of a project and, by law, may not consider potential health issues and any
perceived related consequences (e.g. drop in property value). Under federal law, a local
agency’s wireless facility siting decisions may not have the effect of prohibiting the provision of
wireless service or unreasonably discriminating among wireless service providers. Further, a
utility is required to provide any telecommunications carrier with nondiscriminatory access to
its utility poles. Under federal law, the City may not regulate the placement, construction or
modification of wireless communications facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of
radio frequency (RF) emissions, so long as the facilities comply with the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) regulations concerning such emissions. Staff additionally
has seen no information that indicates an identifiable loss of property value from such
installations.
Noise
As outlined in PAMC Section 9.10.050, the public property noise limit specifies that no person
shall produce on public property a noise level more than 15 dB above the local ambient at a
distance of 25 feet or more from the source. The definition of local ambient means the lowest
sound level repeating itself during a six-minute period as measured with a precision sound level
meter; the code specifies that the minimum sound level shall be 40 dBA when determining
noise levels outside (not inside a structure), and therefore, noise production in excess of 55 dBA
at a distance of 25 feet away from the source would violate the noise ordinance. The noise
requirements for residential properties, as set forth in PAMC 9.10.030, is that noise levels
cannot exceed six dB above the local ambient (40 dBA minimum) at the property plane.
According to AT&T, the two pieces of equipment that would produce sound are the back-up
battery cabinet and the prism remote. All other elements proposed (antenna and wiring) do not
produce noise. On June 6, 2012, Hammett & Edison Inc. performed a noise analysis at a
powered installation in front of 255 N. California Avenue. The results of this study state that the
noise level produced by the equipment, including the ambient noise, is approximately 44.5 dBA
at a distance of 25 feet away from the pole. Based on this data, the conclusion is that the
equipment is compliant with the Noise Ordinance. The details of the noise analysis are outlined
in Attachment D.
Staff does believe that, as indicated in the noise measurements at 255 N. California Avenue,
lower noise levels (nearer the residential standard) can be readily achieved and that every
City of Palo Alto Page 6
effort should be made to attain the lowest level reasonable. To further address the noise
concern, therefore, staff has included the following two Conditions of Approval:
For installations in the City right-of-way, the Applicant shall endeavor to minimize the
noise at the property line boundary with adjacent residential property, and shall
attempt to keep such noise below 6dB above the ambient level most of the time, when
fans are running at their normal setting. If such a standard is not reasonably achievable
for a site, then the Applicant voluntarily agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts
to ensure that the noise level does not exceed 6 dB above the ambient noise level at the
nearest location of a residential structure. Under no circumstances shall the noise
exceed the noise standard in Municipal Code 9.10.050 (i.e., +15dB over ambient at 25
feet).
The applicant shall submit a sound analysis of an operating installation within two
months of the project installation/operation. The analysis shall clearly delineate how the
installation complies with the previously listed condition regarding noise. Applicant may
be required to submit these reports periodically for the life of the project, as
determined by the Director of Planning.
AT&T has agreed to the above conditions and has stated that it will make all feasible attempts
to minimize the noise production from their installations. AT&T has completed several DAS
installations, including 255 North California, 464 Churchill, 1720 Webster, 370 Lowell, and 1345
Webster. Council members may wish to visit one or more of these sites to assess the noise
impacts from a layperson’s standpoint. Staff has visited the sites and believes that the noise is
minimal adjacent to the pole and barely audible from 25 feet away.
Aesthetics
The Phase 3 installations follow the same design concepts that were reviewed by the ARB and
approved by the City Council in January 2012.
Carlson Circle Relocation to Street Right-of-Way
Several residents in the vicinity of the 3706 Carlson Circle site have objected to the relocation of
the pole from a public utility easement (PUE) to the street right-of-way. The City’s direction to
AT&T has been to avoid location of antennas and equipment on poles in PUEs, given their
proximity to homes and potential visual and noise concerns. This street, however, does not
have existing utility poles on the street and the residents have identified some alternatives
(including in PUEs) that might be viable. Staff recommends that the Council direct staff and
AT&T to work with the residents to evaluate the alternative sites and re-issue an approval
letter. AT&T concurs with the staff recommendation. The subsequent action would be
appealable to Council if any neighbor objected. The Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A)
has been prepared excluding this site from the Council approval at this time (condition #25).
City of Palo Alto Page 7
Other Objections
Staff also notes that some property owners objected (Attachment F) to the location and
installations of four other sites near their properties, but those residents did not formally
appeal the decision. Nevertheless, the entire Phase 3 project is one application, so the Council
may act on those or any other proposal in the package. Staff believes that the objections fall
into similar categories related to health impacts or visual concerns, as addressed above.
Conclusion
Staff believes that all of the site requests, other than 3706 Carlson Circle, are consistent with
City criteria and federal and state law for such installations, and the Director’s decisions should
be upheld. The approvals are reflected in the Record of Land Use Action.
Citywide Wireless Communications Facilities Study
In association with the Phase 1 DAS project, many residents requested the City to consider the
development of a city-wide master plan for wireless facilities. On May 16, 2011, Council
sponsored a study session to review issues related to wireless communications facilities (cell
towers and antennas). Consultants to the City and staff presented an overview of the need for
and technology related to such facilities, health issues, and relevant federal, state, and Palo Alto
regulations. The Council asked that staff continue the dialogue with the community to provide
better understanding for the public and the wireless industry. Council directed staff on July 2,
2012 to issue a request for proposal for a consultant/vendor to prepare a citywide wireless
communications facilities plan. The RFP was released on October 2, 2012. Staff has interviewed
four firms for the study and is finalizing its selection. A contract is expected to be awarded in
February.
Alternatives to Staff Recommendation
The Council may also consider the following alternatives rather than approval as proposed:
A. Council may remove the project from Consent to schedule and conduct a Public Hearing for
one or more of the specific DAS locations; OR
B. Council may remove the project from Consent to schedule and conduct a Public Hearing for
all of the proposed DAS locations.
Staff has targeted March 4, 2013 as a potential hearing date, given the wireless
communications “shot-clock” processing requirements. (AT&T has stipulated to a shot-clock
extension to accommodate the Council’s hearing schedule, if necessary.)
City of Palo Alto Page 8
Policy Implications
The proposed project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and staff believes there are no
other substantive policy implications. The project is supported by the following Comprehensive
Plan Policies: (B-13) Support the development of technologically-advanced communications
infrastructure and other improvements that will facilitate the growth of emerging
telecommunications industries; and (B-14) Work with electronic information network providers
to maximize potential benefits for Palo Alto businesses, schools, residences, and other potential
users.
Resource Impacts
The costs of project review by all staff and consultants is recovered by Architectural Review
application fees paid by AT&T. Pursuant to the City’s standard license agreement, AT&T will pay
the City $270 per year per installation, or a total of $4,050 per year for the 15 sites.
Environmental Review
The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) per section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Record of Land Use Action (DOC)
Attachment B: Location Map (PDF)
Attachment C: Appeals (PDF)
Attachment D: Hammett and Edison Noise Memo, July 27, 2012 (PDF)
Attachment E: Applicant's Submittal Information (PDF)
Attachment F: Public Comments (PDF)
Attachment G: Project Plans (Councilmembers and Libraries only) (TXT)
Attachment A
ACTION NO. 2013-01
RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION
FOR AT&T DAS PROJECT PHASE 3: ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 12PLN-00127
(AT&T, APPLICANT)
On January 28, 2013, the Council upheld the Director of
Planning and Community Environment’s December 18, 2012 decision to
approve the Architectural Review application of the co-location by
AT&T of (Distributed Antenna System, a.k.a. DAS) wireless
communications equipment on existing utility poles, removing the
DAS installation located adjacent to 3706 Carlson Circle making the
following findings, determination and declarations:
SECTION 1. Background. The City Council of the City of
Palo Alto (“City Council”) finds, determines, and declares as
follows:
A. On March 29, 2012, AT&T applied for Architectural
Review for the co-location of wireless communications equipment
(Distributed Antenna System) on 20 utility poles located within
City rights-of-ways near the following locations: 747 Loma Verde
Ave; 3284 Cowper; 3412 Ross/ 3374 Ross Rd; 3132 David Ave; 3415
Greer Rd; 3539 Louis Rd; 2385 Waverley; 3094 Greer Road on Maddux;
390 El Dorado Ave; 452 Loma Verde; 3524 Waverly on E. Meadow; 3706
Carlson Ci relocate to sidewalk; 3757 Corina Wy; 3915 Louis Rd; 631
E. Meadow; 3901 Middlefield Rd; 412 Ferne; 3945 Nelson Ave.; 1772
Hamilton Ave relocate to sidewalk; 109 Lois Lane. The proposed
equipment would include one antenna at the top of each pole and two
equipment boxes on the side of each pole (“The Project”).
B. On December 18, 2012, following staff review, the
Director of Planning and Community Environment (Director) approved
the Architectural Review (AR) application. Notices of the
Director’s decision were mailed notifying neighbors of the
decision. The action is contained in the CMR #3435.
D. Within the prescribed timeframe, five appeals of the
Director’s decision were filed by Palo Alto residents: Moss,
Keller, Ganesh, Kramer, and Petersen.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. This project is
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act per Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 3. Architectural Review Findings.
1. The design is consistent and compatible with applicable
elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. This finding can be
made in the affirmative in that the project, as conditioned,
incorporates a more streamlined design that conforms with policies
that encourage quality development that is compatible with
surrounding development and public spaces. The project is also
supported by the following Comprehensive Plan Policies: (B-13)
Support the development of technologically-advanced communications
AT&T DAS Phase 3
2
infrastructure and other improvements that will facilitate the
growth of emerging telecommunications industries; (B-14) Work with
electronic information network providers to maximize potential
benefits for Palo Alto businesses, schools, residences, and other
potential users.
2. The design is compatible with the immediate environment
of the site. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that
the proposed design, as conditioned, blends with the existing
utility poles that are located within various residential
neighborhoods within the City.
3. The design is appropriate to the function of the project.
This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the design of
the equipment is not excessive for the intended utility use and has
been improved with the required conditions of approval to
streamline the design with the back-up battery cabinet placed above
the prism and elimination of one antenna.
4. In areas considered by the board as having a unified
design character or historical character, the design is compatible
with such character. This finding is not applicable to this
project.
5. The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and
character in areas between different designated land uses. This
finding is not applicable to this project.
6. The design is compatible with approved improvements both
on and off the site. This finding can be made in the affirmative
in that the project, as conditioned, is compatible with the
existing utility poles.
7. 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. This finding is not applicable to this project.
8. The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate
to the design and the function of the structures. This finding is
not applicable to this project.
9. Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support
the main functions of the project and the same are compatible with
the project’s design concept. This finding is not applicable to
this project.
10. Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe
and convenient for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles. This finding
can be made in the affirmative in that the circulation under and
around the utility pole is not impacted.
AT&T DAS Phase 3
3
11. Natural features are appropriately preserved and
integrated with the project. This finding is not applicable to this
project.
12. The materials, textures, colors and details of
construction and plant material are appropriate expression to the
design and function. This finding can be made in the affirmative,
see Findings 2, 3, and 4 above.
13. The landscape design concept for the site, as shown by
the relationship of plant masses, open space, scale, plant forms
and foliage textures and colors create a desirable and functional
environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that
the project, as conditioned, will be required to plant some
additional street trees at some locations. The placement and
selection of the street trees will be reviewed and approved by
Public Works and Utilities to assure the plantings will be
consistent with City standards.
14. Plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site,
capable of being properly maintained on the site, and is of a
variety which would tend to be drought-resistant to reduce
consumption of water in its installation and maintenance. This
finding can be made in the affirmative, see Finding 13. All City
street trees are regularly maintained and will use only the
required amount of water needed for establishment and maintenance.
15. The project exhibits green building and sustainable
design that is energy efficient, water conserving, durable and
nontoxic, with high-quality spaces and high recycled content
materials. This finding is not applicable to this project. The
scope of the project is small and there is limited opportunity to
incorporate green building design into the sign installations.
16. The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose
of architectural review as set forth in subsection 18.76.020(a).
This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project
design, as conditioned, promotes visual environments that are
integrated into the aesthetics of the immediate environment of an
industrial utility facility.
SECTION 4. Architectural Review Approval Granted.
Architectural Review Approval is hereby granted for the Project by
the City Council pursuant to Chapter 18.77 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code.
SECTION 5. Plan Approval.
The plans submitted for Building Permit shall be in
substantial conformance with those plans prepared by AT&T titled
Palo Alto ODAS, consisting of 63 pages, and received September 13,
AT&T DAS Phase 3
4
2012, except as modified to incorporate the conditions of approval
in Section 6. A copy of these plans is on file in the Department
of Planning and Community Development.
SECTION 6. Conditions of Approval.
Planning Division
1. The project shall be in substantial conformance with the
approved plans and related documents received September 13,
2012, except as modified to incorporate these conditions of
approval.
2. All conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover
sheet of the plan set submitted to obtain any permit through
the Building Inspection Division.
3. Any modifications/additions to the approved plans shall be
approved by Planning prior to construction and installation.
4. The project approval shall be valid for a period of one year
from the original date of approval. In the event a building
permit(s), if applicable, is not secured for the project
within the time limit specified above, the approval shall
expire and be of no further force or effect.
5. For all pole installations, the backup battery cabinet shall
be placed above the prism box.
6. For the life of the project, the size of the battery cabinet
shall be reduced as technology improves so as to maintain the
smallest battery cabinet needed.
7. The antenna, cabinet boxes, and pole extension shall be
painted either “Rock Brown” or “Sand Brown”, with a matte
finish, to match the existing color and finish of the utility
pole, and all other equipment (i.e. wiring and related
hardware) shall be painted with a matte finish to blend in
with the background material/color of the pole.
8. The project shall be reviewed by the Utilities Department to
determine if the pole is feasible for the placement of the
proposed equipment and antennas. If the Utilities department
does not support the placement of the equipment on the pole,
the applicant shall submit a new Architectural Review
application to the Planning Division for review of proposed
alternative pole selection.
9. For sites that require new street tree installations, the
applicant shall coordinate with the Public Works Tree
Division, Utilities Department, and Transportation Division
to gain approval for the placement and selection of tree
AT&T DAS Phase 3
5
type. If the City departments do not support the placement of
a city tree for screening purposes for the identified
locations, then that site is no longer approved for the
equipment installation and the applicant shall be required to
submit a new Architectural Review application to the Planning
Division for review of proposed alternative pole selection.
10. The applicant, in coordination with City departments, shall
(1) analyze all proposed sites to determine whether new
street trees can be added in the immediate vicinity for
screening purposes and (2) add additional trees where
feasible.
11. The preferred selection for new street trees shall be
evergreen trees, as deemed appropriate by Public Works and
the Utilities department.
12. Unless the City agrees to a modification of this condition,
the requirements to install new street trees shall be 100%
the responsibility of the applicant and shall be completed
prior to the installation of pole equipment.
13. For installations in the City right-of-way, the Applicant
shall endeavor to minimize the noise at the property line
boundary with adjacent residential property, and shall
attempt to keep such noise below 6dB above the ambient level
most of the time, when fans are running at their normal
setting. If such a standard is not reasonably achievable for
a site, then the Applicant voluntarily agrees to use
commercially reasonable efforts to ensure that the noise
level does not exceed 6 dB above the ambient noise level at
the nearest location of a residential structure. Under no
circumstances shall the noise exceed the noise standard in
Municipal Code 9.10.050 (i.e., +15dB over ambient at 25
feet).
14. The applicant shall submit a sound analysis of an operating
installation within two months of the project
installation/operation for City approval. The analysis shall
clearly delineate how the installation complies with the
previously listed condition regarding noise. Applicant may be
required to submit these reports periodically for the life of
the project, as determined by the Director of Planning.
15. The applicant shall perform a radio frequency (RF) analysis
for each of the twenty installations to document the RF
emissions for the installed and operating equipment. This
analysis shall be submitted to the City within two months of
the project installation/operation. Applicant may be required
to submit these reports periodically for the life of the
project, as determined by the Director of Planning.
AT&T DAS Phase 3
6
16. If for any reason the project requires modification from the
approved plans in any way, the applicant shall contact
Planning staff for a determination on whether the change
requires a new application for Architectural Review and
Historic Review, if applicable, to be submitted.
17. Pole 1/Node P2N11A (747 Loma Verde Ave): Equipment shall face
trees to the south west.
18. Pole 2/Node P2N15B installation shall be located adjacent to
3284 Cowper St.
19. Pole 3/Node P2N20A installation shall be adjacent to
3412/3374 Ross Road and an additional street tree shall be
required to the left side of pole.
20. Pole 5/Node P2N24A (3415 Greer Road): Low growing (+/-
15’tall) street tree shall be planted to the south side of
pole.
21. Pole 7/Node P2N51A installation shall be adjacent to 2385
Waverley St and an additional street tree shall be planted to
the left.
22. Pole 8/Node P2N52A (3094 Greer Road): Verify that the maple
tree is still growing to the left of the pole; if tree no
longer there, applicant shall install a new street tree.
23. Pole 9/Node P2N6A installation shall be located adjacent to
390 El Dorado Ave.
24. Pole 11/Node P2N10B shall be located adjacent to 3524
Waverley Street, on E. Meadow.
25. Pole 12/Node P2N13A (3706 Carlson Circle) installation shall
require the utility pole to be moved to the inside edge of
sidewalk and one low growing street tree shall be installed
to the left of the pole, with agreement of the adjacent
property owner be eliminated from the project approval. AT&T
shall work with staff and neighbors to determine if an
alternative location is feasible for AT&T’s coverage needs
and submit that site for separate Architectural Review.
26. Pole 15/Node P2N31A installation shall be located adjacent to
631 E. Meadow Drive.
27. Pole 17/Node P2N34B installation shall be located adjacent to
412 Ferne Ave.
28. Pole 19/Node P2N25A (1772 Hamilton Ave) installation shall
require the utility pole to be moved to the inside edge of
AT&T DAS Phase 3
7
sidewalk and shall install one low growing street tree to the
left of the pole.
29. Pole 20/Node P2N13A (109 Lois Lane) installation shall
require the utility pole to be moved to the inside edge of
sidewalk and one low growing street tree shall be installed
to the left of the pole.
30. All cost recoverable charges related to this Planning
entitlement process, per the cost recovery agreement, shall
be paid in full and in a timely manner; these include charges
for two consultants hired for peer review of this project.
Non-payment may result in the withholding of other city
required permits and or approvals required for the project to
move forward to the construction phase.
Fire Department
31. The applicant shall submit a completed copy the document
entitled “Optional Checklist for Local Government to
Determine Whether a Facility is Categorically Excluded.” If
the applicant is required to submit an Environmental
Assessment (EA) to the FCC, please indicate if it has been
submitted and the date submitted.
Electric Utility
32. Electric Utility shall not perform any operations and/or
engineering until a Master License Agreement is signed
between AT&T and the City of Palo Alto. AT&T shall not attach
any equipment on the City's portion of any utility pole until
the Master License Agreement is signed by both parties. The
Master License Agreement will determine the procedures,
policies, fees and responsibilities for DAS work on joint
utility poles.
SECTION 7. Indemnity.
To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify
and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers,
employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”)from and against
any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against
the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or
void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project,
including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual
attorneys fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation.
The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such
action with attorneys of its own choice.
SECTION 8. Term of Approval. Architectural Review
Approval. The approval shall be valid for one year from the
AT&T DAS Phase 3
8
original date of approval, pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code
Section 18.77.090.
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED:
_________________________ ____________________________
City Clerk Director of Planning and
Community Environment
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Senior Asst. City Attorney
PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED:
Those plans prepared by AT&T titled Palo Alto ODAS, consisting of
63 pages and received September 13, 2012.
Phase 3 - Palo Alto oDAS
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
N25A
N38A
P2N7A
P2N6A
P2N52AP2N51A
P2N36A
P2N34B
P2N33A
P2N32A
P2N31A
P2N28A
P2N27A
P2N24A
P2N21A
P2N20AP2N15B
P2N13A
P2N11A
P2N10B
AL
M
A
MID
DLEFIEL
D
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
PAGE MILL
EMBARCADERO
C H A R LE S T O N
O R E G O N
FOOTHILL
C H U R C HILL
J
U
NIP
E
R
O S
E
R
R
A
S A N D HIL L
PALMARBORETUM
RENGSTORFF
G A L V E Z
EL CAMINO REAL
£¤101
Legend
kj N25A, 1772 Hamilton Ave
kj N38A, 109 Lois Ln
kj P2N10B, 3524 Waverly St
kj P2N11A, 747 Loma Verde Ave
kj P2N13A, 3706 Carlson Cir
kj P2N15B, 3284 Cowper St
kj P2N20A, 3412 Ross Rd/3374 Ross Rd
kj P2N21A, 3132 David Ave
kj P2N24A, 3415 Greer Rd
kj P2N27A, 3757 Corina Way
kj P2N28A, 3915 Louis Rd
kj P2N31A, 631 E Meadow Dr
kj P2N32A, 3901 Middlefield Rd
kj P2N33A, 3539 Louis Rd
kj P2N34B, 412 Ferne Ave
kj P2N36A, 3945 Nelson Dr
kj P2N51A, 2385 Waverly St
kj P2N52A, 3094 Greer Rd
kj P2N6A, 390 El Dorado
kj P2N7A, 452 Loma Verde Ave ³
AT&T Proprietary (Internal Use Only)Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies except under written agreement.Telco proprietary data is not to be disclosed to siloed employees.
Gonsalves. Ronna
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
0 1i t I • ..ttlm ;) Gr F ICE
elainekllr@aol.com
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 10:54 AM 13 JAN 22 PM 12: 50
Council, City
scott.l.keller@lmco.com
Appeal of AT&T DAS Antennas Phase ill -3945 Nelson Drive
KELLER-LANDSCAPING_PLAN.pdf; Map_oC3945_Nelson_and_Environs.pdf
Dear Honorable City Council Members:
I am writing to make you aware of my husband's and my concerns regarding the AT&T DAS antenna installation on the
telephone pole adjacent to our back yard at 3945 Nelson Drive. My husband has written to you before, but we wanted to
make you aware that we have formally appealed the installation and to reiterate our concerns.
We are in a unique situation in that the pole at 3945 Nelson Drive is located on the side of our property at the back
property line, just a few feet from the gate to our backyard patio, and not at the front curb as is usually the case. We own
an Eichler, and we purchased the property because of the indoor/outdoor space concept. It is a small house, and we see
the backyard as an important extension of our living space. Before we knew about this proposed antenna, we
relandscaped our entire back yard and added a patio in the back corner of the property, abutting the telephone pole in
question. (See Attachment #1). In the January 23.2012 City Council meeting to approve Phase I of this project, City
Planning stated that they were not recommending that antennas be located in people's back yards. but that is exactly
what is happening here. The antenna is loud and unSightly and would basically become a part of our backyard space.
We have tried, on multiple occasions, to address this issue with both the Palo Alto City Planning department and AT&T.
City Planning has directed us to work things out directly with AT&T. In a June 25, 2012 email, Clare Campbell from the
Palo Alto Planning Department stated that she "will be communicating directly with you, the property owner, regarding
your concerns with the DAS project" but I have never been able to have a direct conversation with her. She went on to
say that she was forwarding my concerns to AT&T and that "AT&T needs to communicate with you what their needs are
and how those can be met with the various pole sitings." AT&T did not initiate a response with me on this matter. After I
called AT&T multiple times, including calls to Ms. Clunie's supervisor, I was told that the location of the antenna in
question was "critical" but information on why this was so was never given to me, despite multiple requests.
I have tried repeatedly to engage AT&T in a conversation about this antenna location. I have sent Shiyama Clunie from
AT&T External Affairs (and Clare Campell from Palo Alto City Planning) proposed alternative locations and have tried to
engage AT&T in a conversation on the matter. Our property is adjacent or in close proximity to numerous public and
commercial spaces that could be used to house this antenna. (See Attachment #2). Ms. Clunie tells me that the antenna
in question could not possibly be moved, not even by 30 feet over to Cubberley, which is right behind us. When we
question this (my husband and I are both engineers and this makes no sense to us), we have been kept at bay and have
never received any information on why the 3945 Nelson Drive location is so critical. Ms. Clunie assured us as recently as
January 4, 2013 (and copied City Council members on the email), that "I'll review your suggestions and will provide you
with a written response shortly." We have never received any explanations from her or anyone at AT&T, just as we did
not hear back from her after Clare Campbell forwarded my June 25,2012 email to her.
I call upon you, the Palo Alto City Council, to balance your citizens' rights against those of corporations like AT&T and
ensure due process is met. I am really surprised and disheartened that AT&T has so much control in this process. I have
spoken to many others who are affected by the antennas, and the community at large feels railroaded by AT&T in this
process. The Planning Department is asking citizens to work with AT&T, but AT&T has no incentive to consider moving
any antennas, regardless of the reason, and is effectively stonewalling anyone who tries to engage with them in this
matter. .
Please do call me at 650-384-6411 with any questions you might have. I very much appreCiate your thoughtful
consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Elaine M. Keller
1
RESIDENCE
... "
\(ELlt;K
t<ES\vE7\l~
NELSONDRIVE ~qLtS NeJ~ 1:)-
Thlo A\1-o
GoogleMaps Page loft
e
1'D~~\ ~\~.~ loc~s
[[Ie-.ry .c{ 'Palo~11o.1>G\\"k'S /'e:.hoJ.-s. /oihz(o+, LA",c3
I. aGree f\ ~.»J~M~(\ ~~S~ ~
• COM.~al ~ce Cc"'arl.es~o~ ~-b-)
~ l'~FSCt·J ~ T an.\ef'\f\a \ouJl.O" .
• ?o.\enhq\.C\I.\ecn~Ve.. IO~$ ~ A1tf ))~ aftkf\~
0\'1 e.~~~~ *t~~h<.. 1Dle~
hUps:llmaps.googkuomfmaps?Fh&bF=eb&ie=U1'F8AII=31.417737,·122.1U278&SplFO.O.,. 11312013
Gonsalves. Ronna
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Ms. Clunie,
elainekllr@aoLcom
Wednesday, January 23, 2013 12:58 PM
sr2597@att.com
'3 JAN 23 PH 3: 22
sctkllr@aoLcom; Campbell, Clare; Keene, James; Council, City; Williams, Curtis; mn3281
@att.com; pa@mallp.com
Re: EXTERNAL: RE: AT&TDAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Thank you for responding to my many requests for more information. However, I do not agree with your arguments in
their entirety.
First of all, the ARB approved this location based on misinformation provided by AT&T. You submitted photos of the area
taken in March or so of 2012, well before the relandscaping that we did in May (before we know about this plan at
all). This relandscaping eliminated the foilage screening that you claim existed aroud the telephone pole in question. We
made you aware of the lack of screening at this location as early as June, 2012, but you stili submitted erroneous photos
of the location to the ARB in September, which led to their December approval of the site .. There is no screening
whatsoever at this location and you were made aware of that.
Secondly, you do not address the possibility of moving the DAS antenna over to Cubberley, which is just a few feet from
our property. At the proposed Parkside location, you are proposing to install a new AT&T telephone pole. Why isn't this
possible at Cubberley? Or why can't you attach the antenna to an existing light pole at Cubberely, as the January 23,
2012 City Council minutes stated would be the alternative in cases of underground utilities? It does not appear that you
have addressed either of these alternatives, and these locations would be close enough to not impact your coverage.
Lastly, could you please provide the system design impact and the network performance impact for each of the
alternatives that we have proposed along with technical proof that the alternatives are unworkable. This antenna would
basically be located in our back yard. I feel you need to pursue EVERY alternative to that event, and we are not yet
convinced that you have done so.
Thank you.
Elaine Keller
-----Original Message-----
From: CLUNIE, SHIYAMA <sr2597@att.com>
To: 'elainekllr@aol,com' <elainekllr@aoLcom>
Cc: 'sctkllr@aol.com' <sctkllr@aol.com>; 'clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org' <clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org>;
'james. keene@cityofpaloalto.org' <james. keene@cityofpaloalto.org>; 'city .council@cityofpaloalto.org'
<city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; 'curtis.williams@cityofpaloalto.org' <curtis.williams@cityofpaloalto.org>; NGUYEN,
MINH V <mn3281@att.com>; 'Paul Albritton (pa@mallp.com)' <pa@mallp.com>
Sent: Tue, Jan 22, 2013 9:43 pm
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Elaine -As you and I discussed when we spoke in July and October of 2012, we've carefully considered the sites that
you suggested, and unfortunately they are not viable alternatives for AT&T. DAS nodes are low powered in nature and
have only a one to two block range. As a result, the planning division-approved AT&T DAS network already includes
facilities adjacent to the alternatives you suggest, including Piazza Shopping Center, the Greenmeadow Community
Center and Mitchell Park, in addition to the node at 3945 Nelson Drive.
Similarly, the area that would be served by the poles that you reference, located at the intersection of Nelson Dr. and
Charleston Avenue, are already covered by nodes planned nearby, to the north of Middlefield and on the east side of
Charleston, as well as by a node currently planned for Parkside Ave. If we moved the node at 3945 Nelson Drive to the
Nelson Dr.lCharleston Ave. location, it would create overlaps in coverage close to that site, and gaps in coverage
between that location and other nearby nodes. The poles along the access driveway to Cubberley adjacent to your
property are located in rear residential yards and are not accessible to AT&T.
4
Please know that each of the 19 utility poles approved in the AT&T Phase II I DAS project were selected from 77 poles
evaluated by AT&T, the City Planning Division and Utilities Department, as well as the City's third party consultant to
identify poles with the least aesthetic impact to neighbors and the community using criteria established by the city's
Architectural Review Board (ARB). Each individual DAS node also uses the diminutive, streamlined design that resulted
from months of comment and review by the public and ARB. While we understand your concerns, AT&T continues to
believe that 3945 Nelson Drive is the preferred location for AT&T's DAS node to provide needed wireless service to this
area with the least impacts. I have attached the first page of the Planning Division's approvals of AT&T's Phase III and
Phase IV DAS projects that lists the specific address of each approved pole for your reference.
Finally, you correctly mention that the permit application for Phase "' of the DAS project was submitted in March
2012. However, the application was not accepted by the City as complete until September 2012. As noted above, AT&T
has worked with Palo Alto's Planning Division, Utilities Department and the City's outside consultant to find locations that
suit each neighborhood's coverage needs and aesthetics. This process has taken many months.
I hope that this e-mail addresses your concerns adequately. If I've overlooked an issue or concern that you raised or
didn't answer a question to your satisfaction, please let me know.
Best regards,
Shiyama
Shiyama Clunie
Area Manager
AT&T External Affairs, Santa Clara County and Southern San Mateo County
Office: (650) 473-8022
Cell: (510) 326-8897
From: CLUNIE, SHIYAMA
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 11 :00 AM
To: 'elainekllr@aol.com'
Cc: sctkllr@aol.com; clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org; james.keene@cityofpaloalto.org; city.council@cityofpaloalto.org;
curtis.williams@cityofpaloalto.org; NGUYEN, MINH V; Paul Albritton (pa@mallp.com)
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Elaine -
I'm glad that we agree that we have had phone conversations and have exchanged e-mails and voice-mails
over a period of months. I'm sorry that you don't feel that the information that I provided on alternative sites
was detailed enough. I'll review your suggestions and will provide you with a written response shortly.
Best regards,
Shiyama
Shiyama Clunie
Area Manager
AT&T External Affairs, Santa Clara County and Southern San Mateo County
Office: (650) 473-8022
Cell: (510) 326-8897
From: elainekllr@aol.com [mailto:elainekllr@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 10: 12 AM
To: CLUNIE, SHIYAMA
Cc: sctkllr@aol.com; clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org; james.keene@cityofpaloalto.org; city.council@cityofpaloalto.org
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
5
Shiyama, I agree that we have had telephone conversations in addition to emails. I also agree that you have told me that
you do not have alternatives to the antenna location in our backyard. But, when I asked you for detailed information to
support that comment, I have not received it.
It may be inconvenient for AT&T to move this antenna but this not an excuse to force a noisy antenna system to abut a
disabled person's -or anyone else's -back yard, just feet from their patio and entranceway. It is not plausible to us that,
with all the choices within very close distance to us, that the only technically acceptable solution is our exact location. In
fact, our little community is surrounded by phone poles and opportunities for your system in more commercial or public
environments all within a few feet of us. In the attached map you can see multiple locations that should be
suitable. There are easily accessible telephone poles abutting the Piazza's shopping center (Charleston Center), where
higher noise levels are already standard. There are telephone poles at the intersection of Nelson and Charleston which
face a major intersection rather than a residential back yard. Neither is far from the current proposed site. If you look at .
the attached map, there is an over-abundance of public and commercial space in the immediate vicinity of this antenna
location that could support the antenna. Clearly, the antenna does not have to be on a telephone pole. Per the January
23,2012 Palo Alto City Council meeting notes, light poles will be used when telephone poles are not available due to
underground utilities. There is no reason why light poles or phone poles at Cubberly or Mitchell Park could not be used in
this case. Cubberly is only 50 to 100 feet away! AT&T's statements to us regarding alternative locations lack specifics
and are not credible.
Thank you. Elaine and Scott Keller
-----Original Message----
From: Keller, Scott L <scott.l.keller@lmco.com>
To: 'elainekllr@aol,com' <elainekllr@aol,com>
Sent: Fri, Jan 4, 2013 8:31 am '
Subject: Fw: EXTERNAL: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Sent from my Blackberry
From: CLUNIE, SHIYAMA [mailto:sr2597@att.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04,201308:37 AM
To: 'elainekllr@aol.com' <elainekllr@aol.com>; 'clare.campbell@citvofpaloalto.org' <clare.campbell@citvofpaloalto.org>
Cc: Keller, Scott L
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Elaine -
My records show that I called you on July 13th• As you mention below, when you left a message for me on
September 29th (a Saturday), I called you back on Tuesday, October 2nd , after doing research on the site in
question.
Our interactions didn't consist of voice-mails, exclusively. I had a phone conversation with you, during which
we discussed alternatives that had been considered and eliminated.
This week, I've put together an e-mail response for you, and you'll receive that shortly.
Sincerely,
Shiyama
Shiyama Clunie
Area Manager
AT&T External Affairs, Santa Clara County and Southern San Mateo County
Office: (650) 473-8022 .
Cell: (510) 326-8897
6
From: CLUNIE, SHIYAMA
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 6:59 AM
To: 'elainekllr@aol.com'; clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org
Cc: scott.l.keller@lmco.com
Subject: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Hello Elaine -
We considered several alternatives to this location, as I shared with you when we spoke in November. I've put
together an e-mail response for you, which you'll receive shortly.
Sincerely,
Shiyama
Shiyama Clunie
Area Manager
AT&T External Affairs, Santa Clara County and Southern San Mateo County
Office: (650) 473-8022
Cell: (510) 326-8897
From: elainekllr@aol.com [mailto:elainekllr@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 1:47 PM
To: clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org; CLUNIE, SHIYAMA
Cc: scott.l.keller@lmco.com
Subject: Fwd: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Hello and Happy New Year to both of you.
I am writing to resend an email that I originally sent to the two of you back in early November of 2012, documenting our
concerns with the placement of an AT&T DAS system just outside of our side yard fence and within just a few feet our our
backyard living space. In the letter, I proposed three alternative placements for the antenna in close proximity to our
property. I have not heard back from either of you regarding the feasibility of these alternate sites. My husband and I are
formally protesting the placement of this antenna in Phase 3 of the AT&T DAS system, and we would appreciate your
response to the alternative locations as part of this appeal.
Thank you.
Elaine Keller
-----Orig inal Message-----
From: elainekllr <elainekllr@aol.com>
To: sr2597 <sr2597@att.com>
Sent: Mon, Nov 5, 20125:52 pm
Subject: Fwd: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Shiyama, this is the email address that I used last week when I sent the email below, although it looks very different in the
CC: line below. It did not come back as 'returned,' though.
Elaine
-----Original Message-----
From: elainekllr <elainekllr@aol.com>
To: clare. campbell <clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org>
Cc: ""\"sr2597 sr2597\"" <"sr2597 sr2597''''@att.com>; scott.l.keller <scott.l.keller@lmco.com>
Sent: Tue, Oct 30,20125:54 pm
Subject: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
7
Dear Clare,
My husband and I remain extremely concerned about plans to locate an AT&T DAS antenna on a telephone pole abutting
our back yard at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto. Per city documentation, it is Node # P2N36A. We would like to petition
the city to relocate this antenna to another location. There are multiple locations in the vicinity that would be much more
acceptable. Please bear with me as I step through our concerns and our attempts to obtain Clarification.
NOTICES:
To date, we have received no notices from the city regarding this project, nor have any of our neighbors, which is
disheartening in and of itself. The fact that the city, together with AT&T, could even attempt to make decisions as to
antenna placement without alerting the affected neighbors and understanding their individual concerns is just
inconceivable. On the first two rounds of documents, AT&T and the city didn't even get our address right (first listed as
3495 Nelson Drive, then 3945 Nelson Avenue).
My husband and I were only made aware of the project from another local resident who was affected by an antenna in
Phase II, even though a September 12,2012 letter from Minh V. Nguyen of AT&T to Clare Campbell cites a March 29,
2012 Phase III application date. This 9-12-12 document went on to state that the 3945 Nelson Drive "location is
acceptable as has less impacts to residences due to siting by athletic fields and within semi-deciduous tree
canopy." The semi-deciduous tree canopy being referenced was removed when our yard was landscaped in May, 2012
(at which point we still had no idea about this project) but is still being referenced in the 9-12-12 letter, along with pre-May
2012 photos. We formally request that the city of Palo Alto and AT&T follow established laws and processes in terms of
understanding residenfs concerns and impacts and cease work on the DAS planning in this area until they do so.
CONVERSATIONS WITH AT&T:
AT&T has been impossible to deal with in regards to this matter. Their idea of External Relations leaves a lot to be
desired. I originally emailed you, Clare, with my concerns on June 25,2012 and was informed that you would forward my
concerns to Shiyama Clunie in External Affairs at AT&T. By July 10 of 2012,1 had still not heard from Shiyama and you
suggested that I call her supervisor, John Jefferson at AT&T. John reiterated that I needed to work with Shiyama, but still,
weeks and then months passed with no communications from her.
Fast forwarding to September -I attempted once again to contact AT&T after being made aware of the September 12,
2012 letter referenced above. I called John Jefferson on September 29 and was again referred to Shiyama Clunie, whom
I left a voice message for on the same day. Shiyama returned my call with a voice message on October 2,2012, saying
that her engineers felt the pole near our house was the ONLY suitable location in the area for their antenna, something
that I do not begin to believe. My husband and I both have engineering degrees and realize that such a statement is
absurd. I have since called Shiyama back an additional THREE times over the ensuing weeks, and she has yet to return
my call. The last call that I placed to her was on October 26, 2012.
NOISE AND AESTHETIC CONCERNS:
We are very concerned about the noise that will be generated from the DAS antenna and are fairly certain that it will
exceed the guidelines for residential noise pollution as outlined in City of Palo Alto
Noise Ordinance, PAMC Chapter 9.10. Because the antenna would be adjacent to our side/back yard, it is only a few feet
away from the backyard areathat is occupied on a daily basis, throughout the day and often well into the evening
hours. This imposition is much greater than if the antenna were to have been located at the curb in the front yard. I am
handicapped and as such I spend a disproportionate amount of my time in my house / yard. We recently had our yard
landscaped so as to make better use of the outdoor space and hence improve my quality of life. As it stands, the
antenna will be located:
1) on an easement located within our residential property line,
2) a mere 30" from the fence to our back yard and just adjacent to the gate into the back yard area, and
3) just 25' from our bedroom window.
It is inconceivable that the hum from this antenna, which is quite noticeable, would not be heard loud and clear from within
the indoor/outdoor area which we consider living space. Additionally, any stress will aggravate my medical condition,
which is life limiting. The noise of the AT&T DAS antenna will undoubtedly add to my stress level. Lastly, the antenna
itself is unsightly and we would have a clear line of sight from our back yard and our bedroom window.
s
ALTERNATE SITES:
Contrary to AT&T's supposition, there are multiple sites in the immediate area that would be better candidates for
placement ofthis antenna:
1) Cubberly Community Center First and foremost, locating the pole at the nearby Cubberly Community Center
would alleviate a host of problems -it would be on city property and subject to public noise ordinances, the
property is not used full-time and hence would not be under as much scrutiny, and for engineering purposes the
antenna would be located close to its originally designated location.
2) Piazza's Shopping Center Piazza's and the adjacent shopping complex (and a pole near the parking lot of
Piazzas) afford a vast area of space from which to choose an antenna location. This pole is in an area where the
ambient noise is much greater than our quiet corner and is close to the original AT&T location.
3) Greenmeadow Pool Area The area surrounding Greenmeadow's pool and park also offers potential locations
that are better hidden from both residential sight and sound disturbances.
We formally request the city of Palo Alto relocate this antenna to a more suitable site than 3945 Nelson Drive.
Thank you for your patience in listening to my concerns. Please let me know what the next steps are that I should take.
would be happy to meet with you at any time regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Elaine Keller
9
Gonsalves, Ronna
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
"c: :1Y CLE{,t 's u hCE
CLUNIE, SHIYAMA <sr2597@att.com>
Tuesday, January 22,2013 9:14 PI'13 J ~I~ 23 PH 3: 25
'elainekllr@aoLcom'
'sctkllr@aoLcom'; Campbell, Clare; Keene, James; Council, City; Williams, Curtis;
NGUYEN, MINH V; 'Paul Albritton (pa@mallp.com)'
RE: EXTERNAL: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Pages from Phase 3 and 4 Directors ApprovaLpdf
Elaine -As you and I discussed when we spoke in July and October of2012, we've carefully considered the
sites that you suggested, and unfortunately they are not viable alternatives for AT&T. DAS nodes are low
powered in nature mId have only a one to two block range. As a result, the planning division-approved AT&T
DAS network already includes facilities adjacent to the alternatives you suggest, including Piazza Shopping
Center, the Greeimleadow Community Center and Mitchell Park, in addition to the node at 3945 Nelson Drive.
Similarly, the area that would be served by the poles that you reference, located at the intersection ofNel~n Dr.
and Charleston Avenue, are already covered by nodes planned nearby, to the north of Middlefield and on the
east side of Charleston, as well as by a node cUlTently planned for Parkside Ave. If we moved the node at 3945
Nelson Drive to the Nelson Dr.lCharleston Ave. location, it would create overlaps in coverage close to that site,
mId gaps in coverage between that location and other nearby nodes. The poles along the access driveway to
Cubberley adjacent to your property are located in rear residential yards and are not accessible to AT&T.
Please know that each of the 19 utility poles approved in the AT&T Phase III DAS project were selected from
77 poles evaluated by AT&T, the City Plmming Division and Utilities Department, as well as the City's third
party consultant to identify poles with the least aesthetic impact to neighbors and the commlmity using criteria
established by the city's Architectural Review Board (ARB). Each individual DAS node also uses the
diminutive, streamlined design that resulted from months of comment mId review by the public and
ARB. While we understand your concerns, AT&T continues to believe that 3945 Nelson Drive is the preferred
location for AT&T's DAS node to provide needed wireless service to this area with the least impacts. I have
attached the first page of the Plarming Division's approvals of AT&T's Phase III and Phase IV DAS projects
that lists the speci1ic address of each approved pole for your reference.
Finally, you cOlTectly mention that the permit application for Phase III of the DAS project was submitted in
March 2012. However, the application was not accepted by the City as complete until September 2012. As
noted above, AT&T has worked with Palo Alto's Planning Division, Utilities Department mId the City's outside
consultant to find locations that suit each neighborhood's coverage needs and aesthetics. This process has taken
many months.
I hope that this e-mail addresses your concerns adequately. If I've overlooked an issue or concern that you
raised or didn't answer a question to your satisfaction, please let me know.
Best regards,
Shiymna
Shiyama Clunie
Area Manager
1
AT&T External Affairs, Santa Clara County and Southern San Mateo County
Office: (650) 473-8022
Cell: (510) 326-8897
From: CLUNIE, SHIYAMA
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 11:00 AM
To: 'elainekllr@aol.com'
Cc: sctkllr@aol.com; clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org; james.keene@cityofpaloalto.org; city.council@cityofpaloalto.org;
curtis.williams@cityofpaloalto.org; NGUYEN, MINH V; Paul Albritton (pa@mallp.com)
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Elaine -
I'm glad that we agree that we have had phone conversations and have exchanged e-mails and voice-mails over a period
of months. I'm sorry that you don't feel that the information that I provided on alternative sites was detailed
enough. I'll review your suggestions and will provide you with a written response shortly.
Best regards,
Shiyama
Shiyama Clunie
Area Manager
AT&T External Affairs, Santa Clara County and Southern San Mateo County
Office: (650) 473-8022
Cell: (510) 326-8897
From: elainekllr@aol.com [mailto:elainekllr@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04,2013 10:12 AM
To: CLUNIE, SHIYAMA
Cc: sctkllr@aol.com; clare.campbell@citvofpaloalto.org; james.keene@cityofpaloalto.org; city.council@cityofpaloalto.org
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Shiyama, I agree that we have had telephone conversations in addition to emails. I also agree that
you have told me that you do not have alternatives to the antenna location in our backyard. But,
when I asked you for detailed information to support that comment, I have not received it.
It may be inconvenient for AT&T to move this antenna but this not an excuse to force a
noisy antenna system to abut a disabled person's -or anyone else's -back yard, just feet from their
patio and entranceway. It is not plausible to us that, with all the choices within very close distance to
us, that the only technically acceptable solution is our exact location. In fact, our little community is
surrounded by phone poles and opportunities for your system in more commercial or public
environments all within a few feet of us. In the attached map you can see multiple locations that
should be suitable. There are easily accessible telephone poles abutting the Piazza's shopping
center (Charleston Center), where higher noise levels are already standard. There are telephone
poles at the intersection of Nelson and Charleston which face a major intersection rather than a
residential back yard. Neither is far from the current proposed site. If you look at the attached map,
there is an over-abundance of public and commercial space in the immediate vicinity of this antenna
location that could support the antenna. Clearly, the antenna does not have to be on a telephone
2
pole. Per the January 23, 2012 Palo Alto City Council meeting notes, light poles will be used when
telephone poles are not available due to underground utilities. There is no reason why light poles or
phone poles at Cubberly or Mitchell Park could not be used in this case. Cubberly is only 50 to
100 feet away! AT&T's statements to us regarding alternative locations lack specifics and are not
credible.
Thank you. Elaine and Scott Keller
--Original Message----
From: Keller, Scott L <scott.l.keller@lmco.com>
To: 'elainekllr@aol.com' <elainekllr@aol.com>
Sent: Fri, Jan 4, 2013 8:31 am
Subject: Fw: EXTERNAL: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Sent from my Blackberry
From: CLUNIE, SHIYAMA lmailto:sr2597@att.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04,201308:37 AM
To: 'elainekllr@aol.com' <elainekllr@aol.com>; 'clare.campbell@citvofpaloalto.org' <clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org>
Cc: Keller, Scott L
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Elaine -
. My records show that I called you on July 13th• As you mentiqn below, when you left a message for me on
September 29th (a Saturday), I called you back on Tuesday, October 2nd, after doing research on the site in
question.
Our interactions didn't consist of voice-mails, exclusively. I had a phone conversation with you, during which
we discussed alternatives that had been considered and eliminated.
This week, I've put together an e-mail response for you, and you'll receive that shortly.
Sincerely,
Shiyama
Shiyama Clunie
Area Manager
AT&T External Affairs, Santa Clara County and Southern San Mateo County
Office: (650) 473-8022
Cell: (510) 326-8897
From: CLUNIE, SHIYAMA
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 6:59 AM
To: 'elainekllr@aol.com'; clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org
Cc: scott.l.keller@lmco.com
Subject: RE: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, P,alo Alto
Hello Elaine -
3
We considered several alternatives to this location, as I shared with you when we spoke in November. I've put
together an e-mail response for you, which you'll receive shortly.
Sincerely,
Shiyama
Shiyama Clunie
Area Manager
AT&T External Affairs, Santa Clara County and Southern San Mateo County
Office: (650) 473-8022
Cell: (510) 326-8897
From: elainekllr@aol.com [mailto:elainekllr@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 03,20131:47 PM
To: clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org; CLUNIE, SHIYAMA
Cc: scott.l.keller@lmco.com
Subject: Fwd: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Hello and Happy New Year to both of you.
I am writing to resend an email that I originally sent to the two of you back in early November of 2012, documenting our
concerns with the placement of an AT&T DAS system just outside of our side yard fence and within just a few feet our our
backyard living space. In the letter, I proposed three alternative placements for the antenna in close proximity to our
property. I have not heard back from either of you regarding the feasibility of these alternate sites. My husband and I are
formally protesting the placement of this antenna in Phase 3 of the AT&T DAS system, and we would appreciate your
response to the alternative locations as part of this appeal.
Thank you.
Elaine Keller
-----Original Message-----
From: elainekllr <elainekllr@aol.com>
To: sr2597 <sr2597@att.com>
Sent: Mon, Nov 5,20125:52 pm
Subject: Fwd: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Shiyama, this is the email address that I used last week when I sent the email below, although it looks very different in the
CC: line below. It did not come back as 'returned,' though.
Elaine
-----Original Message-----
From: elainekllr <elainekllr@aol.com>
To: clare.campbell <clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org>
Cc: ""\"sr2597 sr2597\"" <"sr2597 sr2597""@att.com>; scott.l.keller <scott.l.keller@lmco.com>
Sent: Tue, Oct 30, 2012 5:54 pm
Subject: AT&T DAS Antenna at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto
Dear Clare,
My husband and I remain extremely concerned about plans to locate an AT&T DAS antenna on a telephone pole abutting
our back yard at 3945 Nelson Drive, Palo Alto: Per city documentation, it is Node # P2N36A. We would like to petition
the city to relocate this antenna to another location. There are multiple locations in the vicinity that would be much more
acceptable. Please bear with me as I step through our concerns and our attempts to obtain clarification.
NOTICES:
4
To date, we have received no notices from the city regarding this project, nor have any of our neighbors, which is
disheartening in and of itself. The fact that the city, together with AT&T, could even attempt to make decisions as to
antenna placement without alerting the affected neighbors and understanding their individual concerns is just
inconceivable. On the first two rounds of documents, AT&T and the city didn't even get our address right (first listed as
3495 Nelson Drive, then 3945 Nelson Avenue).
My husband and I were only made aware of the project from another local resident who was affected by an antenna in
Phase II, even though a September 12, 2012 letter from Minh V. Nguyen of AT&T to Clare Campbell cites a March 29.
2012 Phase III application date. This 9-12-12 document went on to state that the 3945 Nelson Drive "location is
acceptable as has less impacts to residences due to siting by athletic fields and within semi-deciduous tree
canopy." The semi-deciduous tree canopy being referenced was removed when our yard was landscaped in May, 2012
(at which point we still had no idea about this project) but is still being referenced in the 9-12-12 letter, along with pre-May
2012 photos. We formally request that the city of Palo Alto and AT&T follow established laws and processes in terms of
understanding residenfs concerns and impacts and cease work on the DAS planning in this area until they do so.
CONVERSATIONS WITH AT&T:
AT&T has been impossible to deal with in regards to this matter. Their idea of External Relations leaves a lot to be
desired. I originally emailed you, Clare, with my concerns on June 25,2012 and was informed that you would forward my
concerns to Shiyama Clunie in External Affairs at AT&T. By July 10 of 2012, I had still not heard from Shiyama and you
suggested that I call her supervisor, John Jefferson at AT&T. John reiterated that I needed to work with Shiyama, but still,
weeks and then months passed with no communications from her.
Fast forwarding to September -I attempted once again to contact AT&T after being made aware of the September 12,
2012 letter referenced above. I called John Jefferson on September 29 and was again referred to Shiyama Clunie, whom
I left a voice message for on the same day. Shiyama returned my call with a voice message on October 2,2012, saying
that her engineers felt the pole near our house was the ONLY suitable location in the area for their antenna, something
that I do not begin to believe. My husband and I both have engineering degrees and realize that such a statement is
absurd. I have since called Shiyama back an additional THREE times over the ensuing weeks, and she has yet to return
my call. The last call that I placed to her was on October 26, 2012.
NOISE AND AESTHETIC CONCERNS:
We are very concerned about the noise that will be generated from the DAS antenna and are fairly certain that it will
exceed the guidelines for residential noise pollution as outlined in City of Palo Alto
Noise Ordinance, PAMC Chapter 9.10. Becausethe antenna would be adjacent to our side/back yard, it is only a few feet
away from the backyard area that is occupied on a daily basis, throughout the day and often well into the evening
hours. This imposition is much greater than if the antenna were to have been located at the curb in the front yard. I am
handicapped and as such I spend a disproportionate amount of my time in my house / yard. We recently had our yard
landscaped so as to make better use of the outdoor space and hence improve my quality of life. As it stands, the .
antenna will be located:
1) on an easement located within our residential property line,
2) a mere 30" from the fence to our back yard and just adjacent to the gate into the back yard area, and
3) just 25' from our bedroom window.
It is inconceivable that the hum from this antenna, which is quite noticeable, would not be heard loud and clear from within
the indoor/outdoor area which we consider living space. Additionally, any stress will aggravate my medical. condition,
which is life limiting. The noise of the AT&T DAS antenna will undoubtedly add to my stress level. Lastly, the antenna
itself is unSightly and we would have a clear line of sight from our back yard and our bedroom window.
ALTERNATE SITES:
Contrary to AT&T's supposition, there are multiple sites in the immediate area that would be better candidates for
. placement of this antenna:
1) Cubberly Community Center First and foremost, locating the pole at the nearby Cubberly Community Center
would alleviate a host of problems -it would be on city property and subject to public noise ordinances, the
5
property is not used full-time and hence would not be under as much scrutiny, and for engineering purposes the
antenna would be located close to its originally designated location.
2) Piazza's Shopping Center Piazza's and the adjacent shopping complex (and a pole near the parking lot of
Piazzas) afford a vast area of space from which to choose an antenna location. This pole is in an area where the
ambient noise is much greater than our quiet corner and is close to the original AT&T location.
3) Greenmeadow Pool Area The area surrounding Greenmeadow's pool and park also offers potential locations
that are better hidden from both residential sight and sound disturbances.
We formally request the city of Palo Alto relocate this antenna to a more suitable site than 3945 Nelson Drive.
Thank you for your patience in listening to my concerns. Please let me know what the next steps are that I should take.
would be happy to meet with you at any time regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Elaine Keller
6
December 18,2012
Minh Nguyen
AT&T Mobility LLC
870 N. McCarthy Blvd.
Milpitas, CA 95035
Subject:
Dear Mr. Nguyen:
, On December 18, 201
was conditionally aot)t{)~fed . .fuv plrutmijfg
set forth in Palo <"".~n."iI''''''..I~jLjJ'''
PROJECT ,&1.."." ..... ,.&,,"-
Request by
installation an
Cowper St; 3412
Waverley St; ""A~',",'-
Waverly St on E. u'. YJ ...... ..uv
Louis Rd; 631 E. lYl~l:tQO'W;
Hamilton Ave ...... JV,gl,S/,
the California Emlir~J:ltnenta'l '<.'----J< ""'''''.T<,n .. r
of Small Structures.
FINDINGS FOR
The approval is based
the Standards for
Architectural Review tloarCl:·,-l:ma \_J""¥.""',,>l·'l')I-'rl'\:\J~
conditions outlined below.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Gty afPaIo Alto
Department of Planning and
Community Environment
1. The project shall be in substantial cOllltot.tfia1a~(,\jiit1V'tb:e 'll1t)~ffl~
documents received September 13, 2012,
conditions of approval.
Planning
250 Hamilton Avenue
P,O, Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
650.329.2441
650.329.2154
Transportation
250 Hamilton Avenue
P,O. Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
650.329,2520
650.329.2154
Building
285 Hamilton Avenue
P.O, Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
650.329,2496
650.329,2240
Gonsalves, Ronna
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Paul Albritton <pa@mallp.com>
Wedn~sd~y, January 23/2013 11:16 AM 13 JAN 23 PM 3: 24
Councll, City . "-
Williams/ Curtis; French, Amy; Campbell, Clare; Silver, Cara
AT&T Mobility Letter to City Council -DAS Phase ill and Phase IV -Consent Calendar
January 28/ 2013
AT&T Mobility Letter .pdf; ATTOOOOl.htm
Please find attached AT&T Mobility's response to the appeals filed for Phase III and Phase IV of its Palo Alto
DAS project. The letter asks the City Council to affirm the Planning Division approvals and allow them to
remain on the consent calendar for January 28, 2013.
Thank you.
Paul
for Paul Albritton Phone (415) 288-4000
Mackenzie & Albritton, LLP Fax (415) 288-4010
220 Sansome Street, 14th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
1
MACKENZIE & ALBRITTON LLP
220 SANSOME STREET, 14TH FLoOR
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104
TELEPHONE 415/288-4000
FACSIMILE 415/288-4010
January 23, 2013
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Mayor Gregory Scharff
Vice Mayor Nancy Shepherd
Council Members Patrick Burt, Marc Berman,
Karen Holman, Larry Klein, Gail Price,
Greg Schmid and Liz Kniss
City Council
City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94301
Re: AT&T's Response to Appeals of AT&T DAS Project
Phase Ill, 12PLN-00127 Architectural Review
Phase IV, 12PLN-00258 Architectural Review
City Council Consent Calendar Januaty 28,2013
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice Mayor Shepherd and Council Members:
We write to you on behalf of our client AT&T Mobility ("AT&T") to urge that you
adopt the fmdings and decision of the Planning Division to approve AT&T's distributed
antenna system ("DAS") Phase III and Phase IV (the "Approvals"). Staffs findings in
support of the Approvals are well-reasoned, supported by substantial evidence and
represent years of exhaustive review by Planning Division staff, Utilities Department staff,
th.e City'arborist, the City's outside consultants, the Architectural Review Board (the
"ARB") and the Council. In addition, both state and federal law compel the City to affirm
the Approvals. There is no reason to remove the Approvals from the Council's January 28,
2013, consent calendar.
As described below, all but one of the appeals are filed by residents whose homes
are next to existing poles. These appeals simply seek to re-open unsupported aesthetic,
noise, health or property value concerns, while the remaining appeal challenges the City's
implementation of its noise regulations with arguments that were rejected by the Council in
its approval of Phase II of the AT&T DAS project. The concerns raised in all of the
appeals have been thoroughly reviewed and previously addressed by the ARB and the
Council and are not worthy of further review, as follows.
Palo Alto City Council
January 23, 2013
Page 2 of2
I. The Thoughtful Design and Careful Placement of AT&T DAS Node Facilities
on Existing Utility Poles Create No Aesthetic Impacts.
Since early 2010, AT&T has worked with the City of Palo Alto to arrive at an
aesthetically acceptable design and pole site selection process that will minimize aesthetic
impacts on the Palo Alto community while providing needed wireless service. Based upon
ARB review, the aesthetic profile of AT&T's DAS nodes has been nearly eliminated by
streamlining antennas to a single pole-top attachment, raising battery boxes above a narrow
radio cabinet, and rotating all equipment toward the street and away from residential views.
Closely following rigorous location guidelines established by the ARB, AT&T
conducted a rigorous Alternative Aesthetics Fielding Analysis evaluating 150 existing
utility poles to identify the 38 approved pole locations in Phase III and Phase IV, which
represents the fewest poles feasible to provide necessary wireless coverage. Block
placement was evaluated to identify locations away from street comers in order to
minimize public views and in-between property lines to avoid impacts on individual views.
Poles were also selected to maximize the benefit of existing foliage to camouflage DAS
equipment. AT&T's aesthetic review was re-analyzed and adjusted by Planning Division
staff and again by the City's independent consultant to arrive at final pole locations with
the least aesthetic impacts to individuals and the community to be served. In sum, the
design, pole selection guidelines and final pole selection have been thoroughly reviewed by
the Planning Division staff, its independent consultants, the ARB and the Council and do
not require further public hearings for review.
II. Presently OperatingDAS Nodes Confirm Compliance with Noise Ordinance.
Notwithstanding repetitious appeals, there is simply no question that the AT&T
DAS project complies with Palo Alto Municipal Code §9.10 (the "Noise Ordinance"). Just
two months ago, in November 2012, the Council, following the recommendation of
Planning Division staff and the City Attorney, completely rejected a similar appeal based
upon a tortured interpretation of the Noise Ordinance. As part of its obligations under the
Phase I approval, and submittal requirements for its Phase II approval, AT&T has provided
the City with a post-installation noise analysis by independent consultants Hammett &
Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers. This report, which was included in the Council's
approval of Phase II of the AT&T DAS project, measured the sound from an operating
AT&T DAS facility in Palo Alto and confirmed that AT&T's Palo Alto DAS design fully
complies with the Noise Ordinance. Based upon this information and the prior decisions of
the Council, further appeals raising noise concerns are simply frivolous and do not warrant
any further hearings.
III. Health Concerns and. by Extension. Property Value Concerns Are Unfounded.
Preempted by Federal Law and May Not Be the Basis of Further Hearings.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 bars local jurisdictions from denying an
application for a wireless telecommunications facility based on the environmental effects of
Palo Alto City Council
January 23, 2013
Page 3 of3
radio frequency emissions! where, as here, AT&T has demonstrated full compliance with
Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") emissions guidelines. The statements
submitted by Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers, confIrm that all of the AT&T
DAS facilities will operate well within, and indeed far below, applicable public exposure
limits allowed under FCC guidelines. The federal preemption of radio frequency emissions
issues applies whether local decisions are directly based on emissions or indirectly based on a
proxy such as property values. Thus, "concern over the decrease in property values may not
be considered as substantial evidence if the fear of property value depreciation is based on
concern over the health effects caused by RF emissions." AT&T Wireless Services of
California LLC v. City of Carlsbad, 308 F.Supp.2d 1148, 1159 (S.D. Cal. 2003).
IV. Federal and State Law Compel Council Affirmation of the Approvals.
AT&T has worked diligently with the City of Palo Alto over the last three years to
identify the least intrusive means to provide wireless service to an identifIed signifIcant gap
in coverage. This effort has resulted in the Approvals that appear on the January 28,2013
. Council consent calendar. Failure to affirm the Approvals on that date would run afoul of
limitations under the Telecommunications Act which preempt any local decision that
would effectively prohibit the provision of personal wireless services or that would
unreasonably delay approvals for such service.2 Similarly, the Council may not act in a
manner that would deny AT&T the right to place its facilities in the public rights-of-way
under the statewide franchise granted to AT&T under California Public Utilities Code.3
For these reasons, both state and federal law compel Council affirmation of the Approvals
on January 28,2013.
Conclusion
The Phase III and Phase IV AT&T DAS Approvals that appear on the January 28,
2013 Council consent calendar represent years of design and aesthetic review to arrive at
the ideal facility design and locations to best serve the Palo Alto community with the least
impacts upon residents. The City Council should not permit the narrow, unfounded
concerns of a few individuals to further delay this well-designed project, which represents
the extensive efforts of both the City and AT&T. We encourage you to affirm the
Approvals as part of the Council's consent calendar without further hearing.
cc: Curtis Williams
Cara Silver, Esq.
147 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(iv).
2 See 47 U.S.C. §332 et seq.
Very truly yours,
~~~ V ~ B. Albritton
3 See California Public Utilities Code §7901 et seq.
e-mail: bhammett@h-e.com
Delivery: 470 Third Street West • Sonoma, California 95476
Telephone: 707/996-5200 San Francisco • 707/996-5280 Facsimile • 202/396-5200 D.C.
WILLIAM F. HAMMETT, P.E.
DANE E. ERICKSEN, P.E.
STANLEY SALEK, P.E.
ROBERT P. SMITH, JR.
RAJAT MATHUR, P.E.
KENT A. SWISHER
ANDREA L. BRIGHT ___________
ROBERT L. HAMMETT, P.E.
1920-2002
EDWARD EDISON, P.E.
1920-2009
BY E-MAIL JD3235@ATT.COM
July 27, 2012
John di Bene, Esq.
AT&T Mobility
4430 Rosewood Drive
Pleasanton, California 94588
Dear John:
As you requested, we have visited the AT&T Mobility oDAS node recently installed at
255 North California Avenue in Palo Alto, California, in order to assess the noise levels from
that installation and to evaluate those actual levels against both the city's noise limit and the
projected levels.
On the morning of June 6, 2012, using one of our Quest Technologies Type 2200 Sound Level
Meters (Serial No. SBF110001, under current calibration by the manufacturer), we observed a
minimum* noise level of 44.5 dBA at a distance of 25 feet from the pole. That is the distance
specified for compliance with the city's municipal code Section 9.10.050, which limits an
increase in noise to 15 dBA, measured at 25 feet, for facilities not located on private property.
The ambient reading at that location with the AT&T node shut off was 42.1 dBA, so the actual
increase was 2.4 dBA, well below the 15 dBA allowed by the code.
Removing† the 42.1 dBA ambient level from the 44.5 dBA level with the AT&T equipment
turned on indicates that the equipment by itself produced noise at 25 feet of approximately
40.8 dBA. This compares well with the manufacturer's data, given in our report dated
November 1, 2011, which averaged 40.9 dBA to the front and sides.
Therefore, we conclude from these measurements that noise from the AT&T Mobility oDAS
nodes has been accurately represented by the manufacturer and that, indeed, the noise increase
easily meets the Palo Alto limits. Please let us know if any questions arise on these
measurements or this analysis.
Sincerely yours,
William F. Hammett
* Intended to represent the noise from continuous, fixed sources, separate from the varying levels due to
intermittent sources including traffic, wind, voices, and planes.
† Using appropriate mathematical conversions.
MACKENZIE & ALBRITTON LLP
220 SANSOME STREET, 14TH FLOOR
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104
TELEPHONE 415 / 288-4000
FACSIMILE 415 / 288-4010
January 23, 2013
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Mayor Gregory Scharff
Vice Mayor Nancy Shepherd
Council Members Patrick Burt, Marc Berman,
Karen Holman, Larry Klein, Gail Price,
Greg Schmid and Liz Kniss
City Council
City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94301
Re: AT&T’s Response to Appeals of AT&T DAS Project
Phase III, 12PLN-00127 Architectural Review
Phase IV, 12PLN-00258 Architectural Review
City Council Consent Calendar January 28, 2013
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice Mayor Shepherd and Council Members:
We write to you on behalf of our client AT&T Mobility (“AT&T”) to urge that you
adopt the findings and decision of the Planning Division to approve AT&T’s distributed
antenna system (“DAS”) Phase III and Phase IV (the “Approvals”). Staff’s findings in
support of the Approvals are well-reasoned, supported by substantial evidence and
represent years of exhaustive review by Planning Division staff, Utilities Department staff,
the City arborist, the City’s outside consultants, the Architectural Review Board (the
“ARB”) and the Council. In addition, both state and federal law compel the City to affirm
the Approvals. There is no reason to remove the Approvals from the Council’s January 28,
2013, consent calendar.
As described below, all but one of the appeals are filed by residents whose homes
are next to existing poles. These appeals simply seek to re-open unsupported aesthetic,
noise, health or property value concerns, while the remaining appeal challenges the City’s
implementation of its noise regulations with arguments that were rejected by the Council in
its approval of Phase II of the AT&T DAS project. The concerns raised in all of the
appeals have been thoroughly reviewed and previously addressed by the ARB and the
Council and are not worthy of further review, as follows.
Palo Alto City Council
January 23, 2013
Page 2 of 2
I. The Thoughtful Design and Careful Placement of AT&T DAS Node Facilities
on Existing Utility Poles Create No Aesthetic Impacts.
Since early 2010, AT&T has worked with the City of Palo Alto to arrive at an
aesthetically acceptable design and pole site selection process that will minimize aesthetic
impacts on the Palo Alto community while providing needed wireless service. Based upon
ARB review, the aesthetic profile of AT&T’s DAS nodes has been nearly eliminated by
streamlining antennas to a single pole-top attachment, raising battery boxes above a narrow
radio cabinet, and rotating all equipment toward the street and away from residential views.
Closely following rigorous location guidelines established by the ARB, AT&T
conducted a rigorous Alternative Aesthetics Fielding Analysis evaluating 150 existing
utility poles to identify the 38 approved pole locations in Phase III and Phase IV, which
represents the fewest poles feasible to provide necessary wireless coverage. Block
placement was evaluated to identify locations away from street corners in order to
minimize public views and in-between property lines to avoid impacts on individual views.
Poles were also selected to maximize the benefit of existing foliage to camouflage DAS
equipment. AT&T’s aesthetic review was re-analyzed and adjusted by Planning Division
staff and again by the City’s independent consultant to arrive at final pole locations with
the least aesthetic impacts to individuals and the community to be served. In sum, the
design, pole selection guidelines and final pole selection have been thoroughly reviewed by
the Planning Division staff, its independent consultants, the ARB and the Council and do
not require further public hearings for review.
II. Presently Operating DAS Nodes Confirm Compliance with Noise Ordinance.
Notwithstanding repetitious appeals, there is simply no question that the AT&T
DAS project complies with Palo Alto Municipal Code §9.10 (the “Noise Ordinance”). Just
two months ago, in November 2012, the Council, following the recommendation of
Planning Division staff and the City Attorney, completely rejected a similar appeal based
upon a tortured interpretation of the Noise Ordinance. As part of its obligations under the
Phase I approval, and submittal requirements for its Phase II approval, AT&T has provided
the City with a post-installation noise analysis by independent consultants Hammett &
Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers. This report, which was included in the Council’s
approval of Phase II of the AT&T DAS project, measured the sound from an operating
AT&T DAS facility in Palo Alto and confirmed that AT&T’s Palo Alto DAS design fully
complies with the Noise Ordinance. Based upon this information and the prior decisions of
the Council, further appeals raising noise concerns are simply frivolous and do not warrant
any further hearings.
III. Health Concerns and, by Extension, Property Value Concerns Are Unfounded,
Preempted by Federal Law and May Not Be the Basis of Further Hearings.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 bars local jurisdictions from denying an
application for a wireless telecommunications facility based on the environmental effects of
Palo Alto City Council
January 23, 2013
Page 3 of 3
radio frequency emissions1 where, as here, AT&T has demonstrated full compliance with
Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) emissions guidelines. The statements
submitted by Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers, confirm that all of the AT&T
DAS facilities will operate well within, and indeed far below, applicable public exposure
limits allowed under FCC guidelines. The federal preemption of radio frequency emissions
issues applies whether local decisions are directly based on emissions or indirectly based on a
proxy such as property values. Thus, “concern over the decrease in property values may not
be considered as substantial evidence if the fear of property value depreciation is based on
concern over the health effects caused by RF emissions.” AT&T Wireless Services of
California LLC v. City of Carlsbad, 308 F.Supp.2d 1148, 1159 (S.D. Cal. 2003).
IV. Federal and State Law Compel Council Affirmation of the Approvals.
AT&T has worked diligently with the City of Palo Alto over the last three years to
identify the least intrusive means to provide wireless service to an identified significant gap
in coverage. This effort has resulted in the Approvals that appear on the January 28, 2013
Council consent calendar. Failure to affirm the Approvals on that date would run afoul of
limitations under the Telecommunications Act which preempt any local decision that
would effectively prohibit the provision of personal wireless services or that would
unreasonably delay approvals for such service.2 Similarly, the Council may not act in a
manner that would deny AT&T the right to place its facilities in the public rights-of-way
under the statewide franchise granted to AT&T under California Public Utilities Code.3
For these reasons, both state and federal law compel Council affirmation of the Approvals
on January 28, 2013.
Conclusion
The Phase III and Phase IV AT&T DAS Approvals that appear on the January 28,
2013 Council consent calendar represent years of design and aesthetic review to arrive at
the ideal facility design and locations to best serve the Palo Alto community with the least
impacts upon residents. The City Council should not permit the narrow, unfounded
concerns of a few individuals to further delay this well-designed project, which represents
the extensive efforts of both the City and AT&T. We encourage you to affirm the
Approvals as part of the Council’s consent calendar without further hearing.
Very truly yours,
Paul B. Albritton
cc: Curtis Williams
Cara Silver, Esq.
1 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(iv).
2 See 47 U.S.C. §332 et seq.
3 See California Public Utilities Code §7901 et seq.
New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC
Application for
Development Review Permit
Outside Distributed Antenna System (DAS)
City of Palo Alto
March 23, 2012
3
Project Description
AT&T is interested in deploying an outside “distributed antenna
system” (DAS) to bolster voice and data capacity in areas of the City of
Palo Alto. DAS is comprised of a network of small, low power antennas,
usually placed on poles, which are connected to common radio
equipment within a limited geographic area. This system would fill
coverage and capacity gaps within areas of the City that are
experiencing high density demand for mobile wireless services.
The DAS proposed by AT&T would support the development of
technologically advanced communications infrastructure that will
facilitate the growth of emerging wireless telecommunications
industries in the City of Palo Alto.
In addition, residents as well as public safety are increasingly reliant on
mobile devices. Data suggests as much as 70% of all mobile calls are
made inside buildings and 50% of all calls to 911 are made on mobile
devices.1 The Police Department reminds residents to know where their
phones are to help report crimes. Also, in the event of disasters, first
responders and affected residents rely on their cell phones. The DAS
system thus will help improve service coverage and reliability and thus
help enhance public safety efforts within the City.
AT&T’s DAS technology is capable of serving multiple carriers with very
minimal equipment installation. It is AT&T’s intent that its DAS will not
only meet the existing demand but also provide the infrastructure for
deployment of future 4G demands.
1 National Emergency Numbers Association - “It is estimated that of the 240+ million calls that were
made to 9-1-1 in 2006, at least 100 million of them were made by wireless telephone users—that’s 50
percent. This is a huge increase from nearly 4.3 million wireless 9-1-1 calls just 10 years ago, and it is
anticipated that the number will continue to rise, both due to cellular and IP-based WiFi and WiMAX
forms of wireless service.”
4
Scope of Work
This application is for a Development Review Permit and is being
proposed for the construction of the 20 of approximately 80 DAS nodes
on existing utility poles within the City of Palo Alto. The initial and 2nd
group applications of 35 nodes has already been submitted to the City.
This 3rd group of nodes will provide wireless service in the area of
southeastern Palo Alto west of Oregon Expressway and east of El
Camino. The exact locations of the 20 proposed nodes are depicted on
exhibit of this application. The remaining node locations will be applied
for on separate applications to address the remaining coverage needs
within the City of Palo Alto.
Under Section 1.1307(b)(1) of the Federal Communication
Commission’s rules; the proposed low powered wireless facilities are
“categorically excluded” as they are fully compliant with FCC
requirements for limiting human exposure to radio frequency (RF)
energy and are identified as unlikely to cause exposure in excess of the
FCC’s guidelines. Please see the attached Federal Communications
Commission – Local and State Government Advisory Committee
Checklist. The facility also will comply with California Public Utility
Commission General Orders - 95 and 170.
AT&T intends to utilize its existing infrastructure within the City to
minimize the impact of deploying DAS on residents of the City of Palo
Alto.
The DAS system will primarily use existing underground fiber to connect
the DAS nodes to the DAS radio equipment hub which is located inside
the local AT&T central switching office.
5
AT&T Mobility will purchase local fiber transport from AT&T California.
If AT&T California does not have fiber to any node location, it will be
necessary to place new fiber and in a few instances new conduit. In
these instances, new conduit will be necessary only from the nearest
manhole or pole to the node; generally, this should be between 50 to
250 feet. If fiber or power is not already located in the manhole, it
generally can be pulled through existing conduit without the need for
additional trenching or new conduit. In an effort to minimize trenching,
power and fiber can share the same trench where feasible.
All of the DAS nodes will be located within the public ROW on existing
utility poles or within existing Public Utility Easement (PUE).
Replacement of a utilities pole will be necessary if the pole is found to
be noncompliant with General Orders - 95 and 170. For utility poles
that must be replaced, it will remain at the existing height unless a
change is requested by AT&T California or Palo Alto Utilities.
On August 4th, 2011 AT&T attended a preliminary study session for this
DAS project with the Palo Alto Architectural Review Board. As a result
each node locations were reviewed and aesthetics guidelines from the
ARB panel were adhered to where possible. The battery cabinets were
moved higher on the pole to avert it from line of sight. And where
applicable, nodes were moved to avoid being in front of second story
windows. Also, nodes locations were reassessed to account for
maximum screening with the available foliage.
The DAS nodes consist of a remote prism antenna (which is 24 inches
tall with a 16-inch diameter) that is mounted on top of the
existing/replacement poles. The antenna is mounted at the top of a 6
feet tall fiber glass extension that is mounted to the top of the pole. In
total, the extension will be 8 feet above the top of the utility pole in
order to maintain GO95 separation. This is shown on page.
6
For a utility pole mounted cabinet design, a 10 inches high by 5.5 inches
wide by 5 inches deep quick disconnect, a 11 inches high by 4 inches
wide by and 3/8 inches deep ground bus bar mounted 9 feet above the
ground line. Above that sits a Tyco remote cabinet that is 52.4 inches
tall by 12.2 inches deep by 11.2 inches wide. And above that is the
Alpha battery cabinet that is 27 inches high by 22 inches wide by 18
inches deep. Lastly, above that is a demark box that is 13 inches tall by
13 inches wide by 3.75 inches deep. This is shown on page 30. All the
attached equipment is configured such that it blends into the width of
the pole.
Equipment is tan/beige, and designed to blend in with equipment
usually found in the streetscape.
Two of the cabinets produce measureable acoustical results. Both have
theoretical maximum acoustical performance of 46dB, without isolating
ambient noise from the environment, at a distance of 20 feet, which is
a rough approximation of the typical distance from a user on the
ground. AT&T Mobility expects the actual acoustical performance of
the cabinet to be quieter than these theoretical maximums.
Description of Construction
The antenna structure installation may involve the removal and
replacement of the utility poles. A new foundation will be excavated
(size dependent on soil conditions), and conduits containing coaxial
cables (from the Remote cabinet), and power. Trenching will typically
extend to a depth of 36 inches below grade. The following is a
description of the work involved in the installation of the Myers cabinet
and ground mounted remote. The typical sequence for construction of
these nodes will be as follows:
7
· Remote & Myers cabinet excavation and trenching -- An excavation
will be made via backhoe to accommodate the proposed concrete
slab for the equipment/meter cabinet with trenching from the
cabinet location to the pole(s) and/or power connection point, as
necessary. An additional trunk will haul and hold supplies.
Excavated material will be exported from the site using a dump
truck. Backhoe and dump truck will be manned and idling
throughout the excavation process and then turned off; generator
on truck will run during construction.
· Utility pole replacement -- The existing foundation will be removed
and replaced with new foundation adequate for new pole
installation.
· Electrical Installation -- Once conduit and cabinet are in place,
cables will be installed to connect the new cabinet to the serving
manhole. The power panel will be set by an electrical contractor.
SCE will then be called to set the power meter.
· Testing -- Final testing of cabinet equipment and antennas will be
performed after electrical power is provided to the site.
· Duration and Estimated Personnel -- Typical duration for active
construction of each node will be 10 days with 2 trucks and 1-3
workers, with traffic control and Department of Transportation
approvals required for lane closures associated with trenching,
excavation of pad and caisson foundations, and setting of the pole.
8
NORTH PALO ALTO Polygon2 Existing Coverage
In-Building Service
In-Transit Service
Outdoor Service
Legend
Existing Site
City Boundary
9
NORTH PALO ALTO Polygon2 Proposed (Top) Coverage
In-Building Service
In-Transit Service
Outdoor Service
Legend
Existing Site
City Boundary
10
Palo Alto Phase 3 Nodes
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
N34B37.41379-122.10791
N38A37.44575-122.136509
N7A37.426463-122.126148
N6A37.428466-122.132264
N51A37.431927-122.13638
N36A37.41718-122.111271
N31A37.42379-122.115742
N28A37.42315-122.106521
N21A37.433803-122.11966
N25A37.449747-122.132666
N52A37.437177-122.117219
N33A37.430394-122.111908
N32A37.420137-122.109488
N27A37.427621-122.107027
N24A37.432914-122.111599
N20A37.429212-122.116544
N15B37.425283-122.122644
N13A37.418163-122.117285
N11A37.429938-122.121374
N10B37.421091-122.120513
L
O
U
I
S
U
S
H
W
Y
1
0
1
MI
D
D
L
E
F
I
E
L
D
B
R
Y
A
N
T
A
L
M
A
C
O
W
P
E
R
G
R
E
E
R
W
A
V
E
R
L
E
Y
R
O
S
S
SEALE
B
A
Y
S
H
O
R
E
S
O
U
T
H
W
E
B
S
T
E
R
LOMA VE
R
D
E
P
A
R
K
COLORADO
FA
B
I
A
N
NE
W
E
L
L
R
A
M
O
N
A
ELYBARR
O
N
C
L
A
R
A
LEGHOR
N
GARCIA
CALIFO
R
N
I
A
LOWE
L
L
B
Y
R
O
N
MARION
TENNY
S
O
N
AMES
LOS R
O
B
L
E
S
AMARI
L
L
O
HI
G
H
MELVIL
L
E
DR
I
V
E
W
A
Y
OLIVE
E
M
E
R
S
O
N
OREGO
N
N
E
L
S
O
N
GE
N
G
MATAD
E
R
O
LA PA
R
A
HARKER
ILIMA
MA
R
I
N
E
2N
D
GRAN
T
GARLAN
D MOREN
O
WI
L
K
I
E
WYANDO
T
T
E
SUTTE
R
CO
R
I
N
A
HANS
E
N
COLER
I
D
G
E
IRIS
BIRC
H
BICYCL
E
JOSI
N
A
WALKWAY
WILTO
N
CHIMA
L
U
S
PAUL
G
R
O
V
E
EDLEE
HOPKINS
KINGS
L
E
Y PARKINSON
LAMB
E
R
T
CASEY
O
R
M
E
FU
L
T
O
N
MAYB
E
L
L
AMP
H
I
T
H
E
A
T
R
E
FLOR
A
L
E
S
EL
C
A
M
I
N
O
WA
L
N
U
T
CURT
N
E
R
VISTA
EL CAR
M
E
L
O
TA
S
S
O
E
D
G
E
W
O
O
D
TALISM
A
N
FERN
A
N
D
O
G
U
I
N
D
A
PARKS
I
D
E
R
A
M
P
BRUCE
ELSIN
O
R
E
CERE
Z
A
GEOR
G
I
A
MARG
A
R
I
T
A
SAL
A
D
O
CREEKSIDE
SU
T
H
E
R
L
A
N
D
IN
D
I
A
N
CAROL
I
N
A
C
H
A
R
L
E
S
T
O
N
S
A
N
T
A
A
N
A
BRYSON
W
H
I
T
S
E
L
L
L
A
N
D
I
N
G
S
TERMIN
A
L
SANTA
R
I
T
A
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
E
M
B
A
R
C
A
D
E
R
O
TENNE
S
S
E
E
MILIT
A
R
Y
T
R
A
N
S
P
O
R
T
THAI
N
CELIA
PEPP
E
R
TULI
P
CHEST
N
U
T
VENTU
R
A
WASHIN
G
T
O
N
SYCAMOR
E
LAKE
ACACI
A
BLAIR
FIELDIN
G
W
R
I
G
H
T
TA
N
L
A
N
D
STONE
CA
R
M
E
L
GREEN
W
I
C
H
MOR
T
O
N
SIE
R
R
A
SHAU
N
A
MACL
A
N
E
MAURE
E
N
E
M
E
R
S
O
N
COLORADO
OREGO
N
R
A
M
O
N
A
U
S
H
W
Y
1
0
1
HI
G
H
P
A
R
K
RAMP DRIVE
W
A
Y
T
A
S
S
O
MOREN
O
R
A
M
O
N
A
P
A
R
K
CHARLE
S
T
O
N
MATAD
E
R
O
R
A
M
P
DR
I
V
E
W
A
Y
PA
R
K
B
A
Y
S
H
O
R
E
BY
R
O
N
E
M
E
R
S
O
N
CALIFO
R
N
I
A
Legend
PA_Phase_3Nodes
Name, Address
kj N10B, 3524 Waverly St
kj N11A, 747 Loma Verde Ave
kj N13A, 3706 Carlson Cir
kj N15B, 3314 Cowper St
kj N20A, 3412 Ross Rd
kj N21A, 3132 David Ave
kj N24A, 3415 Greer Rd
kj N25A, 620 Rhodes Dr
kj N27A, 3757 Corina Way
kj N28A, 3915 Louis Rd
kj N31A, 651 E Meadow Dr
kj N32A, 3901 Middlefield Rd
kj N33A, 3539 Louis Rd
kj N34B, 372 Ferne Ave
kj N36A, 3945 Nelson Dr
kj N38A, 109 Lois Ln
kj N51A, 2410 Waverly St
kj N52A, 3094 Greer Rd
kj N6A, Side of 2801 South Ct
kj N7A, 452 Loma Verde Ave
³
AT&T Proprietary (Internal Use Only)Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies except under written agreement.Telco proprietary data is not to be disclosed to siloed employees.11
Palo Alto DAS
all forecasted Nodes 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 20.2
Miles
PALO ALTO
280
280
101
101
82
114
109
82
M
I
D
D
L
E
F
I
E
L
D
R
D
A
L
M
A
S
T
SAND
H
I
L
L
R
D
ORE
G
O
N
E
X
P
Y
EMBARCADERO RD
COU
N
T
Y
R
O
U
T
E
G
3
UNIV
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
V
E
W
B
A
Y
S
H
O
R
E
R
D
J
U
N
I
P
E
R
O
S
E
R
R
A
B
L
V
D
FO
O
T
H
I
L
L
E
X
P
Y
SAN
A
N
T
O
N
I
O
A
V
E
SAN
T
A
C
R
U
Z
A
V
E
FA
B
I
A
N
W
A
Y
G
A
R
C
I
A
A
V
E
PU
L
G
A
S
A
V
E
CHA
R
L
E
S
T
O
N
R
D
AMPHIT
H
E
A
T
R
E
P
K
W
Y
E
B
A
Y
S
H
O
R
E
R
D
W
M
I
D
D
L
E
F
I
E
L
D
R
D
N S
H
O
R
E
L
I
N
E
B
L
V
D
ARA
S
T
R
A
D
E
R
O
R
D
OLD
M
I
D
D
L
E
F
I
E
L
D
W
A
Y
E CHAR
L
E
S
T
O
N
R
D
W CH
A
R
L
E
S
T
O
N
R
D
BA
Y
S
H
O
R
E
P
K
W
Y
A
L
M
A
S
T
ORE
G
O
N
E
X
P
Y
F
O
O
T
H
I
L
L
E
X
P
Y
COU
N
T
Y
R
O
U
T
E
G
3
CHA
R
L
E
S
T
O
N
R
D
Legend
Polygon 1
Polygon 2
City Bounds
1212
!"#"$%&'()(*+$,$-.&/&012$&3!4$5&210$
"617*+$8&(7*$-&)1$9&:;*(&70$,$-;)&$!)*&<$=;)(>&.7(;$
!"#$%
&'()%"%*+%,%
4*;*1?17*$&>$@;??1**$#$A2(0&7<$B7:C<$=&70D)*(7E$A7E(711.0$
#-)% +./0% *+% 1'00)22% 3% 45.6*78% 97:;8% <*76=>2.7(% 47(.7))/68% -'6% ?))7% /)2'.7)5% *7% ?)-'>+% *+%
@#3#%!*?.>.2A8%'%B)/6*7'>%C./)>)66%2)>):*00=7.:'2.*76%:'//.)/8%2*%)D'>='2)%2-)%5.62/.?=2)5%'72)77'%
6A62)0%B/*B*6)5%2*%?)%5)D)>*B)5%.7%&'>*%@>2*8%<'>.+*/7.'8%+*/%:*0B>.'7:)%C.2-%'BB/*B/.'2)%(=.5)>.7)6%
>.0.2.7(%-=0'7%)EB*6=/)%2*%/'5.*%+/)F=)7:A%GHIJKL%)>):2/*0'(7)2.:%+.)>56;%
AF1:D*(G1$4D??;.+$
@#3#% B/*B*6)6% 2*% .762'>>% '7% *=26.5)% M.62/.?=2)5% @72)77'% NA62)0% G*M@NL% .7% &'>*% @>2*8%
:*76.62.7(%*+%'72)77'6%*7%2C)72A%=2.>.2A%B*>)6;%%#-)%B/*B*6)5%*B)/'2.*76%C.>>%:*0B>A%C.2-%2-)%
J<<%(=.5)>.7)6%>.0.2.7(%B=?>.:%)EB*6=/)%2*%IJ%)7)/(A;%
-.1G;()(7E$AF/&0D.1$4*;72;.20$
#-)% O;N;% <*7(/)66% /)F=./)6% 2-'2% 2-)% J)5)/'>% <*00=7.:'2.*76% <*00.66.*7% GHJ<<KL% )D'>='2)% .26%
':2.*76%+*/%B*66.?>)%6.(7.+.:'72%.0B':2%*7%2-)%)7D./*70)72;%%@%6=00'/A%*+%2-)%J<<P6%)EB*6=/)%>.0.26%
.6%6-*C7%.7%J.(=/)%";%%#-)6)%>.0.26%'BB>A%+*/%:*72.7=*=6%)EB*6=/)6%'75%'/)%.72)75)5%2*%B/*D.5)%'%
B/=5)72%0'/(.7%*+%6'+)2A%+*/%'>>%B)/6*768%/)('/5>)66%*+%'()8%()75)/8%6.Q)8%*/%-)'>2-;%%#-)%0*62%/)62/.:2.D)%
J<<%>.0.2%+*/%)EB*6=/)6%*+%=7>.0.2)5%5=/'2.*7%2*%/'5.*%+/)F=)7:A%)7)/(A%+*/%6)D)/'>%B)/6*7'>%C./)>)66%
6)/D.:)6%'/)%'6%+*>>*C6R%
%% S./)>)66%N)/D.:)%J/)F=)7:A%T'75% U::=B'2.*7'>%V.0.2% &=?>.:%V.0.2%%%%%
!.:/*C'D)%G&*.72W2*W&*.72L% X8YYYZ[Y8YYY%!1Q% X;YY%0S\:0
]% ";YY%0S\:0
]%
TIN%GT/*'5?'75%I'5.*L%]8^YY%X;YY%";YY%
@SN%G@5D'7:)5%S./)>)66L% ]8"YY%X;YY%";YY%
&<N%G&)/6*7'>%<*00=7.:'2.*7L% "8_XY%X;YY%";YY%
<)>>=>'/%[`Y%];_Y%Y;X[%
N!I%GNB):.'>.Q)5%!*?.>)%I'5.*L% [XX%];[X%Y;X`%
`YY%!1Q%`YY%];,Y%Y;,[%
a0*62%/)62/.:2.D)%+/)F=)7:A%/'7()b% cYZcYY%";YY%Y;]Y%
&*C)/%>.7)%+/)F=)7:.)6%G^Y%1QL%'/)%C)>>%?)>*C%2-)%'BB>.:'?>)%/'7()%*+%2-)6)%62'75'/568%'75%2-)/)%.6%
:*76.5)/)5% 2*% ?)% 7*% :*0B*=75.7(% )++):2% +/*0% 6.0=>2'7)*=6% )EB*6=/)% 2*% B*C)/% >.7)% '75% /'5.*%
+/)F=)7:A%+.)>56;%
13
14
!"#"$%&'()(*+$,$-.&/&012$&3!4$5&210$
"617*+$8&(7*$-&)1$9&:;*(&70$,$-;)&$!)*&<$=;)(>&.7(;$
!"#$%
&'()%*%+,%-%
.#/#% % %.01)00'%%%%%%%%%%%%%%!'23454%6'7857'1)9%:2;+<5=)%>)?)7%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
@+9)%A% % B31)%.99=)<<%C)3(D1% %%%%%%'1%E=+509%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%+0%#+;%F7++=%G)H+09%I3<1'08)%
@J.% KLM"%B+51D%6+5=1%-N!%,1% MOMM"K%4PQ84
K%MOMMK"%4PQ84K%K"%,1%
% +0%:7%I+='9+%% MOKRS%;5G738%% MO-*S%;5G738%
@T.% -RK%>+4'%$)=9)%.?)05)% R*% MOMM""%4PQ84
K% MOMM"L%4PQ84
K%KR%
% +0%U3;730(%B1=))1%% MOKKS%;5G738% MO*JS%;5G738%
@"MV% *RK-%P'?)=7H%B1=))1% -N!% MOMM"K%4PQ84
K%MOMMK"%4PQ84K%"L%
% +0%:'<1%!)'9+W%I=3?)% % MOKRS%;5G738
%% MO-*S%;5G738
%%
@"".% T-T%>+4'%$)=9)%.?)05)% R-!% MOMM"M%4PQ84
K%MOMM"J%4PQ84K% *M%
% 0)'=%#+==)H'%6+5=1%% MOK"S%;5G738%% MO**S%;5G738%
@"*.% *TMJ%6'=7<+0%63=87)% --!% MOMM"J%4PQ84
K%MOMM*M%4PQ84K% J%
% 0)'=%6'=7<+0%6+5=1%% MO**S%;5G738% MOJMS%;5G738%
@"RV% **"-%6+W;)=%B1=))1% -N!% MOMM"K%4PQ84
K%MOMMK"%4PQ84K% K*%
% 0)'=%B1O%67'3=)%I=3?)% % MOKRS%;5G738%% MO-*S%;5G738%
@KM.% *-"K%X+<<%X+'9%R-% MOMM""%4PQ84
K%MOMM"T%4PQ84K% *K%
% 0)'=%.4)<%.?)05)%% MOKKS%;5G738% MO*-S%;5G738%
@K".% *"*K%I'?39%.?)05)% -L!% MOMM"-%4PQ84
K%MOMMK*%4PQ84K% KJ%
% 0)'=%:7G=39()%P'H%% MOKTS%;5G738%% MO-JS%;5G738%
@K-.% *-"R%E=))=%X+'9%-N!% MOMM"K%4PQ84
K%MOMMK"%4PQ84K% "J%
0)'=%Y'038)%P'H%% MOKRS%;5G738% MO-*S%;5G738%
@KR.% JKM%XD+9)<%I=3?)% -N% MOMM"*%4PQ84
K% MOMMKK%4PQ84
K% "N%
0)'=%C'4371+0%.?)05)% % MOKJS%;5G738% MO-RS%;5G738%
@KT.% *TRT%6+=30'%P'H%-T!% MOMM"R%4PQ84
K%MOMMKR%4PQ84K% KR%
0)'=%>+53<%X+'9%% MOKLS%;5G738%% MO-NS%;5G738%
@KL.% *N"R%>+53<%X+'9%-L% MOMM"-%4PQ84
K%MOMMK-%4PQ84K% K-%
0)'=%E'37)=0%.?)05)% % MOKTS%;5G738%% MO-LS%;5G738%
@*".% JR"%:'<1%!)'9+W%I=3?)% -L!%% MOMM"-%4PQ84
K% MOMMK*%4PQ84
K% K"%
0)'=%!3997),3)79%X+'9% % MOKTS%;5G738% MO-JS%;5G738%
@*K.% *NM"%!3997),3)79%X+'9% R-!% MOMM"M%4PQ84
K%MOMM"J%4PQ84K% *M%
+0%:'<1%6D'=7)<1+0%X+'9% % MOK"S%;5G738%% MO**S%;5G738%
@**.% *R*N%>+53<%X+'9%-R% MOMM"J%4PQ84
K%MOMMKN%4PQ84K% --%
0)'=%E=))=%X+'9%% MO**S%;5G738%% MORLS%;5G738%
@*-V% *TK%F)=0)%.?)05)% -N%% MOMM"*%4PQ84
K%MOMMKK%4PQ84K% **%
0)'=%I'Z)%.?)05)%% MOKJS%;5G738%% MO-RS%;5G738%
@*J.% *N-R%@)7<+0%I=3?)% -N% MOMM"*%4PQ84
K%MOMMKK%4PQ84K% *K%
=)'=%+,%!3997),3)79%X+'9% % MOKJS%;5G738%% MO-RS%;5G738%
@*L.% "MN%>+3<%>'0)%RM% MOMM"K%4PQ84
K% MOMMK"%4PQ84
K% L%
0)'=%P'7051%I=3?)%% MOKRS%;5G738% MO-*S%;5G738%
@R".% K-"M%P'?)=7H%B1=))1% --% MOMM"T%4PQ84
K%MOMM*"%4PQ84K% *N%
0)'=%[=)(+0%:2;=)<<W'H% % MO*-S%;5G738%% MOJ*S%;5G738%
@RK.% *MN-%E=))=%X+'9%%-N!% MOMM"K%4PQ84
K%MOMMK"%4PQ84K% KJ%
+0%!'9952%I=3?)%% MOKRS%;5G738%% MO-*S%;5G738%
%
15
!"#"$%&'()(*+$,$-.&/&012$&3!4$5&210$
"617*+$8&(7*$-&)1$9&:;*(&70$,$-;)&$!)*&<$=;)(>&.7(;$
!"#$%
&'()%*%+,%*%
?1:&@@17212$%(*(A;*(&7$%1;0B.10$$
-.)%/+%/0)12%3+.4/14(%5+6'/1+478%/0)%9#:#%'4/)44'7%;+.5<%4+/%=)%'66)771=5)%/+%/0)%()4)2'5%>.=5168%
'4<%7+%4+%31/1('/1+4%3)'7.2)7%'2)%4)6)77'2?%/+%6+3>5?%;1/0%/0)%@AA%>.=516%)B>+7.2)%(.1<)514)7C%%%
#+%>2)D)4/%+66.>'/1+4'5%)B>+7.2)7%14%)B6)77%+,%/0)%@AA%(.1<)514)78%4+%'66)77%;1/014%*%,))/%<12)6/5?%14%
,2+4/%+,%/0)%9#:#%'4/)44'78%7.60%'7%31(0/%+66.2%<.214(%3'14/)4'46)%;+2E%+4%/0)%>+5)78%70+.5<%=)%
'55+;)<%;015)%/0)%='7)%7/'/1+4%17%14%+>)2'/1+48%.45)77%+/0)2%3)'7.2)7%6'4%=)%<)3+47/2'/)<%/+%)47.2)%
/0'/%+66.>'/1+4'5%>2+/)6/1+4%2)F.12)3)4/7%'2)%3)/C%%&+7/14(%)B>5'4'/+2?%;'2414(%71(47G%'/%/0)%'4/)44'7%
'4<H+2%+4%/0)%>+5)7%=)5+;%/0)%'4/)44'78%7.60%/0'/%/0)%71(47%;+.5<%=)%2)'<15?%D171=5)%,2+3%'4?%'4(5)%+,%
'>>2+'60% /+% >)27+47% ;0+% 31(0/% 4))<% /+% ;+2E% ;1/014% /0'/% <17/'46)8% ;+.5<% =)% 7.,,161)4/% /+% 3))/%%
@AAI'<+>/)<%(.1<)514)7C%%%
=&7:)B0(&7$
J'7)<% +4% /0)% 14,+23'/1+4% '4<% '4'5?717% '=+D)8% 1/% 17% /0)% .4<)271(4)<K7% >2+,)771+4'5% +>141+4% /0'/%
+>)2'/1+4%+,%/0)%+./71<)%-17/21=./)<%94/)44'%L?7/)3%'7%>2+>+7)<%=?%9#:#%!+=151/?%14%&'5+%95/+8%
A'51,+241'8%;155%6+3>5?%;1/0%/0)%>2)D'1514(%7/'4<'2<7%,+2%5131/14(%>.=516%)B>+7.2)%/+%2'<1+%,2)F.)46?%
)4)2(?%'4<8%/0)2),+2)8%;155%4+/%,+2%/017%2)'7+4%6'.7)%'%71(41,16'4/%13>'6/%+4%/0)%)4D12+43)4/C%%#0)%
01(0)7/%6'56.5'/)<%5)D)5%14%>.=5165?%'66)771=5)%'2)'7%17%3.60%5)77%/0'4%/0)%>2)D'1514(%7/'4<'2<7%'55+;%
,+2%)B>+7.2)7%+,%.45131/)<%<.2'/1+4C%%#017%,14<14(%17%6+4717/)4/%;1/0%3)'7.2)3)4/7%+,%'6/.'5%)B>+7.2)%
6+4<1/1+47%/'E)4%'/%+/0)2%+>)2'/14(%='7)%7/'/1+47C%
!B*C&.0C(/$
#0)% .4<)271(4)<% './0+2% +,% /017% 7/'/)3)4/% 17% '% F.'51,1)<% &2+,)771+4'5% M4(14))28% 0+5<14(% A'51,+241'%
N)(17/2'/1+4%O+7C%MI"PQRS%'4<%!IRQSTS8%;0160%)B>12)%+4%U.4)%PQ8%RQ"PC%%#017%;+2E%0'7%=))4%6'221)<%
+./%.4<)2%017%<12)6/1+48%'4<%'55%7/'/)3)4/7%'2)%/2.)%'4<%6+22)6/%+,%017%+;4%E4+;5)<()%)B6)>/8%;0)2)%
4+/)<8%;0)4%<'/'%0'7%=))4%7.>>51)<%=?%+/0)278%;0160%<'/'%0)%=)51)D)7%/+%=)%6+22)6/C%
%%VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV%
%W1551'3%@C%X'33)//8%&CMC%
%TQTHYYSIZRQQ%
!'260%"Y8%RQ"R%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
G%W'2414(%71(47%70+.5<%6+3>5?%;1/0%[M#ISZ%6+5+28%7?3=+58%'4<%6+4/)4/%2)6+33)4<'/1+47C%%A+4/'6/%14,+23'/1+4%
70+.5<%=)%>2+D1<)<%\!"#"8%'%/)5)>0+4)%4.3=)2]%/+%'22'4()%,+2%'66)77%/+%2)7/216/)<%'2)'7C%%#0)%7)5)6/1+4%+,%5'4(.'()\7]%
17%4+/% '4%)4(14))214(%3'//)28%'4<%(.1<'46)%,2+3% /0)%5'4<5+2<8%5+6'5%^+414(%+2%0)'5/0%'./0+21/?8%+2%'>>2+>21'/)%
>2+,)771+4'57%3'?%=)%2)F.12)<C%%L1(4'()%3'?%'57+%4))<%/+%6+3>5?%;1/0%/0)%2)F.12)3)4/7%+,%&_A%`[YZC%
16
FCC Radio Frequency Protection Guide
FCC Guidelines
Figure 1
Frequency (MHz)
1000
100
10
1
0.1
0.1 1 10 100 103 104 105
Occupational Exposure
Public Exposure
PCS
CellFM
Po
w
e
r
De
n
s
i
t
y
(m
W
/
c
m
2)
The U.S. Congress required (1996 Telecom Act) the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”)
to adopt a nationwide human exposure standard to ensure that its licensees do not, cumulatively, have
a significant impact on the environment. The FCC adopted the limits from Report No. 86, “Biological
Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields,” published in 1986 by the
Congressionally chartered National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (“NCRP”).
Separate limits apply for occupational and public exposure conditions, with the latter limits generally
five times more restrictive. The more recent standard, developed by the Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers and approved as American National Standard ANSI/IEEE C95.1-2006, “Safety
Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to
300 GHz,” includes similar limits. These limits apply for continuous exposures from all sources and
are intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or
health.
As shown in the table and chart below, separate limits apply for occupational and public exposure
conditions, with the latter limits (in italics and/or dashed) up to five times more restrictive:
Frequency Electromagnetic Fields (f is frequency of emission in MHz)
Applicable
Range
(MHz)
Electric
Field Strength
(V/m)
Magnetic
Field Strength
(A/m)
Equivalent Far-Field
Power Density
(mW/cm2)
0.3 – 1.34 614 614 1.63 1.63 100 100
1.34 – 3.0 614 823.8/ f 1.63 2.19/ f 100 180/ f2
3.0 – 30 1842/ f 823.8/ f 4.89/ f 2.19/ f 900/ f2 180/ f2
30 – 300 61.4 27.5 0.163 0.0729 1.0 0.2
300 – 1,500 3.54 f 1.59 f f /106 f /238 f/300 f/1500
1,500 – 100,000 137 61.4 0.364 0.163 5.0 1.0
Higher levels are allowed for short periods of time, such that total exposure levels averaged over six or
thirty minutes, for occupational or public settings, respectively, do not exceed the limits, and higher
levels also are allowed for exposures to small areas, such that the spatially averaged levels do not
exceed the limits. However, neither of these allowances is incorporated in the conservative calculation
formulas in the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65 (August 1997) for
projecting field levels. Hammett & Edison has built those formulas into a proprietary program that
calculates, at each location on an arbitrary rectangular grid, the total expected power density from any
number of individual radio sources. The program allows for the description of buildings and uneven
terrain, if required to obtain more accurate projections.
17
RFR.CALC™ Calculation Methodology
Assessment by Calculation of Compliance with FCC Exposure Guidelines
Methodology
Figure 2
The U.S. Congress required (1996 Telecom Act) the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) to
adopt a nationwide human exposure standard to ensure that its licensees do not, cumulatively, have a
significant impact on the environment. The maximum permissible exposure limits adopted by the FCC
(see Figure 1) apply for continuous exposures from all sources and are intended to provide a prudent
margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or health. Higher levels are allowed for
short periods of time, such that total exposure levels averaged over six or thirty minutes, for
occupational or public settings, respectively, do not exceed the limits.
Near Field.
Prediction methods have been developed for the near field zone of panel (directional) and whip
(omnidirectional) antennas, typical at wireless telecommunications base stations, as well as dish
(aperture) antennas, typically used for microwave links. The antenna patterns are not fully formed in
the near field at these antennas, and the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65
(August 1997) gives suitable formulas for calculating power density within such zones.
For a panel or whip antenna, power density S = 180
BW
0.1 Pnet
D2 h , in mW/cm2,
and for an aperture antenna, maximum power density Smax = 0.1 16 Pnet
h2 , in mW/cm2,
where BW = half-power beamwidth of the antenna, in degrees, and
Pnet = net power input to the antenna, in watts,
D= distance from antenna, in meters,
h= aperture height of the antenna, in meters, and
= aperture efficiency (unitless, typically 0.5-0.8).
The factor of 0.1 in the numerators converts to the desired units of power density.
Far Field.
OET-65 gives this formula for calculating power density in the far field of an individual RF source:
power density S = 2.56 1.64 100 RFF2 ERP
4 D2 , in mW/cm2,
where ERP = total ERP (all polarizations), in kilowatts,
RFF = relative field factor at the direction to the actual point of calculation, and
D= distance from the center of radiation to the point of calculation, in meters.
The factor of 2.56 accounts for the increase in power density due to ground reflection, assuming a
reflection coefficient of 1.6 (1.6 x 1.6 = 2.56). The factor of 1.64 is the gain of a half-wave dipole
relative to an isotropic radiator. The factor of 100 in the numerator converts to the desired units of
power density. This formula has been built into a proprietary program that calculates, at each location
on an arbitrary rectangular grid, the total expected power density from any number of individual
radiation sources. The program also allows for the description of uneven terrain in the vicinity, to
obtain more accurate projections.
18
Alternative Aesthetics Fielding Analysis 3/20/12
Seq
Design
Status
Node
Number Latitude Longitude
Pole
_Ht
PA_
Pole
_no Locations Fielding Notes
1 in-design P2N10B 37.421091 -122.120513 38' 6" 3954 3524 Waverly St on E Meadow Dr
Feasible - Deciduous tree against pole to rt (NE). No
street tree opportunity.
alternate P2N10B 37.421339 -122.120306 3453
3524 Waverly St
W corner of Waverly and E
Meadow Dr on E Meadow
Feasible - Corner pole. Trees behind. No street trees or
opporunity for. Equipment streetside on E Meadow?
alternate P2N10B 37.421250 -122.120140 2311
Rear of 3546 South Ct on E
Meadow Dr - South Corner of
Waverly and E Meadow
Feasible - Corner pole. No tree screening, except for
tree behind (S) pole. Middle School across Waverly St.
alternate
not
feasible P2N10B 37.420980 -122.120384 223?
Side of 3535 South Ct. on E
Meadow Dr
Not feasible - No room on pole. Pole number obscured.
Can't read last digit.
alternate P2N10B 37.420852 -122.120743 3955
Side of 3527 South Ct on E
Meadow
Feasible - Evergreen tree to rt (NE) and deciduous to
left (SW). Cable box on pole at 17.j Equipment could
be located under cable box.
2 in-design P2N11A 37.429938 -122.121374 43' 6" 3289 747 Loma Verde Ave
Feasible - Decid tree to left (W) on property line. 2nd
story window, but distant, offset and screened. Room
for street tree to right (E).
alternate
not
feasible P2N11A 37.429793 -122.121713 3288 737 Loma Verde Ave
Not feasible - Decid tree to rt (W) and Euc behind. Euc
would block 130 AZM.
alternate P2N11A 37.429766 -122.121515 3290 734 Loma Verde Ave
Feasible if replaced. Power step down pole. No AT&T.
Not tall enough. Evergreen trees to rt and left.
alternate P2N11A 37.430177 -122.121133 3291 761 Loma Verde Ave
Feasible - Euc for screening to rear. Possible to add
street tree to right. 2nd story windows behind
eucalyptus tree.
3 in-design P2N13A 37.418163 -122.117285 33' 6" 2255 3706 Carlson Cir
Feasible - PUE not ROW. Deciduous yard tree to 5'
from top. Pole within 6' of garage. No 2nd story.
alternate P2N13A 37.418982 -122.117042 n/a 3716 Redwood Cir
Feasible - Evergreen shrubs 10' up pole. No 2nd story.
Pole number covered by foliage. 3 spans north of
primary. PUE.
alternate
not
feasible P2N13A Not AvailableNot Available n/a 3704 Calson Cir
Not feasible - Rear yard no access. N of primary 1
span.
alternate
not
feasible P2N13A Not AvailableNot Available n/a 3709 Carlson Cir
Not feasible - Rear yard no access. S of primary 1
span. End pole.
alternate
not
feasible P2N13A Not AvailableNot Available n/a 3719 Redwood Cir
Not feasible - Rear yard no access. N of primary 2
spans.
4 in-design P2N15B 37.425283 -122.122644 39' 6" 3993 3314 Cowper St
Feasible - No 2nd story window. Magnolia tree to far
left (SE). Decid tree to far right (NW). No trees
immediately adjacent and no room for street trees.
alternate P2N15B 37°25'31.68"N122° 7'22.76"W 3992 3304 Cowper St
Feasible - Large pine to rear. Magnolia tree to left (SE).
Place equipment to left. 2nd story window to rt.
alternate P2N15B 37°25'32.70"N122° 7'24.25"W 3991 3284 Cowper St
Feasible - Large decid tree to right of and around pole.
Across street from school. Equipment streetside.
alternate P2N15B 37°25'29.69"N122° 7'19.58"W 3994 3352 Cowper St.
Not feasible unless replaced. End pole. Too short. Guy
pole only. No tree screening.
5 in-design P2N20A 37.429212 -122.116544 43' 3368
3412 Ross Rd - border of YMCA
property and 3374 Ross Rd
Feasible - Large cypress behind pole. No 2nd story
window
alternate P2N20A 37.428626 -122.115709 3371 3412 Ross Rd - YMCA
Feasible - surrounded by deciduous trees. No 2nd story
window. Equipment streetside. 2 spans SE of primary.
alternate P2N20A 37.428848 -122.116042 3370 3412 Ross Rd - YMCA
Feasible - surrounded by deciduous trees. No 2nd story
window. Equipment streetside. 1 span SE of primary
alternate P2N20A 37.429433 -122.117015 3367 3370 Ross Rd
Feasible - No 2nd story window. Topped redwood
behind pole to screen. Equipment streetside. 1 span
NW of primary.
6 in-design P2N21A 37.433803 -122.119660 37' 6" 3268 3132 David Ave
Feasible - No 2nd story window. Good evergreen and
decid screening behind pole. Mature decid tree to right
(NW). No room for new street trees.
alternate
not
feasible P2N21A Not AvailableNot Available n/a 3135 David Ct.Not Feasible - 1 span to the NE. Rear yard, no access.
alternate
not
feasible P2N21A Not AvailableNot Available n/a n/a All other poles within 2 spans are rear yard.
alternate P2N21A 37.433971 -122.120905 3258 3055 Stelling Dr
Feasible if not too far for RF - Alternate pole located
approx 250' W of primary. No 2nd story. Decid tree to rt
(SW). Possible new street tree to left (NE).
Page 1 of 3
19
Alternative Aesthetics Fielding Analysis 3/20/12
Seq
Design
Status
Node
Number Latitude Longitude
Pole
_Ht
PA_
Pole
_no Locations Fielding Notes
7 in-design P2N24A 37.432914 -122.111599 38' 6" 2917 3415 Greer Rd
Feasible - No 2nd story window. Birch tree behind.
Equipment on rt (S) to avoid streetlight on separate
pole in front of utility pole. No room for new street tree.
alternate
not
feasible P2N24A Not AvailableNot Available n/a n/a No other feasible candidates. All poles rear yard
8 in-design P1N25A 37.449747 -122.132666 38' 4490 Side of 620 Rhodes Dr (borders 1772 Hamilton Ave)
Feasible - Screen from SW by evergreen trees.
Equipment on E side of pole. No 2nd story window. Set
back from street in PUE.
alternate
Not
feasible P1N25A Not AvailableNot Available n/a Back of 1765 Hamilton Ave Not feasible - Pole in yard. No access.
alternate
Not
feasible P1N25A Not AvailableNot Available n/a Back of 660 Rhodes Dr Not feasible - Pole in yard. No access.
alternate
Not
feasible P1N25A Not AvailableNot Available n/a Back of 580 Rhodes Dr Not feasible - Pole in yard. No access.
9 in-design P2N27A 37.427621 -122.107027 36' 6" 3660 3757 Corina Way
Feasible - No 2nd story. Mature decid tree to right
(SW). No tree and no room for new tree on left.
alternate
not
feasible P2N27A Not AvailableNot Available n/a n/a No other feasible candidates. All poles rear yard
10 in-design P2N28A 37.423150 -122.106521 37' 3571 3915 Louis Rd Feasible - No 2nd story. Mature decid tree to left (N).
alternate P2N28A 37.424167 -122.106458 3672 3891 Louis Rd
Feasible - No 2nd story. Mature decid tree to left (N)
Transformer. Equipment streetside. Adjacent to Adobe
Creek.
alternate
not
feasible P2N28A Not AvailableNot Available n/a n/a No other feasible candidates. All poles rear yard
11 in-design P2N31A 37.423790 -122.115742 3620 651 E Meadow Dr
Feasible - No 2nd story windows. Equipment
streetside. No screening. No room for street tree.
alternate P2N31A 37.424176 -122.114924 37' 6" 3623
691 E Meadow Dr at Middlefield
Rd
Feasible - Corner pole.Guy pole only. Evergreen olive
tree screening from behind. Decid tree to rt (NW).
alternate P2N31A 37.424085 -122.114782 3622 3600 Middlefield Rd
Feasible - Corner pole. PA Fire Dept. No 2nd story.
Equipment facing E Meadow Dr. Note there is a
flagpole cell tower at the Fire station.
alternate P2N31A 37.423846 -122.115236 3618
Side of 3600 Middlefield Rd (on E
Meadow)
Feasible - No 2nd story. Bet church and Fire Station.
No screening. No opportunity for street tree. Equipment
on N side.
alternate
not
feasible P2N31A 37.423980 -122.115377 36??681 E Meadow Dr Not feasible - Pole full. Pole number obscured.
alternate
not
feasible P2N31A 37.424111 -122.115140 3261 691 E Meadow Dr
Feasible only if tree is pruned and pole replaced with
taller pole. Pole is approx. 30' high. No 2nd story, not
corner. Support pole and drop.
12 in-design P2N32A 37.420137 -122.109488 43' 6" 2167
3901 Middlefield Rd on E
Charleston Rd
Feasible - Large oaks on both sides. 2nd story only
across E Charleston. End pole. None further W.
alternate P2N32A 37.420236 -122.109198 2166
3901 Middlefield Rd on E
Charleston Rd (further NE)
Feasible - Large oak on east side and street tree to
west. 2nd story window across E Charleston.
alternate P2N32A 37.420365 -122.108862 2165 706 E Charleston
Feasible - Tree (deciduous) on west side only. No 2nd
story window.
13 in-design P2N33A 37.430394 -122.111908 23' 6978 3539 Louis Rd
Feasible - At Eichler Swim Club. Support pole only. 23'
AGL. Will need replacement. Only fully accessible pole
candidate. Adjacent to creek.
alternate P2N33A 37.430645 -122.111546 2975 3539 Louis Rd
Feasible - Pole located inside Eichler Swim and Tennis
Club. There is gate access to utility easement. Feasible
if ATT can get access to that gate as a utility. Redwood
alternate
not
feasible P2N33A Not AvailableNot Available n/a n/a No other feasible candidates. All poles rear yard
14 in-design P2N34B 37.413790 -122.107910 38' 1980 372 Ferne Ave
Feasible - No 2nd story. Evergreen shrub to 10' up
pole. Equipment facing driveway (SW). PUE not ROW.
alternate
not
feasible P2N34B 37.414412 -122.107422 1998 412 Ferne Ave Not feasible - Tree behind that interferes with 170 AZM.
alternate
not
feasible P2N34B Not AvailableNot Available n/a n/a No other feasible candidates. All poles rear yard
Page 2 of 3
20
Alternative Aesthetics Fielding Analysis 3/20/12
Seq
Design
Status
Node
Number Latitude Longitude
Pole
_Ht
PA_
Pole
_no Locations Fielding Notes
15 in-design P2N36A 37.417180 -122.111271 38' 1951
3945 Nelson Dr rear of 4000
Middlefield Rd
Feasible - Evergreen screening behind (E) and left (N).
On border or Cubberly Community Center. No 2nd
story window.
alternate
not
feasible P2N36A Not AvailableNot Available n/a
Rear of 3962 Nelson Dr
First pole W of primary Not feasible - Rear yard no access.
alternate
not
feasible P2N36A Not AvailableNot Available n/a
Rear of 3960 Nelson Dr
2nd pole W of primary Not feasible - Rear yard no access.
alternate
not
feasible P2N36A Not AvailableNot Available n/a
Rear of 3945 Nelson Dr
First pole E of primary Not feasible - Rear yard no access.
alternate
not
feasible P2N36A Not AvailableNot Available n/a
Rear of 3929 Nelson Dr
2nd pole E of primary Not feasible - Rear yard no access.
16 in-design P1N38A 37.445750 -122.136509 39' 5048 109 Lois Ln near Walnut Dr
Feasible - Setback 10' from sidewalk in front yard. No
2nd story. No tree screening but could plant one at
street. Equipment will be within 10' of 2 houses. PUE.
alternate
Not
feasible P1N38A Not AvailableNot Available n/a
Back of 109 Lois Ln near Walnut
Dr (first pole to NW of primary)
alternate
Not
feasible P1N38A Not AvailableNot Available n/a
Back of 108 Lois Ln (first pole to
SE of primary)
alternate
Not
feasible P1N38A Not AvailableNot Available 5029
108 Walter Hayes Ln (2nd pole to
SE of primary)
alternate
Not
feasible P1N38A Not AvailableNot Available 5058
Side of 1547 Walnut (on Stanley)
(2nd pole to NW)
17 in-design P2N51A 37.431927 -122.136380 33' 2575 2410 Waverly St.
Feasible - 2nd story window. End pole. Last pole to SE.
Large evergreen mature tree to SE. No street tree
opportunity.
alternate
not
feasible P2N51A 37.432257 -122.136955 4863 2398 Waverly St
Not feasible - No space available without interfering
with climbing. 30' from corner. Street tree behind.
alternate P2N51A 37.432539 -122.137175 4862 2385 Waverly St
Feasible - 2nd story window approx 80' back. Decid
trees to rt (SE) and behind. Comm, no power.
alternate P2N51A 37.432440 -122.137248 4861 2380 Waverly St
Feasible - 2nd story window behind on house next
door. Small decid tree to rt (NW). Larger decid street
trees 20' each side of the pole.
18 in-design P2N52A 37.437177 -122.117219 38' 6" 2355 3094 Greer Rd on Maddux Dr
Feasible - No 2nd story. Redwood behind. Decid trees
to rt and left. Equipment streetside.
alternate P2N52A 37.437595 -122.117177 2379 3095 Greer Rd
Feasible - No 2nd story window. In side yard, adjacent
to garage, not house. Matadero Creek to left. No
screening. Tree could be added in yard?
alternate
not
feasible P2N52A Not AvailableNot Available n/a n/a No other feasible candidates. All poles rear yard
19 in-design P2N6A 37.428466 -122.132264 39' 6" 2669
Side of 2801 South Ct on El
Dorado
Feasible - Magnolia tree rt (NE) and decid tree to left
(SW). No 2nd story window. Shrubs growing up pole to
ht of 5'.
alternate P2N6A 37.428179 -122.132552 2668
Side of 2800 South Ct on El
Dorado
Feasible - Deciduous tree to left (NE) and rt (SW). No
2nd story window.
alternate P2N6A 37.428693 -122.132072 2670
Side of 2801 South Ct on El
Dorado (NE of Primary)
Not feasible - Surrounded by trees for screening, but
tall redwood across street in 360 AZM.
20 in-design P2N7A 37.426463 -122.126148 42' 4002 452 Loma Verde Ave on Kipling St
Feasible - No 2nd story. Equipment streetside. Birch to
rt and behind.
alternate P2N7A 37.426713 -122.126467 3972
Side of 3149 Waverly St (on Loma
Verde)
Feasible - No 2nd story. Shrubs to rear. No room for
street tree to left(W). Mature dec street stree to ft (E).
alternate P2N7A 37.426443 -122.126879 3970
Side of 3149 Waverly St (on Loma
Verde)
Feasible - Grace Lutheran Church. No 2nd story. Dec
street trees to rt and left. Equipment streetside.
alternate P2N7A 37.426347 -122.126785 3971
Side of 3157 Waverly St (on Loma
Verde)
Feasibility to be determined by RF. Decid street tree to
left (E). Possible new tree to rt (W). No 2nd story.
Height might be an issue as this is a short pole.
Page 3 of 3
21
PRISM REMOTE
INSTALLATION
******PROPRIETARY INFORMATION******
NOT FOR USE OR DISCLOSURE OUTSIDE OF ADC
TELECOMMUNICATIONS OR THEIR CUSTOMERS
50
'
-
0
"
6'
6
"
43
'
-
6
"
21
'
-
1
0
"
12
'
-
4
"
12
'
-
4
"
2'-0"
1'
-
0
"
4" U GUARD
EXOTHERMIC (CAD) WELD TO
GROUND ROD
10'-0"
9'
-
0
"
20
'
-
8
7
/
8
"
QUAD BAND/ QUAD BAND
BATTERY CABINET- ALPHA MMOE
24
'
-
1
/
8
"
24
'
-
1
1
7
/
8
"
DUAL BAND X-POL TRI-SECTOR
ANTENNA
52
'
-
3
"
CABLE GAUGE BETWEEN UTILITY POLE GROUND
BAR AND GROUND ROD #2 AWG SOLID PLACED
IN LIQUID TIGHT NON METALIC CONDUIT
COAXIAL CABLE WILL BE ½”
FOR ALL RUNS
>/= 1'-0"
5"
x
5
"
F
I
B
E
R
G
L
A
S
S
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
6'
-
0
"
6"
22
23
!"#"$%&'()(*+$,$-.&/&012$3(0*.('4*12$!5*1556$7+0*18$
-6)&$!)*&9$:6)(;&.5(6$
!"#$%!
!!&'()!*!+,!*!
'!-.%/*000!1&2!3'456)7!+6!78)!9+:);!+;!<5(87!9+<)!4)<+:!78)!'67)66'=!'7!)'38!>?2!6+@)!56!&'<+!
?<7+A!B'<5,+;65'C!!
7*42+$<104)*0$
>'7'!9;+D5@)@!4E!FG!B+66)375D57E!56@53'7)=H!78'7!78)!I'J5IKI!3'<3K<'7)@!6+5=)!<)D)<=!,;+I!785=!
)LK59I)67!'7!'!@5=7'63)!+,!*M!,))7!';)!'=!,+<<+:=N!
!O5(87! -;+67! P),7! Q'3R!!
!S0C0! S*C*! S0CT! UVCM!@Q?!
?@@56(! 78)=)! <)D)<=! 7+! 78)! =7'7K7+;E! I565IKI! <+3'<! 'I45)67! +K7@++;! <)D)<! +,! S0! @Q?! (5D)=! 78)!
,+<<+:56(!;)=K<7=N!
!! O5(87! -;+67! P),7! Q'3R!!
B+I456)@!F+7'<! SUC0! SSC*! SUCT! S*CW!@Q?!
X+5=)!Y63;)'=)! ZUC0! Z*C0! ZUC0! ZUCU!@Q?!
?<<!+,!78)!6+5=)!563;)'=)=!';)!:)<<!4)<+:!78)!B57E[=!'<<+:)@!<)D)<A!4E!3+I9<5'63)!I';(56=!56!)J3)==!+,!
T0!@Q?C!
:&5=)40(&5$$
Q'=)@!+6!78)!56,+;I'75+6!'6@!'6'<E=5=!'4+D)A!57!5=!78)!K6@);=5(6)@[=!9;+,)==5+6'<!+9565+6!78'7!78)!!
?F\F!@5=7;54K7)@!'67)66'!=E=7)I!6+@)=!9;+9+=)@!7+!4)!<+3'7)@!'7!D';5+K=!<+3'75+6=!56!&'<+!?<7+A!
B'<5,+;65'A!:5<<!3+I9<E!:578!78'7!357E[=!=7'6@';@=!<5I5756(!'3+K=753!6+5=)!)I5==5+6!<)D)<=C!
!4*>&.0>(/$
F8)! K6@);=5(6)@! 'K78+;! +,! 785=! =7'7)I)67! 5=! '! LK'<5,5)@! &;+,)==5+6'<! G6(56));A! 8+<@56(! B'<5,+;65'!
O)(5=7;'75+6!X+=C!G/TU0*#!'6@!%/*0#]#A!:8538!)J95;)!+6!^K6)!U0A!*0TUC!!F85=!:+;R!8'=!4))6!3';;5)@!
+K7!K6@);!85=!@5;)375+6A!'6@!'<<!=7'7)I)67=!';)!7;K)!'6@!3+;;)37!+,!85=!+:6!R6+:<)@()!)J3)97A!:8);)!
6+7)@A!:8)6!@'7'!8'=!4))6!=K99<5)@!4E!+78);=A!:8538!@'7'!8)!4)<5)D)=!7+!4)!3+;;)37C!!
!!!_____________________________________!
!`5<<5'I!-C!a'II)77A!&CGC!
!]0]bVV#/M*00!
X+D)I4);!TA!*0TT!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
H!!Q'=)@!+6!I)'=K;)I)67=!'7!'!@5=7'63)!+,!M!,))7C!
24
!"#$%&'%(%)&*+),-)+.#"/&0%.1"2")"34&
!"#$%&'&(&)*!
!+,)-.#!/!
"&0$!1-2,3,45(,$,#0!52'!&$%#.!5)#23,#0!04#3,6*!2&,0#!(,1,$0!,2!
-2,$0! &6! '789! :%,3%! ,0! ,2$#2'#'! $&! 1,1,3! $%#! .#'-3#'!
.#3#4$,;,$*! &6! $%#! %-152! #5.! $&! <&-2'! =.#00-.#! >?@=AB! 5$!
45.$,3-(5.(*!(&:!&.!%,)%!6.#C-#23,#0D!!E%,0!6.#C-#23*F0#20,$,;#!
6,($#.!0%54#9!0%&:2!,2!$%#!).54%!$&!$%#!.,)%$!50!'#6,2#'!,2!$%#!
G2$#.25$,&25(!H(#3$.&$#3%2,35(!I&11,00,&2!<$52'5.'!J&D!/KL9!
$%#!81#.,352!J5$,&25(!<$52'5.'0!G20$,$-$#!<$52'5.'!J&D!MD/9!
52'! ;5.,&-0! &$%#.! 0$52'5.'09! ,0! 5(0&! ,23&.4&.5$#'! ,2$&! 1&0$!
35(,N.5$#'!6,#('!$#0$!#C-,41#2$!6&.!1#50-.,2)!2&,0#!(#;#(0D!!!
E%#!'78!-2,$0!&6!1#50-.#!5.#!.#6#.#23#'!$&!5!4.#00-.#!&6!!!!!!!
OP!!=5!>1,3.&45035(0B9!:%,3%!,0!$%#!$%.#0%&('!&6!2&.15(!
%#5.,2)D!!8($%&-)%!2&,0#!(#;#(0!;5.*!).#5$(*!N*!(&35$,&2!
52'!2&,0#!0&-.3#9!.#4.#0#2$5$,;#!(#;#(0!5.#!0%&:2!,2!$%#!
N&Q!$&!$%#!(#6$D!
!
"52-653$-.#.0! &6! 152*! $*4#0! &6! #C-,41#2$9! 0-3%! 50! 5,.! 3&2',$,&2#.09! )#2#.5$&.09! 52'!
$#(#3&11-2,35$,&20! '#;,3#09! &6$#2! $#0$! $%#,.! 4.&'-3$0! ,2! ;5.,&-0! 3&26,)-.5$,&20! $&! '#$#.1,2#! $%#!
53&-0$,35(!#1,00,&20!5$!3#.$5,2!',0$523#0D!!E%,0!'5$59!2&.15((*!#Q4.#00#'!,2!'78!5$!5!R2&:2!.#6#.#23#!
',0$523#9!352!N#!-0#'!$&!'#$#.1,2#!$%#!3&..#04&2',2)!0&-2'!4.#00-.#!(#;#(!5$!52*!45.$,3-(5.!',0$523#9!
0-3%!50!5$!5!2#5.N*!N-,(',2)!&.!4.&4#.$*!(,2#D!!E%#!0&-2'!4.#00-.#!'.&40!50!$%#!0C-5.#!&6!$%#!,23.#50#!,2!
',0$523#9!533&.',2)!$&!$%#!6&.1-(5S!!
!:%#.#!@=!,0!$%#!0&-2'!4.#00-.#!(#;#(!5$!',0$523#!T4!52'!!
!@U!,0!$%#!R2&:2!0&-2'!4.#00-.#!(#;#(!5$!',0$523#!TUD!!
G2',;,'-5(!0&-2'!4.#00-.#!(#;#(0!5$!5!45.$,3-(5.!4&,2$!6.&1!0#;#.5(!',66#.#2$!2&,0#!0&-.3#0!3522&$!N#!
3&1N,2#'!',.#3$(*!,2!-2,$0!&6!'78D!!V5$%#.9!$%#!-2,$0!2##'!$&!N#!3&2;#.$#'!$&!035(5.!0&-2'!,2$#20,$*!
-2,$0!,2!&.'#.!$&!N#!5''#'!$&)#$%#.9!$%#2!3&2;#.$#'!N53R!$&!'#3,N#(!-2,$09!533&.',2)!$&!$%#!6&.1-(5S!
:%#.#!@E!,0!$%#!$&$5(!0&-2'!4.#00-.#!(#;#(!52'!!
@/9!@O9!#$3!5.#!,2',;,'-5(!0&-2'!4.#00-.#!(#;#(0D!
I#.$5,2!#C-,41#2$!,20$5((5$,&20!15*!,23(-'#!$%#!4(53#1#2$!&6!N5..,#.0!52'W&.!5N0&.4$,;#!15$#.,5(0!$&!
.#'-3#!$.5201,00,&2!&6!2&,0#!N#*&2'!$%#!0,$#D!J&,0#!V#'-3$,&2!IB,3,#2$0!>?JVIAB!5.#!4-N(,0%#'!6&.!
152*!',66#.#2$!15$#.,5(09!#Q4.#00#'!50!-2,$(#00! 4&:#.!653$&.09!:,$%!P!N#,2)!4#.6#3$!.#6(#3$,&2!52'!!!!!!!!!
/!N#,2)!4#.6#3$!5N0&.4$,&2D!!X245,2$#'!3&23.#$#!N(&3R9!6&.!,20$523#9!352!%5;#!52!JVI!50!%,)%!50!PDYMD!!
Z&:#;#.9!5!N5..,#.[0!#66#3$,;#2#00!'#4#2'0!&2!,$0!04#3,6,3!3&26,)-.5$,&29!50!:#((!50!$%#!15$#.,5(0!-0#'!
52'!$%#,.!0-.653#!$.#5$1#2$D!
@=!\!@U!]!OP!(&)>TUWT=B9!
!!YP!'78! (,N.5.*!
!!^P!'78! .-.5(!N53R).&-2'!
!!MP!'78! &66,3#!0453#!
!!_P!'78! 3&2;#.05$,&2!
!!KP!'78! 35.!.5',&!
!!`P!'78! $.566,3!3&.2#.!
!!LP!'78! (5:21&:#.!
@E!\!/P!(&)!>/P@/W/P!]!/P@OW/P!]!aB9!
25
From: John Hamburger <jwhamburger@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:43 PM
To: Campbell, Clare
Cc: ildikoran@gmail.com; tim.perkins@yahoo.com;
sv.rogerp@gmail.com; Sandra Park; manasmandal@yahoo.com;
elizabeth.ratner@gmail.com; jimafox@pacbell.net;
meng@arts4all.org; Williams, Curtis; French, Amy; 'CLUNIE,
SHIYAMA'; NGUYEN, MINH V
Subject: Re: No DAS on Carlson Circle
Attachments: DAS Petition Carlson Circle.pdf
Clare,
We just received a card from your department stating the intention of the Palo Alto Planning Dept to
ignore the petition that we, the neighbors of Carlson Circle, submitted, attached, requesting that the AT&T
DAS system not be installed on our circle. In your last email, you said that you would discuss with AT&T
relocating the switch underground. We think a better alternative is to place the system on a busier route,
such as along Alma St, Charleston or Middlefield. We are adamant in opposing this unsightly and
potentially harmful system on our small circle. We do not consider it a feasible alternative to place a pole
on the sidewalk in front of 3706 Carlson Circle. We request that you address this issue, as we have
communicated to you, your department and to AT&T over the past year, and not install the DAS system
on Carlson Circle. Thank you for your consideration.
John Hamburger
From: "Campbell, Clare" <clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org>
To: 'John Hamburger' <jwhamburger@yahoo.com>
Cc: "ildikoran@gmail.com" <ildikoran@gmail.com>; "tim.perkins@yahoo.com"
<tim.perkins@yahoo.com>; "sv.rogerp@gmail.com" <sv.rogerp@gmail.com>; Sandra Park
<tesyl@pacbell.net>; "manasmandal@yahoo.com" <manasmandal@yahoo.com>;
"elizabeth.ratner@gmail.com" <elizabeth.ratner@gmail.com>; "jimafox@pacbell.net"
<jimafox@pacbell.net>; "meng@arts4all.org" <meng@arts4all.org>; "Williams, Curtis"
<Curtis.Williams@CityofPaloAlto.org>; "French, Amy" <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org>; "'CLUNIE,
SHIYAMA'" <sr2597@att.com>; "NGUYEN, MINH V" <mn3281@att.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:49 AM
Subject: RE: No DAS on Carlson Circle
Hello John,
Thanks for this and the other three emails. I see that you have included AT&T in your communications,
and I need them, as the project applicant, to respond to the issues you raise about alternative placement.
Your issues raised about aesthetics and (health) hazards have been discussed at previous public
hearings with the Architectural Review Board and City Council when the first phase of the DAS project
was reviewed.
By law (Telecommunications Act, 1996), the City cannot base a decision to approve or deny an
application based upon potential health issues. AT&T has gone through an extensive design review
process with the first phase of the DAS project. The project approval was appealed to and ultimately
supported by Council (01/23/12). The aesthetics of the Phase I project was discussed with the
Architectural Review Board and with City Council to assure that the approved design would have the least
visual impacts to the existing neighborhoods. The recently submitted Phase 2 and 3 projects follow the
approved design of Phase I.
I understand that the proposed installation on 3706 Carlson Circle is much closer to the adjacent homes
than those that were approved in the Phase 1 application. To address the aesthetic impacts, perhaps
AT&T can consider the undergrounding of the equipment, so the boxes are not so visually intrusive on the
private properties. I will need AT&T to respond to this redesign (they are copied on this email).
Thanks,
Clare Campbell | Planner
From: John Hamburger [mailto:jwhamburger@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 10:17 PM
To: Campbell, Clare ; Williams, Curtis
Cc: ildikoran@gmail.com; tim.perkins@yahoo.com; sv.rogerp@gmail.com; Sandra Park;
manasmandal@yahoo.com; elizabeth.ratner@gmail.com; jimafox@pacbell.net; meng@arts4all.org
Subject: No DAS on Carlson Circle
Clare, Curtis,
The attached petition, signed by the residents of Carlson Circle, Palo Alto, CA, requests that the City of
Palo Alto ensure that AT&T does not install a DAS (Distributed Antenna System) cell phone tower on
Carlson Circle, Palo Alto. We oppose this installation on the basis that: (1) the DAS system will be visually
obtrusive and will spoil the low Eichler design lines on our circle; (2) concern regarding unknown and
untested hazards from having such a cell tower antenna in a residential area; (3) concern regarding the
health and safety of individuals living on Carlson Circle; and (4) there are other more appropriate
locations to install such an antenna system. Therefore, we Carlson Circle residents request that the City
of Palo Alto Planning Department and AT&T relocate the DAS RF antenna system to another location—
not on Carlson Circle . Please respond at your earliest convenience. Thank you for your consideration.
John Hamburger
From: dyebc@msn.com
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 9:34 PM
To: Campbell, Clare
Subject: DAS installation
Hi Clare,
I emailed you regarding my concerns with the DAS installation at 1772 Hamilton Ave. which is near our
home and Duveneck Elementary school. I am even more concerned now given the plan to relocate the
antenna to the sidewalk. It seems this would make an unsightly addition to the neighborhood. I would
like to better understand this latest decision.
Also, my earlier concerns about the long term effect of the DAS on small, growing children was never
addresses by the City or by AT&T. I contacted the person you suggested multiple times, but they never
responded. It seems improper of the City to allow AT&T to just put up installations without answering
the residents' questions. I'm also wondering why the city is providing final notice of the installation over
the holidays with a deadline to appeal so soon after the holidays. It seems that the City is trying to avoid
residents' concerns.
Your thoughts are greatly appreciated.
Best,
Clara Dye
From: Sung Park <spark0820@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 11:00 AM
To: Campbell, Clare
Subject: Concern over proposed AT&T DAS 3 Project
Dear Clare,
I am a Palo Alto home owner and have been recently notified by your office regarding the
proposed DAS installation plan on a utility pole which is located near my residence at 971
Maddux Dr.
I'm very much concerned about the proposed installation due to the proximity of the pole's
location to our residence. My primary concern is the noise (primary from the fan) that it will
generate during hot summer months where we will have our bedroom windows open. Since our
bedroom windows is literally a few feets away from the pole, I am worried that the generated
noise from DAS will interfere with the peace and tranquility of my residence. Please let me
know if the noise issue is being adequately addressed. If I feel that it's be not being addressed to
some satisfaction, I am planning to file an appeal for the proposed plan. Please let me know how
I can go about doing that as well.
I understand that there is a need for better wireless coverage in the city and I realize the
importance of the proposed plan. I just feel that a good compromise between the city's need and
homeowner's desire to maintain peace and tranquility can be met. I hope you understand. I look
forward to hearing from you soon.
Best regards,
Sung
7069
Note only
Page 1
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3436)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 1/28/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Appeal of AT&T DAS Phase 4
Title: Appeal of Director’s Architectural Review Approval of the Co-location
by AT&T Mobility LLC of Pole-Mounted Wireless Communications Equipment
and Associated Equipment Boxes on 20 Existing Utility Poles Within City
Rights-of-Ways Near the Following Locations: 4131 El Camino Way, 550
Georgia Ave, 4101 Park Blvd (on W. Meadow), 4255 Ruthelma Ave, 669
Maybell Ave, 110 E. Charleston Dr (on Alma), 493 W. Charleston Dr, 4298
Ponce Dr, 429 Monroe, 231 Parkside Dr., opposite 106 Loma Verde, 516
Barron Ave, 4257 McKellar, 320 Lambert Ave, 3989 La Donna, 397 Ventura
Ave, 3364 Emerson St, 820 Chimalus Dr, 715 Barron Ave, 915 Matadero Ave.
AT&T DAS Phase 4 Project
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council: 1) uphold the Director of Planning and Community
Environment’s decision to approve the Architectural Review application for the Phase 4 project
based upon the findings and conditions of approval described in the Record of Land Use Action
(Attachment A), excluding the proposed installation adjacent to 231 Parkside Drive; and 2)
direct staff to work with AT&T and residents to evaluate alternative locations/options to 231
Parkside Drive.
Executive Summary
AT&T’s application is for Architectural Review of 20 wireless communication facilities (WCFs)
collocated on utility poles within City rights-of-way and jointly owned by the City and Pacific
Bell Telephone Company dba AT&T of California, known as the Palo Alto Outdoor DAS
(Distributed Antenna System) project Phase 4. The 20 installations propose one antenna placed
on a pole extension at the top of each pole, and equipment cabinets placed lower down on the
pole (between 10 feet and 20 feet above grade). The pole locations were reviewed regarding
City of Palo Alto Page 2
their aesthetic impacts and consistency with the Phase 1 design approval (Council action
01/23/12), and on December 18, 2012 the staff level Architectural Review approval was issued
for the project. Staff received two appeals of this decision from residents who cited concerns
regarding impacts to health and aesthetics. These are topics that have been raised in the Phase
1 and 2 appeals that Council reviewed in 2012. Staff believes the Director’s decision is
appropriate for all of the sites, with the exception of the 231 Parkside Drive site, which involves
relocation of the utility pole from a public utility easement (PUE) to the street frontage. Staff
recommends that this request be referred back to staff and AT&T to work with the residents to
evaluate alternative sites. A subsequent decision on that particular site would then be issued
and would again be appealable to Council.
Background
On June 29, 2012, AT&T submitted an application for Architectural Review for the Phase 4 DAS
installations at 20 locations. The project was determined to be a collocation project and,
according to Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.42.110, requires approval of an
Architectural Review application, followed by the issuance of encroachment permits. The use
itself is considered a permitted use, such that no Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is needed.
In January 2012, the Council, on appeal, reviewed the Phase 1 DAS project for 20 installations
and upheld the Director’s decision to approve the project sites (CMR #2393). At that time the
issues that were raised by the appellants focused on the need for a wireless master plan for the
entire city, and concerns for aesthetic impacts, potential health risks, noise, impacts on
property value, type of technology proposed, and the safety and reliability of the actual
installations. These issues were discussed in the associated CMR and can be viewed online for
additional details. The Council approved all of the applications.
On November 5, 2012, the Phase 2 DAS project approval was forwarded to Council on appeal to
consider (on the Consent Calendar) at their meeting. An appeal was filed by Mr. Tony Kramer, a
resident, citing concerns about the project’s compliance with the City’s Noise Ordinance. The
City Council did not remove it from the Consent Calendar and voted to uphold the Director’s
decision to approve the 15 project sites (CMR #3239).
There are a total of four phases in AT&T’s citywide DAS project, including a total of 75
installations. The Phase 3 and 4 projects were both approved on December 18, 2012. Phase 1 is
nearing completion of construction and Phase 2 installations are nearing construction. These
four phases are a part of AT&T’s build-out to provide adequate coverage and/or additional
capacity for wireless communications. AT&T is subject to a license agreement that allows AT&T
to collocate the DAS antennas and equipment on the City’s portion of the utility poles. The
Council approved the standard license agreement on July 25, 2011 (CMR #1756).
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Following the Council’s decision on the Phase 1 application, subsequent Architectural Review
(AR) applications for DAS installations, following the same prototype design as the approved
design, were to be reviewed at staff level and be subject to public notice and Council appeal,
but ARB public hearings were not required, according to the Zoning Code. Neighbor notification
is provided and public comments are reviewed by staff for each location. Actions by the
Director of Community Environment on the applications are posted on the City’s website and
courtesy notices of the actions are mailed to neighbors within 300 feet of each pole. The
Director’s decisions on staff level AR applications are also noted on the next available ARB
meeting agenda.
Review Process
The standard procedure for the review of an appealed Architectural Review application is for
placement on the Council Consent Calendar within 30 days of the filing of an appeal. Section
18.76.020(b)(3)(D) of the Zoning Code specifies that wireless communication facilities are
considered “minor projects” to be reviewed by staff. Section 18.77.070(b)(5) of the Zoning Code
specifically requires consideration by the Council on appeal of a staff approval of such a facility,
rather than hearing before the ARB. Council may decide to pull the item off Consent only if at
least three Councilmembers concur, and then the project is scheduled for a future public
hearing date (PAMC 18.77.070(f)). The Council meeting on March 4, 2013 has been targeted for
this public hearing, if Council determines to set a hearing.
Project Description
The approved design for the DAS installations is shown in the attached plans (Attachment G).
The existing utility poles range in height from 28 to 52 feet and the pole top extension, on
average, is about 8.25 feet. The equipment proposed on the pole face is the same for all the
poles and is comprised of (1) a power disconnect box located nine feet above grade; (2) a
remote prism cabinet (52.4”H x 12.15”W x 10.125”D) located approximately 10’-5” above
grade; (3) a back-up battery cabinet (27”H x 22”W x 18”D) located approximately 15’-9” above
grade; (4) an optical network interface box (13”H x 13”W x 3.75”D) located approximately 19’
above grade; and (5) related wiring. At the top of the pole extension, one antenna radome
(24”H x 16” Base Diameter) would be placed in-line with the pole.
The Phase 4 DAS project inlcudes one site (231 Parkside Drive) where the existing pole, which is
within a PUE and located close (≈3 feet) to the existing residential building, is proposed to be
relocated out to the sidewalk right-of-way. With this pole relocation, the DAS installation would
be consistent with the other sites throughout the city.
Discussion
City of Palo Alto Page 4
There were two appeals filed for this project and these are included as Attachment C. The
appellants all requested that another location for the DAS equipment be considered, other than
the sites indicated in their appeal request.
1. The first appeal, submitted by Lilian Marcus, was directed at the proposed installation
near 820 Chimalus Drive. This installation is roughly 22 feet away from the appellant’s
home. Ms. Marcus raised concerns about the potential health impacts that could be
generated by the DAS installation.
Staff Response: The Federal Telecommunications Act (TCA) of 1996 limits the City’s authority in
the review of wireless telecommunications projects. The City may only focus on the aesthetic
and zoning code aspects of a project and, by law, may not consider potential health issues and
any perceived related consequences (e.g. drop in property value). Under federal law, a local
agency’s wireless facility siting decisions may not have the effect of prohibiting the provision of
wireless service or unreasonably discriminating among wireless service providers. Further, a
utility is required to provide any telecommunications carrier with nondiscriminatory access to its
utility poles. Under federal law, the City may not regulate the placement, construction or
modification of wireless communications facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of
radio frequency (RF) emissions, so long as the facilities comply with the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) regulations concerning such emissions. The conditions of approval require
demonstration of compliance with the federal standards.
2. The second appeal was filed by Carolyn and Mark Dobervich (241 Parkside) that includes
signatures from Betty Rundell (231 Parkside) and Nancy Karp (221 Parkside), and
focused on the installation between 231 and 221 Parkside Drive. This DAS installation is
a proposed pole relocation and would move the existing utility pole approximately 22
feet away from the current location (which is approximately three feet away from the
house at 221 Parkside) out towards the street. This site also has a condition of approval
that requires the installation of a new street tree for future screening (if the existing
street tree is damaged). This appeal cites concerns about the new pole placement not
fitting within the existing street context, in that there are no utility poles placed along
the curb in the immediate vicinity. The argument is made that the new pole would be a
“visual eyesore.”
Staff Response: The City’s direction to AT&T has been to generally avoid location of antennas
and equipment on poles in PUEs, given their proximity to homes and potential visual and noise
concerns. This street, however, does not have existing utility poles on the street and the
residents have identified some alternatives that might be viable. Staff recommends that the
Council direct staff and AT&T to work with the residents to evaluate the alternative sites and re-
issue an approval letter. AT&T concurs with the staff recommendation. The subsequent action
City of Palo Alto Page 5
would be appealable to Council if any neighbor objected. The Record of Land Use Action
(Attachment A) has been prepared excluding this site from the Council approval at this time
(condition #19).
Other Objections
Staff also notes that one other property owner objected (Attachment F) to the location and
installations near his property, but did not formally appeal the decision. Nevertheless, the
entire Phase 4 project is one application, so the Council may act on that site or any other
proposal in the package. Staff believes that the objection relates to health impacts of the
installation, as addressed in #1 above.
Conclusion
Staff believes that all of the site requests, other than 231 Parkside Drive, are consistent with
City criteria and federal and state law for such installations, and the Director’s decisions should
be upheld. The approvals are reflected in the Record of Land Use Action.
Citywide Wireless Communications Facilities Study
In association with the Phase 1 DAS project, many residents requested the City to consider the
development of a city-wide master plan for wireless facilities. On May 16, 2011, Council
sponsored a study session to review issues related to wireless communications facilities (cell
towers and antennas). Consultants to the City and staff presented an overview of the need for
and technology related to such facilities, health issues, and relevant federal, state, and Palo Alto
regulations. The Council asked that staff continue the dialogue with the community to provide
better understanding for the public and the wireless industry. Council directed staff on July 2,
2012 to issue a request for proposal for a consultant/vendor to prepare a citywide wireless
communications facilities plan. The RFP was released on October 2, 2012. Staff has interviewed
four firms for the study and is finalizing its selection. A contract is expected to be awarded in
February.
Alternatives to Staff Recommendation
The Council may also consider the following alternatives rather than approval as proposed:
A. Council may remove the project from Consent to schedule and conduct a Public Hearing for
one or more of the specific DAS locations; OR
B. Council may remove the project from Consent to schedule and conduct a Public Hearing for
all of the proposed DAS locations.
City of Palo Alto Page 6
Staff has targeted March 4, 2013 as a potential hearing date, given the wireless
communications “shot-clock” processing requirements. (AT&T has stipulated to a shot-clock
extension to accommodate the Council’s hearing schedule, if necessary.)
Policy Implications
The proposed project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and staff believes there are no
other substantive policy implications. The project is supported by the following Comprehensive
Plan Policies: (B-13) Support the development of technologically-advanced communications
infrastructure and other improvements that will facilitate the growth of emerging
telecommunications industries; and (B-14) Work with electronic information network providers
to maximize potential benefits for Palo Alto businesses, schools, residences, and other potential
users.
Resource Impacts
The costs of project review by all staff and consultants is recovered by Architectural Review
application fees paid by AT&T. Pursuant to the City’s standard license agreement, AT&T will pay
the City $270 per year per installation, or a total of $4,050 per year for the 15 sites.
Environmental Review
The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) per section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Record of Land Use Action (DOC)
Attachment B: Location Map (PDF)
Attachment C: Appeals (PDF)
Attachment D: Hammett and Edison Noise Memo, July 27, 2012 (PDF)
Attachment E: Applicant's Submittal Information (PDF)
Attachment F: Public Comments (PDF)
Attachment G: Project Plans (Councilmembers and Libraries only) (TXT)
Attachment A
ACTION NO. 2013-02
RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION
FOR AT&T DAS PROJECT PHASE 4: ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 12PLN-00258
(AT&T, APPLICANT)
On January 28, 2013, the Council upheld the Director of
Planning and Community Environment’s December 18, 2012 decision to
approve the Architectural Review application of the co-location by
AT&T of (Distributed Antenna System, a.k.a. DAS) wireless
communications equipment on existing utility poles, removing the
DAS installation located adjacent to 231 Parkside Drive making the
following findings, determination and declarations:
SECTION 1. Background. The City Council of the City of
Palo Alto (“City Council”) finds, determines, and declares as
follows:
A. On June 29, 2012, AT&T applied for Architectural
Review for the co-location of wireless communications equipment
(Distributed Antenna System) on 20 utility poles located within
City rights-of-ways near the following locations: 4131 El Camino
Way, 550 Georgia Ave, 4101 Park Blvd (on W. Meadow), 4255 Ruthelma
Ave, 669 Maybell Ave, 110 E. Charleston Dr (on Alma), 493 W.
Charleston Dr, 4298 Ponce Dr, 429 Monroe, 231 Parkside Dr (pole to
be relocated to the curb), opposite 106 Loma Verde, 516 Barron Ave,
4257 McKellar, 320 Lambert Ave, 3989 La Donna, 397 Ventura Ave,
3364 Emerson St, 820 Chimalus Dr, 715 Barron Ave, 915 Matadero Ave.
The proposed equipment would include one antenna at the top of each
pole and two equipment boxes on the side of each pole (“The
Project”).
B. On December 18, 2012, following staff review, the
Director of Planning and Community Environment (Director) approved
the Architectural Review (AR) application. Notices of the
Director’s decision were mailed notifying neighbors of the
decision. The action is contained in the CMR #3436.
D. Within the prescribed timeframe, two appeals of the
Director’s decision were filed by Palo Alto residents: Marcus and
Dobervich.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. This project is
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act per Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 3. Architectural Review Findings.
1. The design is consistent and compatible with applicable
elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. This finding can be
made in the affirmative in that the project, as conditioned,
incorporates a more streamlined design that conforms with policies
that encourage quality development that is compatible with
surrounding development and public spaces. The project is also
supported by the following Comprehensive Plan Policies: (B-13)
AT&T DAS Phase 4
2
Support the development of technologically-advanced communications
infrastructure and other improvements that will facilitate the
growth of emerging telecommunications industries; (B-14) Work with
electronic information network providers to maximize potential
benefits for Palo Alto businesses, schools, residences, and other
potential users.
2. The design is compatible with the immediate environment
of the site. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that
the proposed design, as conditioned, blends with the existing
utility poles that are located within various residential
neighborhoods within the City.
3. The design is appropriate to the function of the project.
This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the design of
the equipment is not excessive for the intended utility use and has
been improved with the required conditions of approval to
streamline the design with the back-up battery cabinet placed above
the prism and elimination of one antenna.
4. In areas considered by the board as having a unified
design character or historical character, the design is compatible
with such character. This finding is not applicable to this
project.
5. The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and
character in areas between different designated land uses. This
finding is not applicable to this project.
6. The design is compatible with approved improvements both
on and off the site. This finding can be made in the affirmative
in that the project, as conditioned, is compatible with the
existing utility poles.
7. 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. This finding is not applicable to this project.
8. The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate
to the design and the function of the structures. This finding is
not applicable to this project.
9. Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support
the main functions of the project and the same are compatible with
the project’s design concept. This finding is not applicable to
this project.
10. Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe
and convenient for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles. This finding
AT&T DAS Phase 4
3
can be made in the affirmative in that the circulation under and
around the utility pole is not impacted.
11. Natural features are appropriately preserved and
integrated with the project. This finding is not applicable to this
project.
12. The materials, textures, colors and details of
construction and plant material are appropriate expression to the
design and function. This finding can be made in the affirmative,
see Findings 2, 3, and 4 above.
13. The landscape design concept for the site, as shown by
the relationship of plant masses, open space, scale, plant forms
and foliage textures and colors create a desirable and functional
environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that
the project, as conditioned, will be required to plant some
additional street trees at some locations. The placement and
selection of the street trees will be reviewed and approved by
Public Works and Utilities to assure the plantings will be
consistent with City standards.
14. Plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site,
capable of being properly maintained on the site, and is of a
variety which would tend to be drought-resistant to reduce
consumption of water in its installation and maintenance. This
finding can be made in the affirmative, see Finding 13. All City
street trees are regularly maintained and will use only the
required amount of water needed for establishment and maintenance.
15. The project exhibits green building and sustainable
design that is energy efficient, water conserving, durable and
nontoxic, with high-quality spaces and high recycled content
materials. This finding is not applicable to this project. The
scope of the project is small and there is limited opportunity to
incorporate green building design into the sign installations.
16. The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose
of architectural review as set forth in subsection 18.76.020(a).
This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project
design, as conditioned, promotes visual environments that are
integrated into the aesthetics of the immediate environment of an
industrial utility facility.
SECTION 4. Architectural Review Approval Granted.
Architectural Review Approval is hereby granted for the Project by
the City Council pursuant to Chapter 18.77 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code.
AT&T DAS Phase 4
4
SECTION 5. Plan Approval.
The plans submitted for Building Permit shall be in
substantial conformance with those plans prepared by AT&T titled
Palo Alto ODAS, consisting of 63 pages, and received September 17,
2012, except as modified to incorporate the conditions of approval
in Section 6. A copy of these plans is on file in the Department
of Planning and Community Development.
SECTION 6. Conditions of Approval.
Planning Division
1. The project shall be in substantial conformance with the
approved plans and related documents received September 17,
2012, except as modified to incorporate these conditions of
approval.
2. All conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover
sheet of the plan set submitted to obtain any permit through
the Building Inspection Division.
3. Any modifications/additions to the approved plans shall be
approved by Planning prior to construction and installation.
4. The project approval shall be valid for a period of one year
from the original date of approval. In the event a building
permit(s), if applicable, is not secured for the project
within the time limit specified above, the approval shall
expire and be of no further force or effect.
5. For all pole installations, the backup battery cabinet shall
be placed above the prism box.
6. For the life of the project, the size of the battery cabinet
shall be reduced as technology improves so as to maintain the
smallest battery cabinet needed.
7. The antenna, cabinet boxes, and pole extension shall be
painted either “Rock Brown” or “Sand Brown”, with a matte
finish, to match the existing color and finish of the utility
pole, and all other equipment (i.e. wiring and related
hardware) shall be painted with a matte finish to blend in
with the background material/color of the pole.
8. The project shall be reviewed by the Utilities Department to
determine if the pole is feasible for the placement of the
proposed equipment and antennas. If the Utilities department
does not support the placement of the equipment on the pole,
the applicant shall submit a new Architectural Review
AT&T DAS Phase 4
5
application to the Planning Division for review of proposed
alternative pole selection.
9. For sites that require new street tree installations, the
applicant shall coordinate with the Public Works Tree
Division, Utilities Department, and Transportation Division
to gain approval for the placement and selection of tree
type. If the City departments do not support the placement of
a city tree for screening purposes for the identified
locations, then that site is no longer approved for the
equipment installation and the applicant shall be required to
submit a new Architectural Review application to the Planning
Division for review of proposed alternative pole selection.
10. The applicant, in coordination with City departments, shall
(1) analyze all proposed sites to determine whether new
street trees can be added in the immediate vicinity for
screening purposes and (2) add additional trees where
feasible.
11. The preferred selection for new street trees shall be
evergreen trees, as deemed appropriate by Public Works and
the Utilities department.
12. Unless the City agrees to a modification of this condition,
the requirements to install new street trees shall be 100%
the responsibility of the applicant and shall be completed
prior to the installation of pole equipment.
13. For installations in the City right-of-way, the Applicant
shall endeavor to minimize the noise at the property line
boundary with adjacent residential property, and shall
attempt to keep such noise below 6dB above the ambient level
most of the time, when fans are running at their normal
setting. If such a standard is not reasonably achievable for
a site, then the Applicant voluntarily agrees to use
commercially reasonable efforts to ensure that the noise
level does not exceed 6 dB above the ambient noise level at
the nearest location of a residential structure. Under no
circumstances shall the noise exceed the noise standard in
Municipal Code 9.10.050 (i.e., +15dB over ambient at 25
feet).
14. The applicant shall submit a sound analysis of an operating
installation within two months of the project
installation/operation for City approval. The analysis shall
clearly delineate how the installation complies with the
previously listed condition regarding noise. Applicant may be
required to submit these reports periodically for the life of
the project, as determined by the Director of Planning.
AT&T DAS Phase 4
6
15. The applicant shall perform a radio frequency (RF) analysis
for each of the twenty installations to document the RF
emissions for the installed and operating equipment. This
analysis shall be submitted to the City within two months of
the project installation/operation. Applicant may be required
to submit these reports periodically for the life of the
project, as determined by the Director of Planning.
16. If for any reason the project requires modification from the
approved plans in any way, the applicant shall contact
Planning staff for a determination on whether the change
requires a new application for Architectural Review and
Historic Review, if applicable, to be submitted.
17. Pole 6/Node P2N29A (110 E. Charleston Road): An Additional
street tree shall be required to the left side of pole.
18. Pole 7/Node P2N30A (493 W. Charleston Road): Equipment shall
be installed to face the existing tree.
19. Pole 10/Node P2N28A (231 Parkside Dr) installation shall
require the utility pole to be moved to the inside edge of
sidewalk and one low growing street tree shall be installed
to the left of the pole if the existing tree is damaged
during construction activities with agreement of the adjacent
property owner be eliminated from the project approval. AT&T
shall work with staff and neighbors to determine if an
alternative location is feasible for AT&T’s coverage needs
and submit that site for a separate Architectural Review.
20. Pole 13/Node P2N44A (4257 McKellar Ln): An Additional street
tree shall be required to the left side of pole.
21. Pole 20/Node P2N50A installation shall be located adjacent to
904 Matadero Road.
22. All cost recoverable charges related to this Planning
entitlement process, per the cost recovery agreement, shall
be paid in full and in a timely manner; these include charges
for two consultants hired for peer review of this project.
Non-payment may result in the withholding of other city
required permits and or approvals required for the project to
move forward to the construction phase.
Fire Department
23. The applicant shall submit a completed copy the document
entitled “Optional Checklist for Local Government to
Determine Whether a Facility is Categorically Excluded.” If
the applicant is required to submit an Environmental
AT&T DAS Phase 4
7
Assessment (EA) to the FCC, please indicate if it has been
submitted and the date submitted.
Electric Utility
24. Electric Utility shall not perform any operations and/or
engineering until a Master License Agreement is signed
between AT&T and the City of Palo Alto. AT&T shall not attach
any equipment on the City's portion of any utility pole until
the Master License Agreement is signed by both parties. The
Master License Agreement will determine the procedures,
policies, fees and responsibilities for DAS work on joint
utility poles.
SECTION 7. Indemnity.
To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify
and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers,
employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”)from and against
any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against
the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or
void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project,
including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual
attorneys fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation.
The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such
action with attorneys of its own choice.
SECTION 8. Term of Approval. Architectural Review
Approval. The approval shall be valid for one year from the
original date of approval, pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code
Section 18.77.090.
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED:
_________________________ ____________________________
City Clerk Director of Planning and
Community Environment
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Senior Asst. City Attorney
AT&T DAS Phase 4
8
PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED:
Those plans prepared by AT&T titled Palo Alto ODAS, consisting of
63 pages and received September 17, 2012.
Phase 4 - Palo Alto oDAS
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kjkj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
kj
P2N4A
P2N1A
P2N9A
P2N8A
P2N5A
P2N3C
P2N50A
P2N45A
P2N44A
P2N43A
P2N39A
P2N38A P2N35A
P2N30A
P2N29A
P2N25A
P2N23A
P2N16B
P2N14B
P2N12A
AL
M
A
MID
DLE
FIELD
EL CAMIN
O REAL
CHARLESTON
FO
OTHILL
PAGE MILL
ARASTRADERO
HILLVIEW
RENGSTORFF
SAN ANTONIO
OLD MIDDLEFIELD
CENTRAL
CALIFORNIA
FOOTHILL
E
L
C
A
M
I
N
O
R
E
A
L
£¤101
£¤101
Legend
kj P2N12A, 4131 El Camino Real
kj P2N14B, 550 Georgia Ave
kj P2N16B, 4101 Park Blvd
kj P2N1A, 820 Chimalus Dr.
kj P2N23A, 4255 Ruthelma Ave
kj P2N25A, 669 Maybell Ave
kj P2N29A, 110 E Charleston Rd
kj P2N30A, 493 W Charleston Rd
kj P2N35A, 4298 Ponce Dr
kj P2N38A, 429 Monroe Dr.
kj P2N39A, 231 Parkside Dr
kj P2N3C, Across from 106 LomaVerde
kj P2N43A, 516 Barron Ave
kj P2N44A, 4257 McKellar
kj P2N45A, 320 Lambert Ave
kj P2N4A, 715 Barron Ave
kj P2N50A, 904/915 Matadero Ave
kj P2N5A, 3989 La Doona
kj P2N8A, 397 Ventura Ave.
kj P2N9A, 3364 Emerson St ³
AT&T Proprietary (Internal Use Only)Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies except under written agreement.Telco proprietary data is not to be disclosed to siloed employees.
e-mail: bhammett@h-e.com
Delivery: 470 Third Street West • Sonoma, California 95476
Telephone: 707/996-5200 San Francisco • 707/996-5280 Facsimile • 202/396-5200 D.C.
WILLIAM F. HAMMETT, P.E.
DANE E. ERICKSEN, P.E.
STANLEY SALEK, P.E.
ROBERT P. SMITH, JR.
RAJAT MATHUR, P.E.
KENT A. SWISHER
ANDREA L. BRIGHT ___________
ROBERT L. HAMMETT, P.E.
1920-2002
EDWARD EDISON, P.E.
1920-2009
BY E-MAIL JD3235@ATT.COM
July 27, 2012
John di Bene, Esq.
AT&T Mobility
4430 Rosewood Drive
Pleasanton, California 94588
Dear John:
As you requested, we have visited the AT&T Mobility oDAS node recently installed at
255 North California Avenue in Palo Alto, California, in order to assess the noise levels from
that installation and to evaluate those actual levels against both the city's noise limit and the
projected levels.
On the morning of June 6, 2012, using one of our Quest Technologies Type 2200 Sound Level
Meters (Serial No. SBF110001, under current calibration by the manufacturer), we observed a
minimum* noise level of 44.5 dBA at a distance of 25 feet from the pole. That is the distance
specified for compliance with the city's municipal code Section 9.10.050, which limits an
increase in noise to 15 dBA, measured at 25 feet, for facilities not located on private property.
The ambient reading at that location with the AT&T node shut off was 42.1 dBA, so the actual
increase was 2.4 dBA, well below the 15 dBA allowed by the code.
Removing† the 42.1 dBA ambient level from the 44.5 dBA level with the AT&T equipment
turned on indicates that the equipment by itself produced noise at 25 feet of approximately
40.8 dBA. This compares well with the manufacturer's data, given in our report dated
November 1, 2011, which averaged 40.9 dBA to the front and sides.
Therefore, we conclude from these measurements that noise from the AT&T Mobility oDAS
nodes has been accurately represented by the manufacturer and that, indeed, the noise increase
easily meets the Palo Alto limits. Please let us know if any questions arise on these
measurements or this analysis.
Sincerely yours,
William F. Hammett
* Intended to represent the noise from continuous, fixed sources, separate from the varying levels due to
intermittent sources including traffic, wind, voices, and planes.
† Using appropriate mathematical conversions.
MACKENZIE & ALBRITTON LLP
220 SANSOME STREET, 14TH FLOOR
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104
TELEPHONE 415 / 288-4000
FACSIMILE 415 / 288-4010
January 23, 2013
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Mayor Gregory Scharff
Vice Mayor Nancy Shepherd
Council Members Patrick Burt, Marc Berman,
Karen Holman, Larry Klein, Gail Price,
Greg Schmid and Liz Kniss
City Council
City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94301
Re: AT&T’s Response to Appeals of AT&T DAS Project
Phase III, 12PLN-00127 Architectural Review
Phase IV, 12PLN-00258 Architectural Review
City Council Consent Calendar January 28, 2013
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice Mayor Shepherd and Council Members:
We write to you on behalf of our client AT&T Mobility (“AT&T”) to urge that you
adopt the findings and decision of the Planning Division to approve AT&T’s distributed
antenna system (“DAS”) Phase III and Phase IV (the “Approvals”). Staff’s findings in
support of the Approvals are well-reasoned, supported by substantial evidence and
represent years of exhaustive review by Planning Division staff, Utilities Department staff,
the City arborist, the City’s outside consultants, the Architectural Review Board (the
“ARB”) and the Council. In addition, both state and federal law compel the City to affirm
the Approvals. There is no reason to remove the Approvals from the Council’s January 28,
2013, consent calendar.
As described below, all but one of the appeals are filed by residents whose homes
are next to existing poles. These appeals simply seek to re-open unsupported aesthetic,
noise, health or property value concerns, while the remaining appeal challenges the City’s
implementation of its noise regulations with arguments that were rejected by the Council in
its approval of Phase II of the AT&T DAS project. The concerns raised in all of the
appeals have been thoroughly reviewed and previously addressed by the ARB and the
Council and are not worthy of further review, as follows.
Palo Alto City Council
January 23, 2013
Page 2 of 2
I. The Thoughtful Design and Careful Placement of AT&T DAS Node Facilities
on Existing Utility Poles Create No Aesthetic Impacts.
Since early 2010, AT&T has worked with the City of Palo Alto to arrive at an
aesthetically acceptable design and pole site selection process that will minimize aesthetic
impacts on the Palo Alto community while providing needed wireless service. Based upon
ARB review, the aesthetic profile of AT&T’s DAS nodes has been nearly eliminated by
streamlining antennas to a single pole-top attachment, raising battery boxes above a narrow
radio cabinet, and rotating all equipment toward the street and away from residential views.
Closely following rigorous location guidelines established by the ARB, AT&T
conducted a rigorous Alternative Aesthetics Fielding Analysis evaluating 150 existing
utility poles to identify the 38 approved pole locations in Phase III and Phase IV, which
represents the fewest poles feasible to provide necessary wireless coverage. Block
placement was evaluated to identify locations away from street corners in order to
minimize public views and in-between property lines to avoid impacts on individual views.
Poles were also selected to maximize the benefit of existing foliage to camouflage DAS
equipment. AT&T’s aesthetic review was re-analyzed and adjusted by Planning Division
staff and again by the City’s independent consultant to arrive at final pole locations with
the least aesthetic impacts to individuals and the community to be served. In sum, the
design, pole selection guidelines and final pole selection have been thoroughly reviewed by
the Planning Division staff, its independent consultants, the ARB and the Council and do
not require further public hearings for review.
II. Presently Operating DAS Nodes Confirm Compliance with Noise Ordinance.
Notwithstanding repetitious appeals, there is simply no question that the AT&T
DAS project complies with Palo Alto Municipal Code §9.10 (the “Noise Ordinance”). Just
two months ago, in November 2012, the Council, following the recommendation of
Planning Division staff and the City Attorney, completely rejected a similar appeal based
upon a tortured interpretation of the Noise Ordinance. As part of its obligations under the
Phase I approval, and submittal requirements for its Phase II approval, AT&T has provided
the City with a post-installation noise analysis by independent consultants Hammett &
Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers. This report, which was included in the Council’s
approval of Phase II of the AT&T DAS project, measured the sound from an operating
AT&T DAS facility in Palo Alto and confirmed that AT&T’s Palo Alto DAS design fully
complies with the Noise Ordinance. Based upon this information and the prior decisions of
the Council, further appeals raising noise concerns are simply frivolous and do not warrant
any further hearings.
III. Health Concerns and, by Extension, Property Value Concerns Are Unfounded,
Preempted by Federal Law and May Not Be the Basis of Further Hearings.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 bars local jurisdictions from denying an
application for a wireless telecommunications facility based on the environmental effects of
Palo Alto City Council
January 23, 2013
Page 3 of 3
radio frequency emissions1 where, as here, AT&T has demonstrated full compliance with
Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) emissions guidelines. The statements
submitted by Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers, confirm that all of the AT&T
DAS facilities will operate well within, and indeed far below, applicable public exposure
limits allowed under FCC guidelines. The federal preemption of radio frequency emissions
issues applies whether local decisions are directly based on emissions or indirectly based on a
proxy such as property values. Thus, “concern over the decrease in property values may not
be considered as substantial evidence if the fear of property value depreciation is based on
concern over the health effects caused by RF emissions.” AT&T Wireless Services of
California LLC v. City of Carlsbad, 308 F.Supp.2d 1148, 1159 (S.D. Cal. 2003).
IV. Federal and State Law Compel Council Affirmation of the Approvals.
AT&T has worked diligently with the City of Palo Alto over the last three years to
identify the least intrusive means to provide wireless service to an identified significant gap
in coverage. This effort has resulted in the Approvals that appear on the January 28, 2013
Council consent calendar. Failure to affirm the Approvals on that date would run afoul of
limitations under the Telecommunications Act which preempt any local decision that
would effectively prohibit the provision of personal wireless services or that would
unreasonably delay approvals for such service.2 Similarly, the Council may not act in a
manner that would deny AT&T the right to place its facilities in the public rights-of-way
under the statewide franchise granted to AT&T under California Public Utilities Code.3
For these reasons, both state and federal law compel Council affirmation of the Approvals
on January 28, 2013.
Conclusion
The Phase III and Phase IV AT&T DAS Approvals that appear on the January 28,
2013 Council consent calendar represent years of design and aesthetic review to arrive at
the ideal facility design and locations to best serve the Palo Alto community with the least
impacts upon residents. The City Council should not permit the narrow, unfounded
concerns of a few individuals to further delay this well-designed project, which represents
the extensive efforts of both the City and AT&T. We encourage you to affirm the
Approvals as part of the Council’s consent calendar without further hearing.
Very truly yours,
Paul B. Albritton
cc: Curtis Williams
Cara Silver, Esq.
1 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(iv).
2 See 47 U.S.C. §332 et seq.
3 See California Public Utilities Code §7901 et seq.
From: James Ang <james.ang@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2012 10:53 PM
To: Campbell, Clare
Subject: Appeal: AT&T DAS Phase 4 Project - 20 Poles
Categories: forwarded to CW AFSC
To Whom This May Concern,
I am appealing the decision to place an antenna within 300 feet from my place of residence at
3130 Emerson St, Palo Alto, California 94306.
I am requesting that the City of Palo Alto does not approve a plan that places a DAS antenna
within 300 feet from my home.
I am concerned about the safety of my children who would be subjected to elevated levels of
electromagnetic interference from the proposed antenna. There has been no studies that
demonstrated that the level of exposure in terms of duration and magnitude is safe for growing
children.
Furthermore, the proximity of the antenna to the nearby El Carmelo Elementary school where
one of my child attends is another cause for my concern, if not the parents of the attending
children.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
James Ang
3130 Emerson St
Palo Alto, CA 94306
7070
Note only.
Page 1
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3457)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 1/28/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Approval of PSSI Maintenance Contract
Title: Approval of $114,165 for the Consolidated Maintenance Contract
between the City of Palo Alto and Public Safety Systems, Inc. For Computer
Aided Dispatch, Police Records Management, Fire Records Management,
Mobile Data, and Geovalidation
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Police
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council approve the 2013 maintenance contract with Public Safety
Systems Inc. (PSSI) for $114,165.
Background
In 1999, the City signed a contract with PSSI for the purchase and installation of Computer
Aided Dispatch (CAD). In subsequent years, the City has contracted for other critical public
safety systems with PSSI, and PSSI provides maintenance and support for these systems. The
systems include: Police Records Management (ICIS); Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD); a
component of Fire Records Management (EMBRS); a GIS-based location validation application
(GeoServer); and mobile data software for the police mobile data computers (Mobile). In 2009,
the City consolidated the five separate maintenance contract into one contract and invoice.
In March 2012, the City entered into a contract with Intergraph Inc. to replace the CAD,
GeoServer and mobile data software systems. Negotiations are in progress to replace the Police
Records Management (RMS) and In-Field reporting systems. The CAD, GeoServer and mobile
data implementation is underway with a “go-live” in the latter half of 2013. Negotiations for
the other applications has taken longer than anticipated, but implementation of those systems
is targeted for the fourth quarter of 2013 or early 2014.
Discussion
City of Palo Alto Page 2
The City has signed a contract for a new CAD vendor in partnership with the cities of Mountain
View and Los Altos. Project development and implementation are underway and completion is
planned in the third quarter of 2013. The maintenance contract for the legacy applications with
the existing vendor PSSI will need to be renewed for the 2013 calendar year to insure that the
critical existing public safety applications are supported during the transition to the new
systems. The CAD implementation will be completed in 2013 and, contingent on final
negotiations, the RMS and In-field systems will be installed in the fourth quarter of 2013.
Resource Impact
The annual cost for systems maintenance is covered in Information Technology’s existing
application maintenance fund.
Policy Implications
The recommendations in this report do not represent a change in City policies.
Environmental Review
The recommendations in this report do not constitute a project requiring review under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Attachments:
Attachment A - PSSI Software Support Agreement 011413 (PDF)
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3493)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 1/28/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Rail Legislative Advocacy Services with PEG
Title: Authorization for the City Manager to Enter Into a One-Year Contract
with the Professional Evaluation Group/The Ochoa & Moore Law Firm, P.C.
(PEG/OM) in a Total Amount Not to Exceed $125,000 for Rail Legislative
Advocacy Services
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
The City Council Rail Committee (CCRC) recommends the City Council authorize the City
Manager to enter into a one-year contract with the Professional Evaluation Group/The Ochoa &
Moore Law Firm, P.C. (PEG/OM) in an amount not to exceed one-hundred and twenty-five
thousand dollars ($125,000) for state rail legislative advocacy services (Attachment A).
Executive Summary
The CCRC voted 3-0 (Vice Mayor Scharff absent) to recommend the City renew its contract with
PEG/OM for state rail legislative advocacy services. Staff is requesting the City Council
authorize the City Manager to enter into a one-year contract with PEG/OM in an amount not to
exceed one-hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars ($125,000) through the end of 2013.
The contract was not renewed prior to the start of 2013 because it was requested in December
that staff revise the scope of the contract to allow PEG/OM to do more legislative advocacy on
the City’s behalf related to possible California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) reform. The
start date of the contract is January 1, 2013 to cover services rendered in January of this year.
The City first retained professional services for rail legislative advocacy services in February
2010. The most recent contract with PEG/OM expired on December 31, 2012. The CCRC, after
conducting a review, recommended the contract with PEG/OM be renewed. The CCRC was
particularly impressed with this firm’s work over the last calendar year.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
In conjunction with the recommendation to move forward with contract renewal, the CCRC
gave direction related to CEQA legislation contract language and cost sharing opportunities.
Specifically, the CCRC directed that the contract scope be revised to allow for expanded CEQA
representation. This is due to the fact that CEQA reform will be a major focus of State
Legislators in 2013, and changes could impact the City of Palo Alto beyond just High Speed Rail.
Therefore, it is critical the City have an advocate that can keep the City informed about
potential comprehensive CEQA legislation, as well inform State Legislators about the City’s
concerns. Given the shared concerns with nearby jurisdictions, the CCRC also directed staff to
explore cost sharing opportunities with local cities. Staff has incorporated expanded CEQA
language in the attached contract and will be contacting nearby cities in early 2013 about cost
shearing opportunities.
John Garamendi Jr., principal of PEG, was formerly the Executive Associate Athletic Director,
External Affairs for U.C. California on an interim basis while he served as U.C. California’s
Director of Corporate and Foundation Relations. Mr. Ralph M. Ochoa, partner with OM, serves
on the Board of Trustees for the U.C. Merced Foundation.
Timeline and Resource Impacts
The contract term would be one-year from January to December 2013. The cost for this
contract is one-hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars ($125,000), including certain travel
expenses. The funds will be provided from the City Council Contingency fund. Staff will include
this contract for discussion during the mid-year budget review to replace the City Council
Contingency Fund. The City will incorporate provisions in the contract that if other cities in the
area decide to use the same firm for high-speed rail consulting then there will be a
corresponding reduction in cost to the City of Palo Alto.
Attachments:
A - C13148578 Signed by Consultant_1-2013 (PDF)
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3432)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 1/28/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Standby Rate and Policy for Energy Purchase from Potential
Waste to Energy Facility
Title: Finance Committee Recommendation that Council Adopt Two
Resolutions: 1) Approving the Policy Pertaining to the Purchase of Energy
from Potential Green Waste-to-Energy Facilities and 2) Amending Utility Rule
and Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) and the Six Rate Schedules
Covering Medium and Large Commercial Customers (E-4 and E-7) to Include
Standby Service Charges
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Utilities
Recommendation
Staff, the Finance Committee, and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that
Council:
1. Adopt a resolution (Attachment A) approving the Policy Pertaining to the Purchase of
Energy from Potential Green Waste-to-Energy Facilities (the Policy); and
2. Adopt a resolution (Attachment B) modifying Utilities Rules and Regulation 2
(Definitions and Abbreviations) and the six electric rate schedules covering medium and
large commercial customers (E-4 and E-7) to include standby service charges.
Executive Summary
In January 2013 the Public Works Department received Council approval of a request for
proposals (RFP) that could result in a waste-to-energy facility at the Regional Water Quality
Control Plant or at the adjacent site designated for that purpose by Measure E. The biogas
produced at such a facility could be used in a variety of ways, and the attached resolutions
clarify the City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU’s) policies so potential proposers have more
certainty about which uses are acceptable and economic for a given project. The proposed
policy states that:
City of Palo Alto Page 2
i. If the energy produced by the waste-to-energy facility is sold to CPAU, CPAU will
purchase the energy at the market prices prevailing when the contract is signed. The
policy also commits CPAU to pay a minimum purchase price of 7.7 cents per kilowatt-
hour (¢/kWh). This “no regrets” rate is a minimum rate and CPAU will purchase at
prevailing market prices if they are higher.
ii. If the energy produced by the waste-to-energy facility is used on-site at the facility, it
would be subject to CPAU standby power rates.
iii. If the energy produced by the waste-to-energy facility is sold to another utility outside
of Palo Alto, it would be subject to a wheeling agreement with CPAU.
iv. The policy also states that the City will not allow proposers to inject biogas into the
City’s gas distribution system.
The second resolution adopts the electric standby rate to recover the cost to the utility of
providing backup service to customers who own their own generators. Customers with
renewable generators smaller than 1 megawatt (MW) that are sized to meet customer load
rather than to export to the grid (like most rooftop solar systems) are exempt from the standby
rates, as required by California Public Utilities Code 2827(g). Therefore, if the size of the waste-
to-energy facility is less than 1 MW, it would not be subject to the proposed standby rate.
Background
In January 2013 the Public Works Department is planning to seek Council approval of an RFP for
a waste-to-energy facility (referred to as the Energy/Compost Facility, or E/C Facility) at the
Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) or at an adjacent site designated for that
purpose by Measure E, which passed in November 2011. Biogas produced by these types of
facilities is used in a variety of ways. It can be used to generate electricity, cleaned up and used
as a vehicle fuel, or injected into a gas pipeline for delivery to customers. If electricity is
generated it can be used on site, sold to the utility where the project is located, or sold to a
different utility. CPAU currently has no policies related to injection of biogas into its gas
distribution system, and has not reviewed its policies related to on-site electric generation or
moving electricity across its distribution system in several years. Staff has reviewed its policies
in order to develop the attached proposal.
Discussion
The first proposed resolution (Attachment A) sets forth a policy for energy use at a potential
waste-to-energy facility. The proposed Policy is discussed in more detail in the report to the
Finance Committee (Attachment I). Staff has identified three primary ways the biogas from a
waste-to-energy facility could potentially be used:
City of Palo Alto Page 3
1) Injection into the gas distribution system. Utilities in California are only beginning to
experiment with injecting biogas into a gas distribution system. Given the safety issues
involved in operating a gas distribution system, the corrosive nature of biogas, and CPAU’s
small size and limited resources, staff recommends against exploring the first alternative at this
time.
2) Vehicle Fuel – Compressed Natural Gas (CNG). A CNG fueling station is a potentially viable
alternative, but one that could be done by the project developer independently from CPAU and
does not require any change in CPAU policy.
3) Electricity generation. The electricity could be used on site or sold. If the proposer decides
to use the energy on site, CPAU would provide backup power under the “standby rates”
discussed below. If the proposer wishes to sell, the resolution commits CPAU to purchasing the
electricity at the market rate for renewable energy (including any avoided transmission or other
costs) at the time the contract is signed. Based on current market conditions staff estimates
that price to be about 9.4 cents/kWh, but market conditions can change rapidly, as
demonstrated by the remarkable decline in solar energy prices over the last three years. In the
interest of providing some level of certainty around the energy price, the resolution also
commits CPAU to purchasing the electricity at a default floor price of 7.7 ¢/kWh.
The Policy also states that CPAU will modify its Rules and Regulations and Rate Schedules to
accommodate these various uses. The second resolution (Attachment B) implements this part
of the Policy as it relates to on-site use of electricity. The primary necessary change is the
adoption of a rate to recover the utility’s costs associated with providing backup electricity
when the generator is offline. Utilities typically refer to these rates as “standby rates,” since
the utility is “standing by” to provide electricity upon demand. The second resolution modifies
the rate schedules for large and medium commercial electric customers to include standby
rates. These rates are discussed in more detail in the attached Finance Committee report
(Attachment I). The second resolution also includes non-substantive cleanup to the six affected
rate schedules, which includes clarifying language incorporating a change in the term “power
factor penalty” to “power factor adjustment.” These changes will not affect operation of the
rate schedules.
Committee and Commission Review and Recommendation
The Finance Committee discussed the proposed Policy and standby rates at its December 18,
2012 meeting. The minutes from that meeting are provided as Attachment H. There were
questions regarding the pricing as well as the types of equipment that could be used to
generate electricity from biogas. The Finance Committee unanimously recommended that the
Council adopt the attached resolutions.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
The UAC discussed the proposed Policy at its September 5, 2012 meeting and voted
unanimously to recommend that Council adopt the Policy. The minutes from that meeting are
provided as Attachment E.
The UAC also discussed the proposed standby rates at its November 7, 2012 and December 5,
2012 meetings. The minutes from those meetings are provided as Attachments F and G,
respectively. Commissioners had questions about how the rate would operate and its
applicability to the proposed E/C Facility project and to other types of projects. At its
December 5, 2012 meeting, the UAC unanimously recommended approval of the rate (6-0, Hall
absent).
Timeline
Following adoption of the proposed resolutions, the Public Works Department will release its
RFP, which is anticipated to be released in early February 2013.
Resource Impact
Adopting the resolutions approving this Policy and the standby rate will have minimal resource
impact, but if a customer takes service under the standby rate schedule, additional staff time
will be necessary to set up the metering required and to implement the rate in the billing
system. Staff time is estimated to be less than 0.1 FTE and would be absorbed with existing
staff. Equipment requirements would depend on the site in question and would be recovered
through applicable connection fees.
Policy Implications
To properly evaluate the value of onsite generation, customers need certainty regarding the
City’s rate structure, and by providing that certainty the staff recommendation is consistent
with Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) Strategy #4, Local Generation, which states
“promote and facilitate the deployment of cost-effective local resources.”
Environmental Review
The adoption of the resolution adopting an energy purchase policy does not meet the
Environmental Quality Act’s definition of a “project” under Public Resources Code 21065, and
the adoption of the resolution setting standby service charges does is not subject to CEQA
review under Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8) (modification of rates to meet
operating expenses, purchase supplies, meet financial reserve needs, obtain capital project
funds, or obtain funds for charter-authorized intracity transfers).
City of Palo Alto Page 5
Attachments:
Attachment A: Resolution Adopting a Policy Regarding Purchase of Energy from
Potential Waste to Energy Facilities (PDF)
Attachment B: Resolution Amending Six Rate Schedules for Medium and Large
Commercial Customers to Add Standby Charges (PDF)
Attachment C: Proposed Utilities Rule and Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations)
(PDF)
Attachment D: Proposed Utility Rate Schedules E-4, E-4TOU, E-4G, E-7, E-7TOU and E-7G
(PDF)
Attachment E: Excerpted Final UAC Minutes of 10-3-12 (PDF)
Attachment F: Excerpted Final UAC Minutes of 11-7-12 Meeting (PDF)
Attachment G: Excerpted Final UAC Minutes of 12-5-12 (PDF)
Attachment H: Excerpted Draft Minutes of the Finance Committee meeting of 12-18-12
(PDF)
Attachment I: Staff Report ID 3314 UAC Recommendation to Adopt a Standby Rate and
E/C Facility Energy Purchase Policy - to Finance 12-18-12 (PDF)
*NOT YET APPROVED*
130114 dm 6051870
Resolution No. _____
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting a Policy
Pertaining to the Purchase of Energy from Potential
Green Waste-to-Energy Facilities
A. On November 3, 2011, Palo Alto voters approved Measure E, which undedicated
10 acres of existing parkland in Byxbee Park (the “Measure E Site”) for the exclusive purpose
of evaluating the development of an Energy/Compost facility, which could potentially process
yard trimmings, food waste, sewage sludge, and other organic material.
B. The City is proceeding with a long-term planning process related to the future of
the regional Water Quality Control Plant.
C. The City plans to evaluate various alternative types of waste-to-energy facilities
at those sites. As part of this process, proposals will be solicited from project developers.
D. The City, in order to properly evaluate the various alternatives and solicit
proposals from developers, intends to adopt a policy pertaining to the use of the energy
generated by the facility or facilities.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City”) does RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. It is the policy of the City to provide a range of alternatives for the use of
energy generated by a potential waste-to-energy facility at the regional Water Quality Control
Plant and the Measure E Site. These alternatives may include, but are not limited to,
compressed natural gas vehicle fueling or electricity generation. Electricity generated may be
1) used by the facilities on the Measure E site or the regional Water Quality Control Plant,
which would reduce the amount of electricity supplied by the City’s electric utility to those
facilities, 2) sold to the City’s electric utility for distribution to customers, or 3) sold to an entity
outside of the City’s electric utility service area.
SECTION 2. To enable this policy the City will evaluate its Utilities Rules and
Regulations and Utility Rate Schedules to determine whether changes are advisable or required
to enable these alternatives.
SECTION 3. It is the policy of the City to provide an optional default purchase price
for energy from a waste-to-energy project, commencing in calendar year 2018. This default
purchase price will be equal to the City’s forecasted avoided cost in 2018 based on a scenario in
which the City’s avoided cost of electricity compares favorably to its current costs. The default
purchase price is 7.7 ¢/kWh for electricity from a project certified by the California Energy
Commission (CEC) as an Eligible Renewable Energy Resource for the purpose of fulfilling
Renewable Portfolio Standard goals. “Renewable Portfolio Standard” refers to the standard
adopted by the State of California pursuant to Senate Bill 2 1st Extraordinary Session (SBX1 2,
*NOT YET APPROVED*
130114 dm 6051870
Chapter 1, Statutes 2011-12), and California Public Utilities Code Sections 399.11 through
399.32, inclusive, as may be amended, setting minimum renewable energy targets for local
publicly owned electric utilities.
SECTION 4. It is the policy of the City not to consider the injection of biogas
associated with a waste-to-energy project into its gas distribution system at this time.
SECTION 5. The Council finds that the adoption of this Resolution does not constitute
a project under the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code
section 21065.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
___________________________ ___________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Sr. Deputy City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Director of Utilities
___________________________
Director of Administrative Services
*NOT YET APPROVED*
121115 dm 6051819 1
Resolution No. _________
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Utilities
Rule and Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) and Utility Rate
Schedules E-4 (Medium Commercial Electric Service), E-4 TOU
(Medium Commercial Electric Time of Use Service), E-4G (Medium
Commercial Green Power Electric Service), E-7 (Large Commercial
Electric Service), E-7 TOU (Large Commercial Time of Use Electric
Service), and E-7G (Large Commercial Green Power Electric Service),
to Include Standby Service Charges
The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Utilities
Rule and Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) is amended as attached and
incorporated. This Utilities Rule and Regulation shall become effective on February 5, 2013.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Utility
Rate Schedules E-4 (Medium Commercial Electric Service), E-4 TOU (Medium Commercial
Electric Time of Use Service), and E-4G (Medium Commercial Green Power Electric Service), E-7
(Large Commercial Electric Service), E-7 TOU (Large Commercial Time of Use Electric Service),
and E-7G (Large Commercial Green Power Electric Service), are amended as attached and
incorporated. These utility rate schedules shall become effective as of February 5, 2013.
SECTION 3. Adoption of this resolution to add standby service charges to the six above-
referenced electric rate schedules has no effect on the other non-standby-related rates shown
on those rate schedules, nor on any of the City’s other electric rates.
SECTION 4. The Council finds that the rates adopted by this resolution are not special
taxes because they are charges imposed for a specific government service or product provided
directly to the payor that are not provided to those not charged, and which do not exceed the
reasonable costs to the City of providing the service or product.
SECTION 5. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not constitute a
project under the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code
section 21080, subdivision (b)(8) because the amended rates adopted by this resolution are
necessary to recover the costs of maintaining the City Electric Utility’s distribution system to
//
//
//
//
*NOT YET APPROVED*
121115 dm 6051819 2
serve peak customer load, as well as the costs of maintaining reserve generating capacity to
provide energy when needed by customers.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
___________________________ ___________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Sr. Deputy City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Director of Utilities
___________________________
Director of Administrative Services
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 1
A. ABBREVIATIONS
AMR - Automated Meter Reading
AER - Advance Engineering Request
Btu - British Thermal Unit
ccf - Hundred Cubic Feet
CEC - California Energy Commission
CPAU - City of Palo Alto Utilities
CPUC - California Public Utilities Commission.
DA - Direct Access
ERU - Equivalent Residential Unit
ESP - Energy Service Provider
FERC - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
GDA - Gas Direct Access
GSP - Gas Service Provider
GSPA - Gas Service Provider Agreement
kVar - Kilovar
kVarh - Kilovar-hours
kW - Kilowatt
kWh - Kilowatt-hour
MW - Megawatt
MMBtu - One million Btus.
NEC - National Electric Code, Latest Version
NRTL - Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory
PAMC - Palo Alto Municipal Code
PSIG - Per square inch gauge
PST - Pacific Standard Time
RWQCP - Regional Water Quality Control Plant
UUT - Utilities Users Tax
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 2
B. GENERAL DEFINITIONS
Account
The identification number in CPAU’s billing system for Utility Services.
Agency
Any local, county, state or federal governmental body or quasi-governmental body, including, without
limitation, the CPUC, the FERC and any joint powers agency, but excluding the City and any board,
commission or council of the City.
Applicant
An individual, corporation, partnership, Agency, or other legal entity or authorized agent of same, requesting
CPAU to supply any or all of the following:
1. Electric Service
2. Water Service
3. Gas Service
4. Wastewater Collection
5. Refuse and Recycling Collection
6. Storm and Surface Water Drainage Service
7. Fiber Optics Service
Or, an entity submitting an Application for Interconnection pursuant to Rule 27.
Application (for Interconnection of Generating Facilities)
An approved standard form (Load Sheet) submitted to CPAU for Interconnection of a Generating Facility.
Bidweek Price Index
The price reported in Natural Gas Intelligence “NGI’s Bidweek Survey”, California “PG&E Citygate” under
the column “avg.” for the calendar month.
Billing Period
Also “service period” or “billing cycle”. The normal Billing Period for CPAU Customers is approximately
30 days, with variations occurring due to staff availability, holiday scheduling, field verification of Meter
readings, or any other billing-related issues requiring additional investigation prior to issuance of the bill..
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 3
British Thermal Unit
Also “Btu”. The standard sub-unit of measurement comprising a Therm of natural Gas. One (1) Therm
equals 100,000 Btu.
Business Day
Any day, except a Saturday, Sunday, or any day observed as a legal holiday by the City.
Certification Test
A test pursuant to Rule 27 that verifies conformance of certain equipment with approved performance
standards in order to be classified as Certified Equipment. Certification Tests are performed by NRTLs.
Certification; Certified; Certificate
The documented results of a successful Certification Test.
Certified Equipment
Equipment that has passed all required Certification Tests.
Charge
Any assessment, cost, fee, surcharge or levy for Utility Service other than a Tax, including metered and
unmetered Utility Service, capacity, connections, construction, penalties, and mandated or required
Customer financial obligations for Service.
Charter
The Charter of the City of Palo Alto.
City Attorney
The individual designated as the City Attorney of the City under Section 2.08.120 of Chapter 2.08 of Title 2
of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and any Person who is designated the representative of the City Attorney.
City’s Collector
The Person(s) authorized under Section 5.20.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to provide collection,
removal and disposal of solid waste and Recyclable Materials pursuant to one or more written contracts with
the City.
City Manager
The individual designated as the City Manager of the City under Section 2.08.140 of Chapter 2.08 of Title 2
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 4
of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and any Person who is designated the representative of the City Manager.
City of Palo Alto, or City
The government of the City of Palo Alto, a chartered City and a municipal corporation duly organized and
validly existing under the Laws of the State of California, with a principal place of business located at 250
Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, County of Santa Clara. For the purposes of these Rules and Regulations, the
term “City” may include services provided by both the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department and the City of
Palo Alto Public Works Department.
City of Palo Alto Public Works Department (Public Works)
The City Department responsible for providing Refuse and Recycling, Wastewater Treatment and Storm and
Surface Water Drainage Utility Services. Other Utility Services such as Water, Gas, Electric, Wastewater
Collection, and Fiber Optics are provided by the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department.
City of Palo Alto Utilities Department (CPAU)
The City Department responsible for providing Water, Gas, Electric, Wastewater Collection and Fiber Optic
Utility Services. Other Utility Services such as Refuse and Recycling, Wastewater Treatment and Storm and
Surface Water Drainage are provided by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department.
Code
The words "the Code" or "this Code" shall mean the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
Commercial Service
Commercial Utility Service is provided to businesses, non-profit organizations, public institutions, and
industrial Customers. The term also applies to Utility Services through Master Meters serving multi-family
Residential dwellings and common areas of multi-family facilities.
Compostable Materials
Organic materials designated by the City as acceptable for collection and processing.
Cubic Foot of Gas (cf)
The quantity of Gas that, at a temperature of sixty (60) degrees Fahrenheit and a pressure of 14.73 pounds
per square inch absolute, occupies one cubic foot.
Curtailment
The act of reducing or interrupting the delivery of natural Gas.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 5
Customer
The Person, corporation, Agency, or entity that receives or is entitled to receive Utility Service(s) from the
City of Palo Alto, or in whose name Service is rendered for a particular Account as evidenced by the
signature on the Application, contract, or agreement for Service. In the absence of a signed instrument, a
Customer shall be identified by the receipt of any payment of bills regularly issued in the name of the
Person, corporation, or Agency regardless of the identity of the actual user of the Utility Service(s).
Dark Fiber
A Fiber Optic cable provided to end-users or resellers by CPAU without any of the light transmitters,
receivers, or electronics required for telecommunications over the Fiber. Infrastructure for Fiber Optic
activation is provided by the reseller or end-user.
Dark Fiber Infrastructure
Components of the CPAU Fiber Optic Distribution System required to provide Service to Customers
(licensees), that are attached, owned, controlled or used by the City, located overhead or underground within
the Public Right-of-Way, the Public Utility Easements and Leased Service Properties.
Dedicated Distribution Transformer
A Distribution Transformer that is dedicated to serving a single premise.
Demand
The highest rate of delivery of Electric energy, measured in Kilowatts (kW) or kilovolt amperes (kVA)
occurring instantaneously or registered over a fixed time period (normally fifteen minutes unless otherwise
specified within a monthly billing cycle).
Demand Charge
An electrical Charge or rate that is applied to a metered Demand reading expressed in Kilowatts to compute
a Demand Charge component of a Customer’s Electric bill.
Demarcation Point
The Demarcation Point for a project shall be the Customer side of the panel onto which the CPAU Fiber
terminates within the Customer Premises, unless otherwise specified in the Proposal for Dark Fiber Services.
Direct Access (DA)
The election by a Customer to procure its Gas Supply Services, from an Energy Service Provider, other than
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 6
CPAU. In this situation, a Customer deals directly with an ESP for commodity supply, while distribution
and applicable transmission services would continue to be provided by CPAU.
Direct Access Service Request (DASR)
The form required to initiate Direct Access Service.
Distribution Services
Includes, but is not limited to, Utility Service provided by the Distribution System and other Services such as
billing, meter reading, administration, marketing, and Customer Services. Does not include Services directly
related to the Interconnection of a Generating Facility as per Rule 27.
Distribution System
The infrastructure owned and operated by CPAU which is capable of transmitting electrical power, other
than Interconnection Facilities, or transporting Water, Wastewater, or Gas within the City of Palo Alto. The
Electric Distribution System transmits power from the City’s Interconnection with PG&E to CPAU’s Meter
located on the Customer’s Premises. The Gas Distribution System transports Gas from PG&E receiving
stations to CPAU’s Meter located on the Customer Premises. The Water Distribution System transports
Water from the San Francisco Water Department receiving stations and CPAU wells to the meter located on
the Customer Premises. The Wastewater Collection System transports sewage from the Customer’s
Premises to the Water Quality Control Plant.
Distribution and Transmission Services
Services provided by CPAU to effect the physical delivery of Energy Services provided by the Energy
Services Provider from the Point of Receipt to the Direct Access Customer’s Service Address.
Effluent
Treated or untreated Wastewater flowing out of a Wastewater treatment facility, sewer, or industrial outfall.
Electric, Electric Service
Utility Service provided to residents and business owners in the City of Palo Alto consisting of generation,
transmission, and distribution of electrical power for retail use. Electric Service is provided by the City of
Palo Alto Utilities Department.
Emergency
An actual or imminent condition or situation, which jeopardizes CPAU’s Distribution System Integrity.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 7
Emergency Service
Electric Service supplied to, or made available to, Load devices which are operated only in Emergency
situations or in testing for same.
Energy Services
Energy commodity and any applicable ancillary Services used to generate and transport such commodity
from its origin to the City’s Point of Receipt. May also mean the sale of value added Services associated or
related to the Provision and/or usage of energy commodity.
Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU)
This is the basic unit for computing storm and surface water drainage fees. All single-family Residential
properties are billed the number of ERU’s specified in the table contained in Utility Rate Schedule D-1,
according to parcel size. All other properties have ERU's computed to the nearest 1/10 ERU using this
formula: No. Of ERU = Impervious Area (sq. ft.) / 2,500 sq. ft.
Fiber Optic, Fiber Optic Service
A solid core of optical transmission material. Fiber Optic Service that is provided by the City of Palo Alto
Utilities Department is referred to as Dark Fiber.
Fiber Optic Backbone
The high-density portion of the Dark Fiber Infrastructure installed and owned by the City.
Force Majeure
The occurrence of any event that has, had or may have an adverse effect on the design, construction,
installation, management, operation, testing, use or enjoyment of the City’s Utility Services, which is beyond
the reasonable control of the parties and which event includes, but is not limited to, an Act of God, an
irresistible superhuman cause, an act of a superior governmental authority, an act of a public enemy, a labor
dispute or strike or a boycott which could not be reasonably contemplated by the City or Customer affected
thereby, a defect in manufactured equipment (including, but not limited to, the Dark Fibers), fire, floods,
earthquakes, or any other similar cause.
Full Service; Fully Bundled Service
Provision by CPAU of both Distribution and Transmission Services and Energy or Gas
Commodity Services to its Customer(s).
Function
Some combination of hardware and software designed to provide specific features or capabilities. Its use, as
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 8
in Protective Function, is intended to encompass a range of implementations from a single-purpose device to
a section of software and specific pieces of hardware within a larger piece of equipment to a collection of
devices and software.
Gas
Any combustible Gas or vapor, or combustible mixture of gaseous constituents used to produce heat by
burning. It shall include, but not be limited to, natural Gas, Gas manufactured from coal or oil, Gas obtained
from biomass or from landfill, or a mixture of any or all of the above.
Gas, Gas Service
Utility Service provided to residents and business owners in the City of Palo Alto consisting of procurement,
transmission, and distribution of Gas for retail use. Gas Service is provided by the City of Palo Alto Utilities
Department.
Gas Direct Access (GDA)
The election by a Customer to procure its natural Gas, and related natural Gas Services, from a Gas Service
Provider, other than CPAU. In this situation, a Customer obtains natural Gas commodity directly from a
GSP, but local transmission of the natural Gas commodity is effectuated by CPAU in accordance with the
terms of CPAU’s Natural Gas Service Agreement with PG&E. Also, Distribution Services would continue
to be provided by CPAU.
Gas Direct Access Service Request (GDASR)
The form required to initiate Gas Direct Access Service.
Gas Service Provider (GSP)
The Person who procures, schedules, nominates and arranges transport of natural Gas to Gas Direct Access
Customers, including its successors and assigns.
Gas Service Provider Agreement (GSPA)
The contract between CPAU and the Gas Direct Access Customer’s Gas Service Provider that establishes
the terms and conditions under which Gas Services may be provided to the Gas Direct Access Customer.
Generating Facility
All Generators, electrical wires, equipment, and other facilities owned or provided by Producer for the
purpose of producing Electric power. This includes a solar or wind turbine electrical generating facility that
is the subject of a Net Energy Metering and Interconnection Agreement and Rule and Regulation 29.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 9
Generator
A device converting mechanical, chemical or solar energy into electrical energy, including all of its
protective and control Functions and structural appurtenances. One or more Generators comprise a
Generating Facility.
Gross Nameplate Rating; Gross Nameplate Capacity
The total gross generating capacity of a Generator or Generating Facility as designated by the
manufacturer(s) of the Generator(s).
Initial Review
The review by CPAU, following receipt of an Application, to determine the following: (a) whether the
Generating Facility qualifies for Simplified Interconnection; or (b) if the Generating Facility can be made to
qualify for Interconnection with a Supplemental Review determining any additional requirements.
Inspector
The authorized Inspector, agent, or representative of CPAU.
Interconnection; Interconnected
The physical connection of a Generating Facility in accordance with the requirements of the City’s Utilities
Rules and Regulations so that Parallel Operation with CPAU’s Distribution System can occur (has
occurred).
Interconnection Agreement
An agreement between CPAU and the Producer providing for the Interconnection of a Generating Facility
that gives certain rights and obligations to effect or end Interconnection. For the purposes of the City’s
Utilities Rules and Regulations, the Net Energy Metering and Interconnection Agreement, and the Power
Purchase Agreements authorized by the City Council may be considered as Interconnection Agreements for
purposes of defining such term.
Interconnection Facilities
The electrical wires, switches and related equipment that are required in addition to the facilities required to
provide Electric Distribution Service to a Customer to allow Interconnection. Interconnection Facilities may
be located on either side of the Point of Common Coupling as appropriate to their purpose and design.
Interconnection Facilities may be integral to a Generating Facility or provided separately.
Interconnection Study
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 10
A study to establish the requirements for Interconnection of a Generating Facility with CPAU’s Distribution
System.
Internet Exchange
Any Internet data center for telecommunications equipment and computer equipment for the purposes of
enabling traffic exchange and providing commercial-grade data center services.
Interstate Transportation (or Transmission)
Transportation of Gas on a pipeline system under the regulation of the FERC.
Island; Islanding
A condition on CPAU’s Electric Distribution System in which one or more Generating Facilities deliver
power to Customers using a portion of CPAU’s Distribution System that is electrically isolated from the
remainder of CPAU’s Distribution System.
Junction
A location on the Dark Fiber Infrastructure where equipment is installed for the purpose of connecting
communication cables.
Junction Site
The area within the Transmission Pathway at which a Junction is located.
Kilovar (kVar)
A unit of reactive power equal to 1,000 reactive volt-amperes.
Kilovar-hours (kVarh)
The amount of reactive flow in one hour, at a constant rate of Kilovar.
Kilowatt (kW)
A unit of power equal to 1,000 watts.
Kilowatt-hour (kWh)
The amount of energy delivered in one hour, when delivery is at a constant rate of one Kilowatt; a standard
unit of billing for electrical energy.
Law
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 11
Any administrative or judicial act, decision, bill, Certificate, Charter, Code, constitution, opinion, order,
ordinance, policy, procedure, Rate, Regulation, resolution, Rule, Schedule, specification, statute, tariff, or
other requirement of any district, local, municipal, county, joint powers, state, or federal Agency, or any
other Agency having joint or several jurisdiction over the City of Palo Alto or City of Palo Alto Utilities or
Public Works Customers, including, without limitation, any regulation or order of an official or quasi-
official entity or body.
Licensed Fibers
One or more fibers comprising a part of the Dark Fiber Infrastructure that are dedicated to the exclusive use
of the Customer under the Provisions of the Dark Fiber License Agreement, Proposal to Dark Fiber Services
Agreement and the Utilities Rules and Regulations.
Licensed Fibers Route
A defined path of Licensed Fibers that is identified by specific End Points.
Load(s)
The Electric power Demand (kW) of the Customer at its Service Address within a measured period of time,
normally 15 minutes or the quantity of Gas required by a Customer at its Service Address, measured in
MMBtu per Day.
Main Wastewater Line
Any Wastewater line not including a building connection (Service) sewer.
Master-metering
Where CPAU installs one Service and Meter to supply more than one residence, apartment dwelling unit,
mobile home space, store, or office.
Maximum Generation
For a customer with a non-utility generator located on the customer’s side of the Point of Common
Coupling, the Maximum Generation for that non-utility generator during any billing period is the maximum
average generation in kilowatts taken during any 15-minute interval in that billing period provided that in
case the generator output is intermittent or subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute
interval.
Meter
The instrument owned and maintained by CPAU that is used for measuring either the Electricity, Gas or
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 12
Water delivered to the Customer.
Metering
The measurement of electrical power flow in kW and/or energy in kWh, and, if necessary, reactive power in
kVar at a point, and its display to CPAU as required by Rule 27.
Metering Equipment
All equipment, hardware, software including Meter cabinets, conduit, etc., that are necessary for Metering.
Meter Read
The recording of usage data from Metering Equipment.
Minimum Charge
The least amount for which Service will be rendered in accordance with the Rate Schedule.
Momentary Parallel Operation
The Interconnection of a Generating Facility to the Distribution System for one second (60 cycles) or less.
Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL)
A laboratory accredited to perform the Certification Testing requirements under Rule 27.
Net Energy Metering
Net Energy Metering means measuring the difference between the electricity supplied through CPAU’s
Electric utility Distribution System and the electricity generated by the customer-generator’s facility and
delivered to CPAU’s Electric utility Distribution System over a specified twelve-month period.
Net Generation Metering
Metering of the net electrical power of energy output in kW or energy in kWh, from a given Generating
Facility. This may also be the measurement of the difference between the total electrical energy produced by
a Generator and the electrical energy consumed by the auxiliary equipment necessary to operate the
Generator.
Net Nameplate Rating
The Gross Nameplate Rating minus the consumption of electrical power of a Generator or Generating
Facility as designated by the manufacturer(s) of the Generator(s).
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 13
Non-Islanding
Designed to detect and disconnect from an Unintended Island with matched Load and generation. Reliance
solely on under/over voltage and frequency trip is not considered sufficient to qualify as Non-Islanding.
Occupied Domestic Dwelling
Any house, cottage, flat, or apartment unit having a kitchen, bath, and sleeping facilities, which is occupied
by a Person or Persons.
Parallel Operation
The simultaneous operation of a Generator with power delivered or received by CPAU while Interconnected.
For the purpose of this Rule, Parallel Operation includes only those Generating Facilities that are
Interconnected with CPAU’s Distribution System for more than 60 cycles (one second).
Performance Test, Performance Tested
After the completion of any Fiber Interconnection work, the City will conduct a Performance Test of each
Fiber constituting a part of the proposed leased fibers to determine its compliance with the Performance
Specifications.
Performance Specifications
These specifications will include, but not be limited to, criteria relating to end-to-end optical time domain
reflectometer data plots that identify the light optical transmission losses in each direction along the leased
fibers whenever the testing is possible, measured in decibels at a wavelength of 1310 or 1550 nanometers
for singlemode Fiber, as a Function of distance, measured in kilometers.
Person
Any individual, for profit corporation, nonprofit corporation, limited liability company, partnership, limited
liability partnership, joint venture, business, family or testamentary trust, sole proprietorship, or other form
of business association.
PG&E Citygate
The PG&E Citygate is the point at which PG&E’s backbone transmission system connects to PG&E’s local
transmission system.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 14
Point of Common Coupling (PCC)
The transfer point for electricity between the electrical conductors of CPAU and the electrical conductors of
the Producer.
Point of Common Coupling Metering
Metering located at the Point of Common Coupling. This is the same Metering as Net Generation Metering
for Generating Facilities with no host load.
Point of Delivery (POD)
Unless otherwise specified, the following definitions apply: For Electric, that location where the Service
lateral conductors connect to the Customer’s Service entrance equipment; for overhead Services, the POD is
at the weather-head connection; for under-ground Services, the POD is located at the terminals ahead of or at
the Meter; for multiple Meter arrangements with connections in a gutter, the POD is at the Meter terminals
(supply-side); for multiple Meter arrangements in a switchboard, the POD is typically at the connectors in
the utility entrance section; for Natural Gas, the POD is the point(s) on the Distribution System where the
City delivers natural Gas that it has transported to the Customer.
Point of Interconnection
The electrical transfer point between a Generating Facility and the Distribution System. This may or may
not be coincident with the Point of Common Coupling.
Point of Receipt
The designated location at which CPAU receives Gas supplied by a GSP on behalf of a GDA Customer. The
Point of Receipt for Gas will be designated in the GSPA.
Point of Service (POS)
Where CPAU connects the Electric Service lateral to its Distribution System. For Fiber Optics Service, this
is where CPAU connects the Fiber Service to the backbone. This point is usually a box located in or near the
street or sidewalk and can be in the Public Right-of-Way. This point is at a mutually agreed upon location
established at the time of installation.
Pole Line
Overhead wires and overhead structures, including poles, towers, support wires, conductors, guys, studs,
platforms, cross arms braces, transformers, insulators, cutouts, switches, communication circuits, appliances
attachments, and appurtenances, located above ground and used or useful in supplying Electric,
communication, or similar or associated Service.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 15
Power Factor
The percent of total power delivery (kVA) which does useful work. For billing purposes, average Power
Factor is calculated from a trigonometric function of the ratio of reactive kilovolt-ampere-hours to the
Kilowatt-hours consumed during the billing month. Power Factor is a ratio that reflects the reactive power
used by a Customer. CPAU maintains an overall system Power Factor above 95% to reduce distribution
system losses caused by low Power Factor.
Power Factor Adjustment
CPAU must install additional equipment to correct for Customers that maintain a low Power Factor, and
may make a Power Factor Adjustment to a Customer’s bill to account for those costs and the additional
energy costs and losses incurred by CPAU due to the Customer’s low Power Factor.
Premises
All structures, apparatus, or portion thereof occupied or operated by an individual(s), a family, or a business
enterprise, and situated on an integral parcel of land undivided by a public street, highway, or railway.
Primary Service
CPAU Electric distribution Service provided to a Customer’s Premises at a voltage level equal to or greater
than 1000 volts.
Producer
The entity that executes an Interconnection Agreement with CPAU. The Producer may or may not own or
operate the Generating Facility, but is responsible for the rights and obligations related to the Interconnection
Agreement.
Proposal for Dark Fiber Services
A project-specific Service agreement that acts as a supplemental document for the Dark Fiber License
Agreement. This Service agreement shall include the proposed Interconnection fees, applicable Fiber
licensing fees, term of the Service, and summary of licensed Fiber elements.
Protective Function(s)
The equipment, hardware and/or software in a Generating Facility (whether discrete or integrated with other
Functions) whose purpose is to protect against Unsafe Operating Conditions.
Provision
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 16
Any agreement, circumstance, clause, condition, covenant, fact, objective, qualification, restriction, recital,
reservation, representation, term, warranty, or other stipulation in a contract or in Law that defines or
otherwise controls, establishes, or limits the performance required or permitted by any party.
Prudent Utility Practices
The methods, protocols, and procedures that are currently used or employed by utilities to design, engineer,
select, construct, operate and maintain facilities in a dependable, reliable, safe, efficient and economic
manner.
Public Right-of-Way
The areas owned, occupied or used by the City for the purposes of furnishing retail and/or wholesale
Electricity, Gas, Water, Wastewater, Storm and Surface Water Drainage, Refuse and recycling or
communications commodity and/or distribution Service, and the means of public transportation, to the
general public, including but not limited to, the public alleys, avenues, boulevards, courts, curbs, gutters,
lanes, places, roads, sidewalks, sidewalk planter areas, streets, and ways.
Public Utility Easements
The areas occupied or used by the City for the purpose of providing Utility Service to the general public, and
all related Services offered by the City’s Utilities Department and/or Public Works Department, the rights of
which were acquired by easements appurtenant or in gross, or are other interests or estates in real property,
or are the highest use permitted to be granted by the nature of the City’s interest in and to the affected real
property. This term incorporates all public Service easements for Utility Services that have been recorded by
the City with the Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, California.
Public Works Department
See City of Palo Alto Public Works Department.
Rate Schedule
One or more Council-adopted documents setting forth the Charges and conditions for a particular class or
type of Utility Service. A Rate Schedule includes wording such as Schedule number, title, class of Service,
applicability, territory, rates, conditions, and references to Rules.
Recyclable Materials
Materials designated by the City as acceptable for recycling collection and processing.
Reserved Capacity
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 17
For a customer with one or more non-utility generators located on the customer’s side of the Point of
Common Coupling, the Reserved Capacity for each billing period is the lesser of 1) the sum of the
Maximum Generation for that period for all non-utility generation sources; or 2) the maximum average
customer demand in kilowatts taken during any 15-minute interval in the billing period provided that in case
the load is intermittent or subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute interval.
Residential Service
Utility Service provided to separately metered single family or multi-family, domestic dwelling.
Rules and Regulations
See Utilities Rules and Regulations
Scheduling Coordinator
An entity providing the coordination of power schedules and nominations to effect transportation and
distribution of Gas, Electric power and energy.
Secondary Service
CPAU Electric distribution Service provided to a Customer’s Premises at a voltage level less than 1000
volts.
Service(s)
Utility Services offered by the City of Palo Alto include Electric, Fiber Optics, Gas, Water, Wastewater
Collection services provided by the Utilities Department (CPAU); and Refuse and Recycling, Wastewater
Treatment, and Storm and Surface Water Drainage Services provided by the Public Works Department.
Service Address
The official physical address of the building or facility assigned by CPAU’s Planning Department, at which
Customer receives Utility Services.
Service Charge
A fixed monthly Charge applicable on certain Rate Schedules that does not vary with consumption. The
Charge is intended to recover a portion of certain fixed costs.
Service Drop
The overhead Electric Service conductors from the last pole or other aerial support to and including the
splices, if any, connecting to the service entrance conductors at the building or other structure. Or, in the case
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 18
of Fiber Optic Drops, the overhead Fiber Optics cable from the last pole or other aerial support to the
building or other structure to and including the termination box.
Services or Service Lines
Facilities of CPAU, excluding transformers and Meters, between CPAU’s infrastructure and the Point of
Delivery to the Customer.
Service Territory
The geographic boundaries within the City of Palo Alto limits served by the physical Distribution System of
the CPAU.
Short Circuit (Current) Contribution Ratio (SCCR)
The ratio of the Generating Facility’s short circuit contribution to the short circuit contribution provided
through CPAU’s Distribution System for a three-phase fault at the high voltage side of the distribution
transformer connecting the Generating Facility to CPAU’s system.
Simplified Interconnection
An Interconnection conforming to the minimum requirements as determined under Rule 27, Section I.
Single Line Diagram; Single Line Drawing
A schematic drawing, showing the major Electric switchgear, Protective Function devices, wires,
Generators, transformers and other devices, providing sufficient detail to communicate to a qualified
engineer the essential design and safety of the system being considered.
Special Facilities
See CPAU’s Rule and Regulation 20 governing Special Facilities.
Splice
A point where two separate sections of Fiber are physically connected.
Standard Refuse Container
A Standard Refuse Container shall have the meaning described in the Palo Alto Municipal Code. A
Standard Container shall also include a wheeled container with a capacity of not to exceed 32 gallons.
Standby Service
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 19
Back-up Energy Services provided by CPAU.
Storm and Surface Water Drainage
Utility Service provided to residents and business owners in the City of Palo Alto.
Storm and Surface Water Drainage Service is provided by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department.
Supplemental Review
A process wherein CPAU further reviews an Application that fails one or more of the Initial Review Process
screens. The Supplemental Review may result in one of the following: (a) approval of Interconnection;
(b) approval of Interconnection with additional requirements; or (c) cost and schedule for an Interconnection
Study.
System Integrity
The condition under which a Distribution System is deemed safe and can reliably perform its intended
Functions in accordance with the safety and reliability rules of CPAU.
Tax
Any assessment, Charge, imposition, license, or levy (including any Utility Users Tax) and imposed by any
Agency, including the City.
Telemetering
The electrical or electronic transmittal of Metering data in real-time to CPAU.
Temporary Service
Service requested for limited period of time or of indeterminate duration such as, but not limited to, Service
to provide power for construction, seasonal sales lots (Christmas trees), carnivals, rock crushers or paving
plants. Temporary Service does not include Emergency, breakdown, or Standby Service.
Therm
A Therm is a unit of heat energy equal to 100,000 British Thermal Units (Btu). It is approximately the
energy equivalent of burning 100 cubic feet (often referred to as 1 ccf) of natural Gas. Since Meters measure
volume and not energy content, a Therm factor is used to convert the volume of Gas used to its heat
equivalent, and thus calculate the actual energy use. The Therm factor is usually in the units therms/ccf. It
will vary with the mix of hydrocarbons in the natural Gas. Natural Gas with a higher than average
concentration of ethane, propane or butane will have a higher Therm factor. Impurities, such as carbon
dioxide or nitrogen lower the Therm factor.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 20
Transfer Trip
A Protective Function that trips a Generating Facility remotely by means of an automated communications
link controlled by CPAU.
Transmission Pathway
Those areas of the Public Right-of-Way, the Public Utility Easements and the Leased Service Properties in
which the Dark Fiber Infrastructure is located.
Trap
Any approved equipment or appliance for sealing an outlet from a house-connection sewer to
prevent the escape of sewer Gas from a main line through a building connection (service) sewer.
Underground Utility District
An area in the City within which poles, overhead electric or telecommunication wires, and associated
overhead structures are prohibited or as otherwise defined in Section 12.04.050 of the PAMC.
Unintended Island
The creation of an Island, usually following a loss of a portion of CPAU’s Distribution System, without the
approval of CPAU.
Unsafe Operating Conditions
Conditions that, if left uncorrected, could result in harm to personnel, damage to equipment, loss of System
Integrity or operation outside pre-established parameters required by the Interconnection Agreement.
Utilities Department
See City of Palo Alto Utilities Department.
Utilities Director
The individual designated as the Director of Utilities Department under Section 2.08.200 of Chapter 2.08 of
Title 2 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and any Person who is designated the representative of the director
of utilities.
Utility(ies) Rules and Regulations, Rules and Regulations
The compendium of Utilities Rules and Regulations prepared by the City’s Utilities and Public Works
Departments and adopted by ordinance or resolution of the Council pursuant to Chapter 12.20 of the Palo
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 21
Alto Municipal Code, as amended from time to time.
Utility(ies) Service(s), Service(s)
Electric, fiber optics, water, gas, wastewater collection services provided by the City of Palo Alto Utilities
Department (CPAU) and Refuse and Recycling, Wastewater Treatment and Storm and Surface Water
Drainage services provided by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department.
Utilities User Tax (UUT)
City of Palo Alto Tax imposed on Utility Charges to a Water, Gas, and/or Electric Service user. This may
include Charges made for Electricity, Gas, and Water and Charges for Service including Customer Charges,
Service Charges, Standby Charges, Charges for Temporary Services, Demand Charges, and annual and
monthly Charges, as described in Chapter 2.35 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
Wastewater
Utility Service provided to residents and business owners in the City of Palo Alto. Wastewater Utility
Services include collection and treatment of Wastewater. Wastewater Collection Service is provided by the
City of Palo Alto Utilities Department, and Wastewater Treatment Service is provided by the City of Palo
Alto Public Works Department.
Water
Utility Service provided to residents and business owners in the City of Palo Alto for retail use. Water
Service is provided by the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department.
Water Column (WC)
Pressure unit based on the difference in inches between the heights of water columns as measured in a
manometer. 6” WC = 0.217 psi; 7” WC = 0.25 psi.
Yard Trimmings
Yard Trimmings means those materials defined in Section 5.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
(END)
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered secondary Electric Service for customers with a Maximum
Demand below 1,000 kilowatts. This schedule applies to three-phase Electric Service and may
include Service to master-metered multi-family facilities or other facilities requiring Demand-
metered services, as determined by the City.
B. TERRITORY:
This rate schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. UNBUNDLED RATES:
Rates per kilowatt (kW) and kilowatt-hour (kWh):
Commodity Distribution
Public
Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $5.31 $15.23 $20.54
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.06083 0.01767 0.00321 0.08171
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $4.80 $9.04 $13.84
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.05281 0.01716 0.00321 0.07318
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Cost Components
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges and/or taxes. On a customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-2
2. Seasonal Rate Changes
The Summer Period is effective May 1 to October 31 and the Winter Period is effective from
November 1 to April 30. When the billing period includes use both in the Summer and the
Winter Periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each seasonal
period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein. For further discussion of bill
calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
3. Maximum Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kWh for three consecutive months,
a Maximum Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is practicable and thereafter
continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has fallen below 6,000 kWh for twelve
consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the City, it may be removed.
The Maximum Demand in any month will be the maximum average power in kilowatts taken
during any 15-minute interval in the month, provided that in case the load is intermittent or
subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute interval. A thermal-type Demand
meter which does not reset after a definite time interval may be used at the City's option.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts for the current month. An exception is that the Billing
Demand for customers with Thermal Energy Storage (TES) will be based upon the actual
Maximum Demand of such customers between the hours of noon and 6 pm on weekdays.
4. Power Factor
For new or existing customers whose Demand is expected to exceed or has exceeded 300
kilowatts for three consecutive months, the City has the option of installing applicable
metering to calculate a Power Factor. The City may remove such metering from the Service
of a customer whose Demand has been below 200 kilowatts for four consecutive months.
When such metering is installed, the monthly Electric bill will include a “Power Factor
penaltyAdjustment”, if applicable. The penalty adjustment will be applied to a customer’s
bill prior to the computation of any primary voltage discount. The Power Factor penalty
Adjustment is applied by increasing the total energy and Demand charges for any month by
0.25 percent (0.25%) for each one percent (1%) that the monthly Power Factor of the
customer’s load was less than 95%.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-3
The monthly Power Factor is the average Power Factor based on the ratio of kilowatt hours
to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month. Where time-of-day metering is
installed, the monthly Power Factor shall be the Power Factor coincident with the customer's
Maximum Demand.
5. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers may request a rate schedule change at any time to any City of Palo Alto full-
service rate schedule as is applicable to their kilowatt-Demand and kilowatt-hour usage
profile.
6. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2 1/2 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed provided the City is not required to supply Service at a particular line voltage where
it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally or better suited
to the customer's electrical requirements. The City retains the right to change its line voltage
at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any customer receiving a discount
hereunder and affected by such change. The customer then has the option to change his
system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept Service (without voltage
discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to a maximum kilovolt-
ampere size limitation.
7. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(7)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-4
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.69 $15.23 $15.92
Winter Period $0.63 $9.04 $9.67
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand (as defined in Section D.3)
occurs when one or more of the non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the
City’s revenue meter are not operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the
sum of the Maximum Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall
the Customer’s Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4), as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-TOU-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-TOU-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered secondary Electric Service for customers with Demand
between 500 and 1,000 kilowatts per month and who have sustained this level of usage for at least
three consecutive months during the most recent 12 month period. This schedule applies to
three-phase Electric Service and may include Service to master-metered multi-family facilities or
other facilities requiring Demand-metered services, as determined by the City. In addition, this rate
schedule is applicable for customers who did not pay Power Factor penalties Adjustments during the
last 12 months.
B. TERRITORY:
This rate schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. UNBUNDLED RATES:
Rates per kilowatt (kW) and kilowatt-hour (kWh):
Commodity Distribution Public Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW)
Peak $3.12 $8.96 $12.08
Mid-Peak 1.99 5.65 7.64
Off-Peak 1.13 3.26 4.39
Energy Charge (per kWh)
Peak $0.10963 $0.03242 $0.00321 $0.14526
Mid-Peak 0.05617 0.01623 0.00321 0.07561
Off-Peak 0.04298 0.01218 0.00321 0.05837
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW)
Peak $2.77 $5.10 $7.87
Off-Peak 1.49 2.94 4.43
Energy Charge (per kWh)
Peak $0.07003 $0.02296 $0.00321 $0.09620
Off-Peak 0.04088 0.01313 0.00321 0.05722
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-TOU-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-TOU-2
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Cost Components
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges and/or taxes. On a Customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
2. Definition of Time Periods
SUMMER PERIOD (Service from May 1 to October 31):
Peak: 12:00 noon to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
Mid Peak: 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon Monday through Friday (except holidays)
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Off-Peak: 9:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
All day Saturday, Sunday, and holidays
WINTER PERIOD (Service from November 1 to April 30):
Peak: 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
Off-Peak: 9:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
All day Saturday, Sunday, and holidays
HOLIDAYS: “Holidays” for the purposes of this rate schedule are New Years Day,
President’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving
Day, and Christmas Day. The dates will be those on which the holidays are legally observed.
SEASONAL RATE CHANGES: When the billing period includes use in both the Summer
and the Winter periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each
seasonal period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein.. For further discussion
of bill calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-TOU-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-TOU-3
3. Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kilowatt-hours for three
consecutive months, a Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is practicable and
thereafter continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has fallen below 6,000
kilowatt-hours for twelve consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the City, it
may be removed.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts taken during any 15-minute interval in each of the
designated Time periods as defined under Section D.2.
4. Power Factor PenaltyAdjustment
Time of Use customers must not have had a Power Factor penalty Adjustment assessed on
their Service for at least 12 months. Power factor is calculated based on the ratio of kilowatt
hours to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month, and must not have fallen below
95% to avoid the Power Factor penaltyAdjustment.
Should the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department find that the Customer’s Service should be
subject to Power Factor penaltiesAdjustments, the Customer will be removed from the E-4-
TOU rate schedule and placed on another applicable rate schedule as is suitable to their
kilowatt Demand and kilowatt-hour usage.
5. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers electing to be served under E-4 TOU must remain on said schedule for a
minimum of 12 months. Should the Customer so wish, at the end of 12 months, the
Customer may request a rate schedule change to any applicable City of Palo Alto full-service
rate schedule as is suitable to their kilowatt Demand and kilowatt-hour usage.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-TOU-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-TOU-4
6. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2 1/2 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed provided the City is not required to supply Service at a particular line voltage where
it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally or better suited
to the Customer's electrical requirements. The City retains the right to change its line voltage
at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any Customer receiving a discount
hereunder and affected by such change. The Customer then has the option to change his
system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept Service (without voltage
discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to a maximum kilovolt-
ampere size limitation.
7. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(7)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.69 $15.23 $15.92
Winter Period $0.63 $9.04 $9.67
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand occurs when one or more of the
non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter are not
operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the sum of the Maximum
Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall the Customer’s
Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-TOU-5 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-TOU-5
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4), as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-G-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-G-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered secondary Electric Service for Customers with a
Maximum Demand below 1,000 kilowatts (kW) who receive power under the Palo Alto Green plan.
This schedule applies to three-phase Electric Service and may include Service to master-metered
multi-family facilities or other facilities requiring Demand-metered Services, as determined by the
City.
B. TERRITORY:
The rate schedule applies everywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. UNBUNDLED RATES: (1000 kWh block option):
Commodity Distribution Public Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $5.31 $15.23 $20.54
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.06083 0.01767 0.00321 0.08171
Palo Alto Green Charge (per 1000 kWh block) 15.00
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $4.80 $9.04 $13.84
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.05281 0.01716 0.00321 0.07318
Palo Alto Green Charge (per 1000 kWh block) 15.00
(100% Renewable Green option):
Commodity Distribution
Public
Benefits
Palo
Alto
Green Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $5.31 $15.23 $20.54
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.06083 0.01767 0.00321 0.0150 0.09671
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $4.80 $9.04 $13.84
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.05281 0.01716 0.00321 0.0150 0.08818
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-G-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-G-2
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Cost Components
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges, and/or taxes. On a Customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
2. Seasonal Rate Changes
The Summer Period is effective May 1 to October 31 and the Winter Period is effective from
November 1 to April 30. When the billing period includes use both in the Summer and the
Winter Periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each seasonal
period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein. For further discussion of bill
calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
3. Maximum Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kilowatt-hours for three
consecutive months, a Maximum Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is
practicable and thereafter continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has dropped
below 6,000 kilowatt-hours for twelve consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the
City, it may be removed.
The Maximum Demand in any month will be the maximum average power in kilowatts taken
during any 15-minute interval in the month provided that in case the load is intermittent or
subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute interval. A thermal-type Demand
meter, which does not reset after a definite time interval, may be used at the City's option.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts for the current month. An exception is that the Billing
Demand for Customers with Thermal Energy Storage (TES) will be based upon the actual
Maximum Demand of such Customers between the hours of noon and 6 PM on weekdays.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-G-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-G-3
4. Power Factor
For new or existing Customers whose Demand is expected to exceed or has exceeded 300
kilowatts for three consecutive months, the City has the option of installing applicable
metering to calculate a Power Factor. The City may remove such metering from the Service
of a Customer whose Demand has dropped below 200 kilowatts for four consecutive months.
When such metering is installed, the monthly Electric bill will include a “Power Factor
penaltyAdjustment”, if applicable. The penalty adjustment will be applied to a Customer’s
bill prior to the computation of any primary voltage discount. The Power Factor penalty
Adjustment is applied by increasing the total energy and Demand charges for any month by
0.25 percent or (1/4) for each one percent (1%) that the monthly Power Factor of the
Customer’s load was less than 95%.
The monthly Power Factor is the average Power Factor based on the ratio of kilowatt-hours
to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month. Where time-of-day metering is
installed, the monthly Power Factor shall be the Power Factor coincident with the Customer's
Maximum Demand.
5. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers may request a rate schedule change at any time to any applicable full-service rate
schedule as is applicable to their kilowatt-Demand and kilowatt-hour usage profile.
6. Palo Alto Green Participation
Customers choosing to participate shall fill out a Palo Alto Green Power Program application
provided by the Customer Service Center. Customers may request at any time, in writing, a
change to the number of blocks they wish to purchase under the Palo Alto Green plan.
Palo Alto Green provides for either the purchase of enough renewable energy credits (RECs)
to match 100% of the energy usage at the facility every month, or for the purchase of 1000
kilowatt-hour (kWh) blocks. These REC purchases support the production of renewable
energy, increase the financial value of power from renewal sources, and creates a transparent
and sustainable market that encourages new development of wind and solar.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-G-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-G-4
7. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2.5 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed provided the City is not required to supply Service at a particular line voltage where
it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally or better suited
to the Customer's electrical requirements. The City retains the right to change its line voltage
at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any Customer receiving a discount
hereunder and affected by such change. The Customer then has the option to change the
system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept Service (without voltage
discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to a maximum kilovolt-
ampere size limitation.
8. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(8)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.69 $15.23 $15.92
Winter Period $0.63 $9.04 $9.67
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand (as defined in Section D.3)
occurs when one or more of the non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the
City’s revenue meter are not operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the
sum of the Maximum Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-G-5 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-G-5
the Customer’s Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4) , as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered secondary Service for commercial Customers with a
Maximum Demand of at least 1,000KW per month per site, who have sustained this Demand level at
least 3 consecutive months during the last twelve months.
B. TERRITORY:
This rate schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. RATES:
Rates per kilowatt (kW) and kilowatt-hour (kWh):
Commodity Distribution Public Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (kW) $6.42 $12.55 $18.97
Energy Charge (kWh) 0.05662 0.01825 0.00321 0.07808
Winter Period
Demand Charge (kW) $5.50 $6.04 $11.54
Energy Charge (kWh) 0.04990 0.01898 0.00321 0.07209
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Charges
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges and/or taxes. On a Customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-2
2. Seasonal Rate Changes
The Summer Period is effective May 1 to October 31 and the Winter Period is effective from
November 1 to April 30. When the billing period includes use both in the summer and in the
winter periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each seasonal
period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein. For further discussion of bill
calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
3. Request for Service
Qualifying Customers may request Service under this schedule for more than one account or
one meter if the accounts are on one site. A site shall be defined as one or more utility
accounts serving contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of-ways (e.g.
streets) and have a common billing address.
4. Maximum Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kilowatt-hours for three
consecutive months, a Maximum Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is
practicable and thereafter continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has fallen
below 6,000 kilowatt-hours for twelve consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the
City, it may be removed.
The Maximum Demand in any month will be the maximum average power in kilowatts taken
during any 15-minute interval in the month provided that in case the load is intermittent or
subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute interval. A thermal-type Demand
meter which does not reset after a definite time interval may be used at the City's option.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts for the current month. An exception is that the Billing
Demand for Customers with Thermal Energy Storage (TES) will be based upon the actual
Maximum Demand of such Customers between the hours of noon and 6 pm on weekdays.
5. Power Factor
For new or existing Customers whose Demand is expected to exceed or has exceeded 300
kilowatts for three consecutive months, the City has the option to install applicable metering
to calculate a Power Factor. The City may remove such metering from the Service of a
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-3
Customer whose Demand has been below 200 kilowatts for four consecutive months.
When such metering is installed, the monthly Electric bill shall include a “Power Factor
penaltyAdjustment”, if applicable. The penalty adjustment shall be applied to a Customer’s
bill prior to the computation of any primary voltage discount. The Power Factor penalty
Adjustment is applied by increasing the total energy and Demand charges for any month by
0.25 percent (0.25%) for each one percent (1%) that the monthly Power Factor of the
Customer’s load was less than 95%.
The monthly Power Factor is the average Power Factor based on the ratio of kilowatt hours
to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month. Where time-of-day metering is
installed, the monthly Power Factor shall be the Power Factor coincident with the Customer's
Maximum Demand.
6. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers may request a rate schedule change at any time to any applicable full service rate
schedule as is applicable to their kilowatt-Demand and kilowatt-hour usage profile.
7. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2 1/2 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed provided the City is not required to supply Service at a particular line voltage where
it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally or better suited
to the Customer's electrical requirements. The City retains the right to change its line voltage
at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any Customer receiving a discount
hereunder and affected by such change. The Customer then has the option to change his
system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept Service (without voltage
discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to a maximum kVA size
limitation.
8. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(8)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-4
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.84 $12.55 $13.39
Winter Period $0.72 $6.04 $6.76
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand (as defined in Section D.4)
occurs when one or more of the non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the
City’s revenue meter are not operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the
sum of the Maximum Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall
the Customer’s Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4) , as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-TOU-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-TOU-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered secondary Service for commercial customers with a
Maximum Demand of at least 1,000KW per month per site, who have sustained this Demand level at
least 3 consecutive months during the last twelve months. In addition, this rate schedule is
applicable for customers who did not pay Power Factor penalties Adjustments during the last 12
months.
B. TERRITORY:
This rate schedule applies everywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. UNBUNDLED RATES:
Rates per kilowatt (kW) and kilowatt-hour (kWh):
Commodity Distribution Public Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW)
Peak $4.24 $8.25 $12.49
Mid-Peak 2.06 4.13 6.19
Off-Peak 1.17 2.06 3.23
Energy Charge (per kWh)
Peak $0.07029 $0.02296 $0.00321 $0.09646
Mid-Peak 0.05867 0.01901 0.00321 0.08089
Off-Peak 0.04870 0.01567 0.00321 0.06758
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW)
Peak $3.04 $3.38 $6.42
Off-Peak 1.59 1.68 3.27
Energy Charge (per kWh)
Peak $0.05617 $0.02142 $0.00321 $0.08080
Off-Peak 0.04663 0.01767 0.00321 0.06751
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-TOU-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-TOU-2
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Charges
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges and/or taxes. On a Customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
2. Definition of Time Periods
SUMMER PERIOD (Service from May 1 to October 31):
Peak: 12:00 noon to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
Mid Peak: 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon Monday through Friday (except holidays)
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Off-Peak: 9:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday
All day Saturday, Sunday, and holidays
WINTER PERIOD (Service from November 1 to April 30):
Peak: 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
Off-Peak: 9:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
All day Saturday, Sunday, and holidays
HOLIDAYS: “Holidays” for the purposes of this rate schedule are New Years Day,
President’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving
Day, and Christmas Day. The dates will be those on which the holidays are legally observed.
SEASONAL RATE CHANGES: When the billing period includes use in both the Summer
and the Winter periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each
seasonal period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein. For further discussion
of bill calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-TOU-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-TOU-3
3. Request for Service
Qualifying customers may request Service under this schedule for more than one account or
one meter if the accounts are on one site. A site shall be defined as one or more utility
accounts serving contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of-ways (e.g.
streets) and have a common billing address.
4. Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kilowatt-hours for three
consecutive months, a Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is practicable and
thereafter continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has fallen below 6,000
kilowatt-hours for twelve consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the City, it may
be removed.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts taken during any 15-minute interval in each of the
designated Time periods as defined under Section D.2.
5. Power Factor PenaltyAdjustment
Time of Use customers must not have had a Power Factor penalty Adjustment assessed on
their Service for at least 12 months. Power factor is calculated based on the ratio of kilowatt
hours to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month, and must not have fallen below
95% to avoid the Power Factor penaltyAdjustment.
Should the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department find that the Customer’s Service should be
subject to Power Factor penaltiesAdjustments, the Customer will be removed from the E-7-
TOU rate schedule and placed on another applicable rate schedule as is suitable to their
kilowatt Demand and kilowatt-hour usage.
6. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers electing to be served under E-7 TOU must remain on said schedule for a
minimum of 12 months. Should the Customer so wish, at the end of 12 months, the
Customer may request a rate schedule change to any applicable City of Palo Alto full-service
rate schedule as is suitable to their kilowatt Demand and kilowatt-hour usage.
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-TOU-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-TOU-4
7. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2 1/2 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed provided the City is not required to supply Service at a particular line voltage where
it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally or better suited
to the Customer's electrical requirements. The City retains the right to change its line voltage
at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any Customer receiving a discount
hereunder and affected by such change. The Customer then has the option to change his
system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept Service (without voltage
discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to a maximum kilovolt-
ampere size limitation.
8. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(8)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.84 $12.55 $13.39
Winter Period $0.72 $6.04 $6.76
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand occurs when one or more of the
non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter are not
operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the sum of the Maximum
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-TOU-5 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-TOU-5
Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall the Customer’s
Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4) , as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-G-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-G-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered Service for large commercial Customers who choose
Service under the Palo Alto Green plan. A Customer may qualify for this rate schedule if the
Customer’s Maximum Demand is at least 1,000KW per month per site, who have sustained this
Demand level at least 3 consecutive months during the last twelve months
B. TERRITORY:
The rate schedule applies everywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. UNBUNDLED RATES: (1000 kWh block option):
Commodity Distribution Public Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $6.42 $12.55 $18.97
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.05562 0.01825 0.00321 0.07808
Palo Alto Green Charge (per 1000 kWh block) 15.00
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $5.50 $6.04 $11.54
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.04990 0.01898 0.00321 0.07209
Palo Alto Green Charge (per 1000 kWh block) 15.00 (100% renewable green option):
Commodity Distribution
Public
Benefits
Palo Alto
Green Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge ( per kW) $6.42 $12.55 $18.97
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.05562 0.01825 0.00321 0.0150 0.09308
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $5.50 $6.04 $11.54
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.04990 0.01898 0.00321 0.0150 0.08709
LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-G-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-G-2
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Charges
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges and/or taxes. On a Customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
2. Seasonal Rate Changes
The Summer Period is effective May 1 to October 31 and the Winter Period is effective from
November 1 to April 30. When the billing period includes use both in the Summer and the
Winter Periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each seasonal
period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein. For further discussion of bill
calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
3. Maximum Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kilowatt-hours for three
consecutive months, a Maximum Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is
practicable and thereafter continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has dropped
below 6,000 kilowatt-hours for twelve consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the
City, it may be removed.
The Maximum Demand in any month will be the maximum average power in kilowatts taken
during any 15-minute interval in the month provided that in case the load is intermittent or
subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute interval. A thermal-type Demand
meter which does not reset after a definite time interval may be used at the City's option.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts for the current month. An exception is that the Billing
Demand for Customers with Thermal Energy Storage (TES) will be based upon the actual
Maximum Demand of such Customers between the hours of noon and 6 PM on weekdays.
LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-G-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-G-3
4. Request for Service
Qualifying Customers may request Service under this schedule for more than one account or
one meter if the accounts are at one site. A site shall be defined as one or more utility
accounts serving contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of-ways (e.g.
streets) and have a common billing address.
5. Power Factor
For new or existing Customers whose Demand is expected to exceed or has exceeded 300
kilowatts for three consecutive months, the City has the option of installing applicable
metering to calculate a Power Factor. The City may remove such metering from the Service
of a Customer whose Demand has dropped below 200 kilowatts for four consecutive months.
When such metering is installed, the monthly Electric bill shall include a “Power Factor
penaltyAdjustment”, if applicable. The penalty adjustment shall be applied to a Customer’s
bill prior to the computation of any primary voltage discount. The Power Factor penalty
Adjustment is applied by increasing the total energy and Demand charges for any month by
0.25 percent or (1/4) for each one percent (1%) that the monthly Power Factor of the
Customer’s load was less than 95%.
The monthly Power Factor is the average Power Factor based on the ratio of kilowatt-hours
to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month. Where time-of-day metering is
installed, the monthly Power Factor shall be the Power Factor coincident with the Customer's
Maximum Demand.
6. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers may request a rate schedule change at any time to any applicable full service rate
schedule as is applicable to their kilowatt-Demand and kilowatt-hour usage profile
LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-G-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-G-4
7. Palo Alto Green Participation
Customers choosing to participate shall fill out a Palo Alto Green Power Program application
provided by the Customer Service Center. Customers may request at any time, in writing, a
change to the number of blocks they wish to purchase under the Palo Alto Green plan.
Palo Alto Green provides for either the purchase of enough renewable energy credits (RECs)
to match 100% of the energy usage at the facility every month, or for the purchase of 1000
kilowatt-hour (kWh) blocks. These REC purchases support the production of renewable
energy, increase the financial value of power from renewal sources, and creates a transparent
and sustainable market that encourages new development of wind and solar.
8. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2 1/2 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed; provided, however, the City is not required to supply Service at a qualified line
voltage where it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally
or better suited to the Customer's Electrical requirements. The City retains the right to
change its line voltage at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any Customer
receiving a discount hereunder and affected by such change. The Customer then has the
option to change the system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept
Service (without voltage discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to
a maximum kilovolt-ampere size limitation.
9. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(9)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-G-5 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-G-5
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.84 $12.55 $13.39
Winter Period $0.72 $6.04 $6.76
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand (as defined in Section D.3)
occurs when one or more of the non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the
City’s revenue meter are not operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the
sum of the Maximum Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall
the Customer’s Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4) , as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
EXCERPTED FINAL MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 3, 2012
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
ITEM 1: ACTION: UAC Recommendation that Council Adopt a Resolution Approving the
Continuation of the Palo Alto Clean Local Energy Accessible Now (CLEAN) Program
Public Comment:
Craig Lewis, representing the CLEAN Coalition, stated that the Palo Alto CLEAN has had no
takers so far, but that the program could be tweaked to be successful. The CLEAN Coalition had
hoped when the program started that property owners rather than developers would develop
and own projects, eliminating the need for a lease payment. He said the price offered seems to
have been too low and developers and that property owners were not attracted by the rate of
return from a project in Palo Alto. He believed property owners would be more interested in
leasing their rooftops to a third party developer. He stated that the lease payment to building
owners translates to a 3 cent/kilowatt-hour (₵/kWh) increase in price so that a price of
17 ₵/kWh or higher would be required to get local solar projects. He recommended
implementing a Volumetric Price Adjustment (VPA) whereby non-participation in the program
over some period of time (e.g. a month) would result in an automatic increase in the price until
participants were attracted.
Resource Planner Jon Abendschein provided a summary of the written report. He stated that
the City has supported local solar photovoltaic (PV) system installations since 1999 and the PV
Partners program has resulted in the City being one of the top utilities nationwide for PV
system installations. Abendschein stated that, despite a large amount of interest, the CLEAN
program has not had any participants, primarily because the PV Partners is a more cost-
effective option for most facilities and the returns for CLEAN program are insufficient.
Abendschein explained the staff recommendation is to extend the program at the current 14
₵/kWh price, eliminate the 100 kW minimum size, and ramp up efforts to market the PV
Partners program. Since the program was evaluated last year, and the price was set at 14
₵/kWh, the City's projection of the avoided cost has fallen to 11.6 ₵/kWh so that additional cost
to ratepayers is $158,000 per year.
Abendschein explained that the alternatives to the recommendation were considered and
included increasing the price, lowering the price, or eliminating the program. Increasing the
price would increase the cost to ratepayers, while lowering the price would not result in any
participation. He also stated that staff had examined other types of renewable energy sources,
but did not find any other energy sources aside from solar that were viable in Palo Alto aside
from City-owned sources that could be developed without a CLEAN program.
Commissioner Melton said that originally the program had been priced at the City's avoided
cost, but now the price was 20% higher than the avoided cost. He asked what the City’s pricing
policy was, and at what price would the cost of the program be too high compared to the City’s
avoided cost. He did not want the program to entirely lose its relationship to avoided costs.
Director Valerie Fong stated that the City Council had been comfortable with a small premium
over avoided cost when the program was adopted, but had not provided specific policy
direction on the maximum acceptable premium.
Commissioner Eglash asked how many PV systems had been installed in Palo Alto since the
CLEAN program had been adopted. Abendschein stated that there had been from 25-50
systems installed in residences, but he did not have the exact numbers. Commissioner Eglash
said that many people were continuing to install solar even without Palo Alto CLEAN. He said
the goal was not to have a feed-in tariff (FIT) simply to have a FIT. It was to stimulate solar
development. He said the PV Partners program was economically more attractive and that
solar was being installed at a healthy rate even without Palo Alto CLEAN. That implied that Palo
Alto CLEAN was obsolete and unnecessary. He said the cost of solar was falling substantially,
and 3rd party developers were offering excellent prices. He was against raising the price, but he
was happy leaving the program operating as it was if it did not cost much to maintain it.
Commissioner Waldfogel asked what the equivalent cost of the PV Partners program was.
Abendschein said the avoided cost was the same, but if PV Partners were translated into a FIT
price it would be equivalent to 20-24 ¢/kWh. PV Partners was a State mandated program,
however. Commissioner Waldfogel asked whether the size of the PV Partners program was
also a State mandate. Abendschein said it was.
Vice Chair Foster asked who paid for the PV Partners program. Director Fong stated the City
did. Vice Chair Foster asked whether it was better to have people participating in PA CLEAN or
PV Partners, since PV Partners was more expensive. Director Fong stated that PA CLEAN
participation would not relieve the City of its SB1 obligation, which the PV Partners program
fulfilled. Abendschein added that even if customers chose to participate in Palo Alto CLEAN,
the PV Partners capacity would still be available. Vice Chair Foster asked how much the
Brannon Solar project factored into the avoided cost calculation. Abendschein said it was a
small part of the calculation. Vice Chair Foster asked whether the staff recommended program
would allow people to fund solar on each other’s roofs if they chose to. Abendschein said the
funding source was not important as long as they sold the energy to the City.
Vice Mayor Scharff asked what it would cost to continue the program. Abendschein said the
staff time involved in maintaining the program without marketing it was minimal, but that the
staff proposal had involved some staff time for marketing which would be absorbed by existing
staff. Utility Marketing Services Manager Joyce Kinnear said that Key Account Representatives,
who market the City’s programs, including energy efficiency, would spend time on marketing
Palo Alto CLEAN, which would replace some of the time they spent marketing other programs
like energy efficiency.
Commissioner Foster stated that the program is an innovative program. The City should be
doing it and would like to see an increase in the price to get more participation. He was not
sensing much support for that proposal, so he would support the staff recommendation. He
would be opposed to eliminating the program.
Chair Cook thanked the CLEAN Coalition for support, but would not want to move much further
away from the avoided cost. He would support the staff recommendation, but would want to
review it again at some point in time, rather than have the program continue indefinitely.
Commissioner Melton remarked that the goal is to increase the amount of renewable power
generated within city limits, so he supported continuing the program despite the small increase
in price.
ACTION:
Vice Chair Foster made a motion to support staff's recommendation. Melton seconded the
motion.
Commissioner Eglash offered a friendly amendment to review the program in one year. Vice
Chair Foster and Commissioner Melton accepted the amendment.
Commissioner Waldfogel asked if the failure of the program could be attributed to a marketing
shortcoming. Abendschein said it was a matter of expanding the marketing to the specific
customers who the program would work for. Commissioner Waldfogel stated that he believed
that anyone who was eligible for the program had already heard about the program and had
determined it was not worthwhile. He was uncomfortable continuing to spend money to
market the program.
Vice Chair Foster said that some level of marketing should exist as not all have heard of the
program and it is being expanded to more customers.
The motion passed by a vote of 5-1 with Commissioner Waldfogel voting no.
EXCERPTED FINAL MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 7, 2012
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
NEW BUSINESS
ITEM 1: PRESENTATION: Presentation on Standby Electric Rates for the City’s Energy/Compost
Facility
Resource Planner Jon Abendschein gave a presentation on standby rates. He stated that
utilities generally have standby electric rates so that customers who have on-site generators
pay for their reliance on backup power provided by the utility. Most utilities have a standby
rate, but the City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) has not needed to have one due to a lack of
previous proposals to develop large or non-renewable generators. Renewable generators
smaller than one megawatt (MW) are exempt from standby rates under State Law. The Public
Works Department, however, was seeking proposals for its Energy/Compost (E/C) Facility
project, which could involve on-site generation, and would need to know the CPAU standby
rate in order to evaluate proposals. Abendschein stated that the standby rate is designed to
recover distribution system costs, generating capacity costs, and billing and administrative
costs. The costs the standby rate was intended to recover were part of the demand charges in
the E-4 and E-7 retail rate schedules, and the standby charge would be designed to recover all
of the distribution system demand charge and the portion of the generation demand charge
related to providing reserve generating capacity. Staff expected to propose a rate based on the
generator size, and had calculated a preliminary standby rate for E-7 customers of $13.51/kW
in the summer billing periods and $6.86/kW in the winter. Abendschein gave an example
calculation of a customer bill for a customer with an on-site generator. He noted that with no
standby rate, the utility would not recover costs unless the generator had an outage during the
month, and that cost recovery would be irregular, dependent on the frequency of generator
outages. With a standby rate the customer’s share of the utility’s costs were properly collected
each month regardless of outages. He also showed that the proposed rate was in-line with
those of other California utilities.
Commissioner Foster asked who this rate was needed for, and whether it was only necessary
for the Energy/Compost Facility. Abendschein stated that it would apply to any non-renewable
generator or large renewable generator in Palo Alto, but that the Energy/Compost Facility was
the only project he was currently aware of that might involve such a facility. Commissioner
Foster asked Abendschein to summarize why the rate was necessary. Abendschein stated that
the rate was necessary for the utility to recover its costs associated with providing standby
service. The State prohibited CPAU from recovering those costs for small renewable
generators, but the rate was still necessary for other generators.
Commissioner Hall asked whether the standby rate would provide an incentive for a customer
to build their own gas-fired generator to reduce their electric bill. Abendschein stated that the
rate was designed to recover the utility’s costs and was not an incentive. He stated that gas-
fired generators were unlikely to be cost-effective due to the low electric rates compared to the
CPAU gas rates.
Commissioner Waldfogel asked if the rate could be avoided if the customer built more than
1 MW of on-site generation capacity but used multiple renewable generators, keeping each
generator smaller than 1 MW. Abendschein said he believed the State’s exemption applied to
the total generation behind the customer meter, not each individual generator, so the rate
could not be avoided under that scenario. Commissioner Waldfogel then asked how the
reduced customer load would affect the CPAU RPS requirements. Assistant Director, Resource
Management Jane Ratchye stated that CPAU’s RPS requirements were based on sales, so the
reduced customer load would reduce the RPS requirement some. Commissioner Waldfogel
also asked what would happen if the generator ran infrequently in a month, asking whether the
customer would be charged both the standby rate as well as the applicable retail demand rate.
Abendschein said the customer would pay only one or the other, not both.
Commissioner Melton asked whether staff had reviewed both investor-owned and publicly-
owned utilities’ rates when developing the rate. Abendschein said staff had surveyed large and
small publicly-owned utilities’ rate schedules as well as Pacific Gas and Electric’s (PG&E’s) rate.
Commissioner Melton asked whether staff had reviewed the CPUC rules applicable to PG&E
and related to standby rates and asked whether there were any that should be incorporated
into the CPAU rates and policies. Abendschein said he had looked at PG&E's rate and found it
very complex. He said it included some features not necessary for CPAU’s rate schedule, but
that there were some other features he had incorporated. Staff had done a comprehensive
review of State regulations as well. Commissioner Melton then asked would this rate would be
an incentive for customers to install gas-fired generation like Bloom Energy fuel cells to avoid
the City's electric charges. Abendschein stated that since fuel cells ran on natural gas they were
unlikely to be cost-effective due to the low electric rates compared to the CPAU gas rates. Fuel
cells were also relatively high cost solutions and were currently dependent on significant
rebates and incentives in other utilities’ territories.
Commissioner Hall asked whether the E/C Facility developer could the market the power
outside the City. Abendschein said that it is possible, but unlikely. Commissioner Hall asked
whether staff had conceived of a situation in which part of the E/C Facility output was used on
site and the remainder was exported. Abendschein said that the owner would pay the standby
charge for the portion of the output used on site and a wheeling charge for the remainder.
EXCERPTED FINAL MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 5, 2012
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
NEW BUSINESS
ITEM 1: ACTION: Recommendation that Council Adopt a Resolution Amending Utility Rule and
Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) and the Six Rate Schedules Covering Medium and
Large Commercial Customers (E-4 and E-7) to Include Standby Service Charges
Chair Cook stated that the UAC received a presentation and had a discussion at its last meeting
and had few questions at the time. After receiving confirmation from the other commissioner,
he requested that commissioners commence with any questions and indicated that there was
no need for the prepared presentation.
Commissioner Waldfogel stated that the rate being proposed is highly technical in nature and
that the UAC may not have fully understood all of its details, but is being asked to weigh in on
the rate. Director Fong stated that the details are in the rate schedule, but noted that the UAC
does rely on the descriptions of the rate provided by staff in the report.
Vice Chair Foster asked if anyone would be on the proposed standby rate now. Resource
Planner Jon Abendschein stated that the first project that could be under the rate would be the
waste to energy facility that is being evaluated by the Public Works Department. Director Fong
stated that any customers with large generators would be subject to the rate. Abendschein
added that he does receive calls from time to time from customers who are considering adding
a generator on their site.
ACTION:
Commissioner Waldfogel moved to support the staff's recommendation. Vice Mayor Foster
seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously (6-0) with Commissioner Hall absent.
FINANCE COMMITTEE
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
Special Meeting
December 18, 2012
UAC Recommendation that the Finance Committee Recommend that Council Adopt
Two Resolutions: 1) Approving the Policy Pertaining to the Purchase of Energy from
a Potential Green Waste-to-Energy Facility and 2) Amending Utility Rule and
Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) and the Six Rate Schedules Covering
Medium and Large Commercial Customers (E-4 and E-7) to Include Standby Service
Charges.
Jon Abendschein, Resources Planner spoke about a resolution that spelled out the
City’s policy toward biogas and electricity use at a proposed compost-to-energy
facility, and a resolution that adopted rate changes to enable customers who owned
their own generators. The rate changes did not apply to Palo Alto net metered
solar customers, since electric utility was required to provide free backup power
under state law. . The facilities that were proposed for the Water Quality Control
Plant site and the adjacent site were designated by Measure E for a Compost to
Energy Facility. The Public Works Department was currently preparing to solicit
proposals for potential designs, and he believed Council was going to see the draft
Request for Proposal (RFP) in January. Facilities processed some combination of
yard waste, food waste, and sewage sludge to generate biogas, which was used for
electricity generation. This was the first large customer-owned electric generating
facility seriously proposed for Palo Alto. Staff was working with the Public Works
Department to ensure the rates, policies, and rules and regulations were all properly
set up. The proposed policy discussed common uses of biogas, which was primarily
used in three ways. First, it was burned in an engine to generate electricity.
Second, it was used to power gas vehicles, and third, it was injected into a gas
pipeline to be burned by gas customers. California gas utilities were only beginning
to explore biogas injection, and safety was a major concern since biogas was able to
corrode pipelines if poorly handled; Staff was against considering that option at this
time. Vehicle fuel was a possibility, but Council was going to discuss that at a later
date when they considered the RFP Public Works was bringing them in January.
Electricity Generation was sold to Electric Utilities, or used at project sites. The
policy in the first resolution reiterated different alternatives and stated that the City
considered vehicle fuel or electricity generation use for the biogas, but there was no
injection into the distribution system. The Resolution had one other key feature: it
set a price that was used to model the economics of their projects. There were two
main sources of revenue for these projects; the tip fees for the waste they
FINANCE COMMITTEE
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
processed and the revenue from the energy generation. The tip fees were the
largest revenue source by far, but the energy revenue was significant. A change in
the energy revenue changed the tip fee. To compare projects on an equivalent
basis, the consultant assisting with the RFP recommended having all proposers use
the same assumption for revenue from electricity sales. This resolution committed
the City to purchase the energy at prevailing renewable market prices and set a
floor price of 7.7 cents per Kilowatt-hour (kWh). This floor price was a conservative
price based on the forecast of the future price of renewable energy under conditions
favorable to the City. It was intended for use in developing proposals, and if the
renewable market price was higher when it was time to sign a contract, the City
paid that price. Staff reviewed the electric utility rates as well and the rules and
regulations to ensure that the City accommodates all the project configurations that
were proposed for the Energy Composting Facility and said if the proposer wanted
to use the biogas from the project to generate electricity there were two main uses
for that electricity. He said the proposer could plan to sell the energy or use it to
reduce their own load. He said it was easy to accommodate the user if they wanted
to sell the energy. The changes that were made to the permit processes and
engineering rules and regulations to accommodate Palo Alto Clean Local Energy
Accessible Now (CLEAN) program applied to this project. He said if people wanted
to use the energy on site, Staff was not set up to accommodate that. The customer
needed to buy backup power from the utility company when their generator was
down. Most retail rate schedules did not work when an on-site generator was
involved. Most utilities used a special rate schedule for backup power called a
“Standby Rate.” The second resolution added a standby service section to the E-4
and E-7 rate schedules. The proposed standby rate was designed to recover the
fixed costs associated with maintaining the distribution system and for it to be ready
to provide energy to the customer upon demand in case of a generator outage. It
also fixed costs associated with maintaining generating reserves. It was a monthly
charge based on the generator size. Fixed charges were typically collected through
the demand charge, which was the portion of the customer’s bill based on their
peak monthly usage. The proposed standby rates compared to the regular retail
demand rate was slightly lower. This was because Staff only charged the customer
for a portion of the fixed generation costs. The rate schedule incorporated a
provision of State Law that effectively required the utility to provide free backup
power to renewable generators smaller than one megawatt (MW) and sized to meet
FINANCE COMMITTEE
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
on-site load. He noted that this exemption could conceivably apply to certain types
of designs for an Energy/Compost Facilities.
Chair Shepherd noted that there was an effective date of February 5, 2013.
Mr. Abendschein indicated the effective date changed because the number of
meetings relating to the digester had changed. The effective date was determined
by scheduling.
Herb Borock reported if the City supplied the power, the rate would include charges
for a distribution system and would have public benefit. The overall distribution
system expense was to be paid by other ratepayers if the facility generated its own
power. An in-lieu charge was considered so other utility user rates did not increase.
Council Member Burt asked Staff to review the Palo Alto CLEAN program.
Mr. Abendschein indicated that the generator was separate from the Palo Alto
CLEAN program. The purchase price was set without a feed-in tariff program.
Council Member Burt felt the renewable source had been removed from the Palo
Alto CLEAN program when the developer was most likely going select that program.
He asked why the resource was not eligible for the Palo Alto CLEAN program.
Mr. Abendschein reported that the Resolution demonstrated the commitment to
purchase at wholesale prices. The Resolution provided the City with flexibility and
developers with the option to decide what they wanted to do with their power.
Council Member Burt asked if the rate was significantly different from the Palo Alto
CLEAN rate.
Mr. Abendschein explained Palo Alto CLEAN was a solar rate.
Council Member Burt recalled that the Palo Alto CLEAN program was a program with
renewables, with the first year limited to commercial solar. He asked why biogas
was not allowed to participate in Palo Alto CLEAN.
Mr. Abendschein stated that the prices and the commitments as set forth in the
Resolution could be called the Palo Alto CLEAN rate.
Council Member Burt inquired whether they were the same rate as Palo Alto CLEAN.
Mr. Abendschein stated the only rate in the Palo Alto CLEAN program was a solar
FINANCE COMMITTEE
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
rate. Any rate set for Palo Alto CLEAN was different for a base load resource. There
was also a built-in incentive in the Palo Alto CLEAN rate. Staff was hesitant to
include any energy incentives, and requested Council direction on that.
Council Member Burt believed the earlier discussion anticipated that the Wastewater
Treatment Plant was a prospective customer, and inquired whether Staff's
comments alluded to that.
Mr. Abendschein indicated it was one possibility. Some project configurations used
a considerable amount of energy, in which case they wanted to use their energy.
Staff wished to provide that flexibility.
Council Member Burt reported the cleanest utilization of gas was fuel cells. The
California Energy Commission created the emerging renewables program with
strong incentives for small wind and fuel cells. He asked if someone was eligible to
use those rebates based on wattage produced.
Mr. Abendschein explained the rebates were fairly high for fuel cells because the
capital investment was very high. They were not eligible for the State rebate levels.
The incentives were very high for a utility with a small rate base to try to maintain.
Council Member Burt requested Staff explain why they were not eligible for State
rebates.
Mr. Abendschein reported they were not eligible for State rebates because they
were not an investor-owned utility service territory; they were in Palo Alto's service
territory.
Council Member Burt inquired whether they could get the same rebates through
Palo Alto.
Mr. Abendschein answered no. The high rebate levels were sustained by a very
large investor-owned utility rate base.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Chair Shepherd to recommend
the City Council; 1) Adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) approving the Policy
Pertaining to the Purchase of Energy from Potential Green Waste-to-Energy
Facilities; and, 2) Adopt a Resolution (Attachment B) modifying Utilities Rules and
Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) and the six electric rate schedules
covering medium and large commercial customers (E-4 and E-7) to include standby
service charges.
FINANCE COMMITTEE
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
Vice Mayor Scharff did not believe incentives should be included.
Chair Shepherd wanted to ensure a measurement of energy transitioned and used
was maintained.
Council Member Burt supported the recommendation, but wished to have a better
understanding of the ramifications of scenarios prior to it being presented to the full
Council.
MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Price absent
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3314)
Finance Committee Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 12/18/2012
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Standby Rate and Policy for Energy Purchase from Potential
Waste to Energy Facility
Title: UAC Recommendation that the Finance Committee Recommend that
Council Adopt Two Resolutions: 1) Approving the Policy Pertaining to the
Purchase of Energy from a Potential Green Waste-to-Energy Facility and 2)
Amending Utility Rule and Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) and
the Six Rate Schedules Covering Medium and Large Commercial Customers
(E-4 and E-7) to Include Standby Service Charges
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Utilities
Recommendation
Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the Finance Committee
recommend that Council:
1. Adopt a resolution (Attachment A) approving the Policy Pertaining to the Purchase of
Energy from Potential Green Waste-to-Energy Facilities; and
2. Adopt a resolution (Attachment B) modifying Utilities Rules and Regulation 2
(Definitions and Abbreviations) and the six electric rate schedules covering medium and
large commercial customers (E-4 and E-7) to include standby service charges.
Executive Summary
In January 2013 the Public Works Department is planning to seek Council approval of a request
for proposals (RFP) for a waste-to-energy facility at the Regional Water Quality Control Plant or
at an adjacent site designated for that purpose by Measure E, which passed in November 2011.
The biogas produced at such a facility could be used in a variety of ways, and staff has
introduced the attached resolutions to clarify the City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU’s) policies so
potential proposers have more certainty about which uses are acceptable and economic for a
given project. The proposed policy states that:
City of Palo Alto Page 2
i. CPAU will purchase the energy at the market prices prevailing when the contract is
signed, but the policy also commits CPAU to a minimum purchase price of 7.7 cents per
kilowatt-hour (¢/kWh). This default rate is a “no regrets” rate that represents CPAU’s
forecasted avoided costs in 2018 based on a plausible scenario in which CPAU’s
expenses for renewable energy and transmission have decreased substantially from
current planning assumptions. The default rate is a minimum rate, and CPAU will
purchase at prevailing market prices if they are higher.
ii. The energy could be used to reduce the facility’s purchases from the utility, subject to
CPAU standby power rates.
iii. The proposer may sell the energy to another utility outside of Palo Alto, subject to a
wheeling agreement with CPAU.
iv. The policy also states that the City will not allow proposers to inject biogas into the
City’s gas distribution system.
The second resolution adopts the electric standby rate mentioned above. A standby rate
recovers the cost to the utility of providing backup service to customers who own their own
generators. Customers with renewable generators smaller than 1 MW that are sized to meet
customer load rather than to export to the grid (like most rooftop solar systems) are exempt
from the standby rates, as required by California Public Utilities Code 2827(g).
Background
In January 2013 the Public Works Department is planning to seek Council approval of an RFP for
a waste-to-energy facility (referred to as the Energy/Compost Facility, or E/C Facility) at the
Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) or at an adjacent site designated for that
purpose by Measure E, which passed in November 2011. Biogas produced by these types of
facilities is used in a variety of ways. It can be used to generate electricity, cleaned up and used
as a vehicle fuel, or injected into a gas pipeline for delivery to customers. If electricity is
generated it can be used on site, sold to the utility where the project is located, or sold to a
different utility. CPAU currently has no policies related to injection of biogas into its gas
distribution system, and has not reviewed its policies related to on-site electric generation or
moving electricity across its distribution system in several years. Staff has reviewed its policies
in order to develop the attached proposal.
Discussion
Staff has identified three primary ways the biogas from a waste-to-energy facility could
potentially be used: 1) the gas could be injected into the gas distribution system, 2) the gas
could be used in compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles, and 3) the gas could be burned in a gas
generator to make electricity. Utilities in California are only beginning to experiment with
injecting biogas into a gas distribution system. Given the safety issues involved in operating a
City of Palo Alto Page 3
gas distribution system, the corrosive nature of biogas, and CPAU’s small size and limited
resources, staff recommends against exploring the first alternative at this time. A CNG fueling
station, on the other hand, is a potentially viable alternative, but one that could be done by the
project developer independently from CPAU and, therefore, does not require any analysis by
CPAU. Therefore, the proposed Policy Pertaining to the Purchase of Energy from Potential
Green Waste-to-Energy Facilities mainly addresses CPAU policies regarding electricity
generation.
Electricity generated at an E/C Facility could be used in three ways:
1) The electricity could be used on site to supply the energy needs of the facility itself;
2) It could be sold to CPAU; or
3) If requested by the proposer, it could be sold to a utility outside of Palo Alto.
Option 1: On-site Electricity Use
If the electricity were to be used on site, it would result in reduced energy purchases from
CPAU for the RWQCP or the E/C Facility itself. CPAU’s interconnection rules and rates do not
prohibit this, but they are not written to facilitate it either. The proposed policy states that on-
site use is an acceptable use for the electricity, and that CPAU will make any necessary changes
to its rates and rules and regulations to facilitate this. The primary necessary change is the
adoption of a standby rate to recover the utility’s costs associated with providing backup
service. The resolution in Attachment B modifies the rate schedules for large and medium
commercial electric customers to include these rates.
The proposed standby rates are designed to recover the cost to maintain the CPAU distribution
system to serve peak customer load, as well as the cost of maintaining reserve generating
capacity to provide energy when needed by the customer. For medium and large commercial
customers these costs are recovered through the demand charge. When a customer’s load is
served by an on-site generator, the generator reduces the customer’s metered demand, and
the utility is not able to recover its cost to maintain the distribution system or provide
generating capacity. Therefore, the proposed standby rate is designed to recover these costs
through a monthly charge. The standby rate recovers the entire distribution component of the
demand charge, which pays for the cost of maintaining the distribution system to serve peak
customer load. It also recovers a portion of the commodity component of the demand charge,
which pays for generation costs related to providing reserve generating capacity. Only a
portion of the commodity demand charge is recovered because the customer is providing their
own generating capacity. The portion of the commodity demand charge assessed reflects the
cost of maintaining reserve generating capacity for the customer that conforms to California
Independent System Operator (CAISO) reserve requirements.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Under the proposed standby rate the customer would pay a monthly charge for backup service
based on the smaller of the generator size or the customer’s peak load for the month. In
developing the rate, staff surveyed fourteen other California utilities, and this rate design is the
same as the rate design used by the majority of those other utilities.
Table 1, below, shows the proposed standby rate and compares it to the retail demand charge
for each customer class. The standby rate is lower, but this relates to the fact that the
customer is only charged a portion of the commodity component of the retail demand charge,
as discussed above.
Table 1: E-4 and E-7 Standby Rates and Retail Demand Charges
Standby Rate ($/kW) Retail Demand Charge ($/kW)
E-4 (Medium Commercial)
Summer 15.92 20.54
Winter 9.67 13.84
E-7 (Large Commercial)
Summer 13.39 18.97
Winter 6.76 11.54
The standby charge will also include an exemption for renewable generators smaller than 1
MW, an exemption that is mandated by California Public Utilities Code 2827(g). To qualify, the
generator must be sized to meet the customer’s load, delivering no more than incidental
surplus energy to the grid. Residential and commercial solar systems built under the utility’s PV
Partners program are examples of the types of generators that qualify for this exemption. Solar
systems built under the Palo Alto CLEAN program would not be subject to the standby charge
because they are not intended to serve on-site load, and therefore do not reduce the customer
bill.
The proposed standby rate would apply to the following six electric rate schedules:
1. E-4 (Medium Commercial)
2. E-4 TOU (Medium Commercial Time of Use Service)
3. E-4-G (Medium Commercial Green Power Service)
4. E-7 (Large Commercial)
5. E-7 TOU (Large Commercial Time of Use Service)
City of Palo Alto Page 5
6. E-7-G (Large Commercial Green Power Service)
Staff does not believe a standby rate is necessary for E-2 (Small Commercial) or E-1 (Residential)
customers at this time, since customers this size would typically install renewable generators
that would be exempt from standby rates. Gas generators for small customers are not typically
economically feasible in Palo Alto. In addition, because the E-2 and E-1 rate schedules do not
have a demand rate, additional analysis would be required to establish these standby rates.
Staff validated its rate design by calculating sample customer bills using actual customer data,
and then applied eleven other utilities’ standby rates to the same customer data to see how
they compared. Staff measured the ratio of the customer’s bill with self-generation to the
customer’s bill without self-generation under each rate schedule, and found that the ratio for
the CPAU rate was close to the median ratio for the other eleven utilities’ rates. Since other
California utilities have similar cost structures, staff believes this provides additional industry-
supported data that validates the proposed rate.
The attached resolution also includes non-substantive cleanup to the six affected rate
schedules, which includes clarifying language incorporating a change in the term “power factor
penalty” to “power factor adjustment.” These changes will not affect operation of the rate
schedule.
Option 2: Electricity Sales to CPAU
Generally, CPAU buys renewable energy by soliciting proposals from suppliers and selecting the
best projects. That competitive procurement process ensures that the City pays the lowest
price for renewable energy. Staff expects that CPAU will have an ongoing need to execute new
contracts for renewable energy in the future as existing contracts start to expire beginning in
2021, leaving room for additional renewable energy in the electric portfolio.
The current timeline for the E/C Facility and Biosolids Facility projects involves the facility or
facilities beginning operation in 2018 or 2019. Due to the uncertainty associated with energy
markets, CPAU does not enter into contracts for renewable energy commencing more than 3-4
years out. However, in order to evaluate the E/C and Biosolids facilities, the City will need to
establish a price it would pay for the renewable energy produced from the facilities. This price
will be used by vendors who respond to the E/C Facility RFP. Since the sale of energy is
expected to be a significant revenue source for most E/C Facility designs, the sale price of the
electricity will affect the fees the vendors will propose to charge the City for waste disposal.
City of Palo Alto Page 6
If proposal states that CPAU will pay market price for the electricity, the uncertainty of this
price could lead to the possibility that individual vendors will use different numbers to develop
their proposals in response to Public Works’ RFP. In the interest of providing some level of
certainty around the energy price, staff proposes that CPAU commit to purchasing the energy
at a default, “no regrets” rate of 7.7 ¢/kWh. The default price represents the City’s avoided
cost of locally sited renewable energy in 2018 under the following reasonable, but low cost (“no
regrets”), scenario:
1) Solar energy prices continue to drop substantially. Staff used recent projections of solar
energy prices from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the Rocky Mountain
Institute to develop these estimates;
2) The renewable energy market is favorable to buyers, as it is currently;
3) CPAU has built a second transmission line that enables it to avoid Low Voltage
Transmission Charges imposed by PG&E; and
4) All other avoided cost components use the current CPAU planning assumptions.
The proposed policy states that if, at the time the facility is built, the market value of local
renewable energy is less than 7.7 ¢/kWh, CPAU would still pay the default rate of 7.7 ¢/kWh. If,
however, the market value of local renewable energy is higher than 7.7 ¢/kWh, CPAU would
pay the market value determined at the time.
Option 3: Electricity Sales to Another Utility
Though CPAU will purchase the electricity from the project at market prices, it is possible,
though unlikely, that the proposer would be able to find another utility willing to pay more for
the electricity produced by the project. In this case CPAU would negotiate an agreement with
the proposer to facilitate transporting the energy across its distribution system to the PG&E
transmission system.
Commission Review and Recommendation
The UAC discussed the proposed Policy Pertaining to the Purchase of Energy from Potential
Green Waste-to-Energy Facilities at its September 5, 2012 meeting and recommended
unanimously that Council adopt the policy. The minutes from that meeting are provided as
Attachment E.
The UAC also discussed the proposed standby rates at its November 7, 2012 and December 5,
2012 meetings. The minutes from those meetings are provided as Attachments F and G.
Commissioners had questions about how the rate would operate and its applicability to the
City of Palo Alto Page 7
proposed E/C Facility project and to other types of projects. At its December 5, 2012 meeting,
the UAC recommended approval of the rate (6-0, Hall absent).
Timeline
Staff anticipates requesting City Council adoption of the proposed resolutions in January 2013.
This will enable the Public Works department to incorporate the policies into its RFP, which is
anticipated to be released in February 2013.
Resource Impact
Adopting the resolutions approving this policy and the standby rate will have minimal resource
impact, but if a customer takes service under the standby rate schedule, additional staff time
will be necessary to set up the metering required and to implement the rate in the billing
system. Staff time is estimated to be less than 0.1 FTE and would be absorbed with existing
staff. Equipment requirements would depend on the site in question and would be recovered
through applicable connection fees.
Policy Implications
To properly evaluate the value of onsite generation, customers need certainty regarding the
City’s rate structure, and by providing that certainty the staff recommendation is consistent
with Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) Strategy #4, Local Generation, which states
“promote and facilitate the deployment of cost-effective local resources.”
Environmental Review
The adoption of the resolution adopting an energy purchase policy does not meet the
Environmental Quality Act’s definition of a “project” under Public Resources Code 21065, and
the adoption of the resolution setting standby service charges does is not subject to CEQA
review under Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8) (modification of rates to meet
operating expenses, purchase supplies, meet financial reserve needs, obtain capital project
funds, or obtain funds for charter-authorized intracity transfers).
Attachments:
Attachment A: Resolution Adopting a Policy Regarding Purchase of Energy from Waste
to Energy Facilities (PDF)
Attachment B: Resolution Amending Six Rate Schedules for Medium and Large
Commercial Customers to Add Standby Charges (PDF)
Attachment C: Proposed Utilities Rule and Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations)
(PDF)
City of Palo Alto Page 8
Attachment D: Proposed Utility Rate Schedules E-4, E-4TOU, E-4G, E-7, E-7TOU and E-7G
(PDF)
Attachment E: Excerpted Final UAC Minutes of 10-3-12 (PDF)
Attachment F: Excerpted Draft Minutes of the UAC 11-07-12 Meeting (PDF)
Attachment G: Draft Excerpted UAC Minutes of 12-5-12 (PDF)
*NOT YET APPROVED*
121128 dm 00710078
Resolution No.
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting a Policy
Pertaining to the Purchase of Energy from Potential
Green Waste-to-Energy Facilities
A. On November 3, 2011, the Palo Alto voters approved Measure E, which
undedicated 10 acres of existing parkland in Byxbee Park (the “Measure E Site”) for the
exclusive purpose of evaluating the development of an Energy/Compost facility, which could
potentially process yard trimmings, food waste, sewage sludge, and other organic material.”
B. The City is proceeding with a long-term planning process related to the future of
the regional Water Quality Control Plant.
C. The City plans to evaluate various alternative types of waste to energy facilities
at those sites. As part of this process, proposals will be solicited from project developers.
D. The City in order to properly evaluate the various alternatives and solicit
proposals from developers intends to adopt a policy pertaining to the use of the energy
generated by the facility or facilities.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City”) does RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. It is the policy of the City to provide a range of alternatives for the use of
energy generated by a potential waste-to-energy facility at the regional Water Quality Control
Plant and the Measure E Site. These alternatives may include, but are not limited to,
compressed natural gas vehicle fueling or electricity generation. Electricity generated may be
1) used by the facilities on the Measure E site or the regional Water Quality Control Plant,
which would reduce the amount of electricity supplied by the City’s electric utility to those
facilities, 2) sold to the City’s electric utility for distribution to customers, or 3) sold to an entity
outside of the City’s electric utility service area.
SECTION 2. To enable this policy the City will evaluate its Utilities Rules and
Regulations and Utility Rate Schedules to determine whether changes are advisable or required
to enable these alternatives.
SECTION 3. It is the policy of the City to provide an optional default purchase price
for energy from a waste-to-energy project, commencing in calendar year 2018. This default
purchase price will be equal to the City’s forecasted avoided cost in 2018 based on a scenario in
which the City’s avoided cost of electricity compares favorably to its current costs. The default
purchase price is 7.7 ¢/kWh for electricity from a project certified by the California Energy
Commission (CEC) as an Eligible Renewable Energy Resource for the purpose of fulfilling
Renewable Portfolio Standard goals. “Renewable Portfolio Standard” refers to the standard
adopted by the State of California pursuant to Senate Bill 2 1st Extraordinary Session (SBX1 2,
*NOT YET APPROVED*
121128 dm 00710078
Chapter 1, Statutes 2011-12), and California Public Utilities Code Sections 399.11through
399.31, inclusive, as may be amended, setting minimum renewable energy targets for local
publicly owned electric utilities.
SECTION 4. It is the policy of the City not to consider the injection of biogas
associated with a waste-to-energy project into its gas distribution system at this time.
SECTION 5. The Council finds that the adoption of this Resolution does not constitute
a project under the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code
section 21080, subdivision (b)(8).
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
___________________________ ___________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Senior Asst. City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Director of Utilities
___________________________
Director of Administrative Services
*NOT YET APPROVED*
121115 dm 6051819 1
Resolution No. _________
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Utilities
Rule and Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) and Utility Rate
Schedules E-4 (Medium Commercial Electric Service), E-4 TOU
(Medium Commercial Electric Time of Use Service), E-4G (Medium
Commercial Green Power Electric Service), E-7 (Large Commercial
Electric Service), E-7 TOU (Large Commercial Time of Use Electric
Service), and E-7G (Large Commercial Green Power Electric Service),
to Include Standby Service Charges
The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Utilities
Rule and Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) is amended as attached and
incorporated. This Utilities Rule and Regulation shall become effective on February 5, 2013.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Utility
Rate Schedules E-4 (Medium Commercial Electric Service), E-4 TOU (Medium Commercial
Electric Time of Use Service), and E-4G (Medium Commercial Green Power Electric Service), E-7
(Large Commercial Electric Service), E-7 TOU (Large Commercial Time of Use Electric Service),
and E-7G (Large Commercial Green Power Electric Service), are amended as attached and
incorporated. These utility rate schedules shall become effective as of February 5, 2013.
SECTION 3. Adoption of this resolution to add standby service charges to the six above-
referenced electric rate schedules has no effect on the other non-standby-related rates shown
on those rate schedules, nor on any of the City’s other electric rates.
SECTION 4. The Council finds that the rates adopted by this resolution are not special
taxes because they are charges imposed for a specific government service or product provided
directly to the payor that are not provided to those not charged, and which do not exceed the
reasonable costs to the City of providing the service or product.
SECTION 5. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not constitute a
project under the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code
section 21080, subdivision (b)(8) because the amended rates adopted by this resolution are
necessary to recover the costs of maintaining the City Electric Utility’s distribution system to
//
//
//
//
*NOT YET APPROVED*
121115 dm 6051819 2
serve peak customer load, as well as the costs of maintaining reserve generating capacity to
provide energy when needed by customers.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
___________________________ ___________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Sr. Deputy City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Director of Utilities
___________________________
Director of Administrative Services
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 1
A. ABBREVIATIONS
AMR - Automated Meter Reading
AER - Advance Engineering Request
Btu - British Thermal Unit
ccf - Hundred Cubic Feet
CEC - California Energy Commission
CPAU - City of Palo Alto Utilities
CPUC - California Public Utilities Commission.
DA - Direct Access
ERU - Equivalent Residential Unit
ESP - Energy Service Provider
FERC - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
GDA - Gas Direct Access
GSP - Gas Service Provider
GSPA - Gas Service Provider Agreement
kVar - Kilovar
kVarh - Kilovar-hours
kW - Kilowatt
kWh - Kilowatt-hour
MW - Megawatt
MMBtu - One million Btus.
NEC - National Electric Code, Latest Version
NRTL - Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory
PAMC - Palo Alto Municipal Code
PSIG - Per square inch gauge
PST - Pacific Standard Time
RWQCP - Regional Water Quality Control Plant
UUT - Utilities Users Tax
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 2
B. GENERAL DEFINITIONS
Account
The identification number in CPAU’s billing system for Utility Services.
Agency
Any local, county, state or federal governmental body or quasi-governmental body, including, without
limitation, the CPUC, the FERC and any joint powers agency, but excluding the City and any board,
commission or council of the City.
Applicant
An individual, corporation, partnership, Agency, or other legal entity or authorized agent of same, requesting
CPAU to supply any or all of the following:
1. Electric Service
2. Water Service
3. Gas Service
4. Wastewater Collection
5. Refuse and Recycling Collection
6. Storm and Surface Water Drainage Service
7. Fiber Optics Service
Or, an entity submitting an Application for Interconnection pursuant to Rule 27.
Application (for Interconnection of Generating Facilities)
An approved standard form (Load Sheet) submitted to CPAU for Interconnection of a Generating Facility.
Bidweek Price Index
The price reported in Natural Gas Intelligence “NGI’s Bidweek Survey”, California “PG&E Citygate” under
the column “avg.” for the calendar month.
Billing Period
Also “service period” or “billing cycle”. The normal Billing Period for CPAU Customers is approximately
30 days, with variations occurring due to staff availability, holiday scheduling, field verification of Meter
readings, or any other billing-related issues requiring additional investigation prior to issuance of the bill..
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 3
British Thermal Unit
Also “Btu”. The standard sub-unit of measurement comprising a Therm of natural Gas. One (1) Therm
equals 100,000 Btu.
Business Day
Any day, except a Saturday, Sunday, or any day observed as a legal holiday by the City.
Certification Test
A test pursuant to Rule 27 that verifies conformance of certain equipment with approved performance
standards in order to be classified as Certified Equipment. Certification Tests are performed by NRTLs.
Certification; Certified; Certificate
The documented results of a successful Certification Test.
Certified Equipment
Equipment that has passed all required Certification Tests.
Charge
Any assessment, cost, fee, surcharge or levy for Utility Service other than a Tax, including metered and
unmetered Utility Service, capacity, connections, construction, penalties, and mandated or required
Customer financial obligations for Service.
Charter
The Charter of the City of Palo Alto.
City Attorney
The individual designated as the City Attorney of the City under Section 2.08.120 of Chapter 2.08 of Title 2
of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and any Person who is designated the representative of the City Attorney.
City’s Collector
The Person(s) authorized under Section 5.20.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to provide collection,
removal and disposal of solid waste and Recyclable Materials pursuant to one or more written contracts with
the City.
City Manager
The individual designated as the City Manager of the City under Section 2.08.140 of Chapter 2.08 of Title 2
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 4
of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and any Person who is designated the representative of the City Manager.
City of Palo Alto, or City
The government of the City of Palo Alto, a chartered City and a municipal corporation duly organized and
validly existing under the Laws of the State of California, with a principal place of business located at 250
Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, County of Santa Clara. For the purposes of these Rules and Regulations, the
term “City” may include services provided by both the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department and the City of
Palo Alto Public Works Department.
City of Palo Alto Public Works Department (Public Works)
The City Department responsible for providing Refuse and Recycling, Wastewater Treatment and Storm and
Surface Water Drainage Utility Services. Other Utility Services such as Water, Gas, Electric, Wastewater
Collection, and Fiber Optics are provided by the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department.
City of Palo Alto Utilities Department (CPAU)
The City Department responsible for providing Water, Gas, Electric, Wastewater Collection and Fiber Optic
Utility Services. Other Utility Services such as Refuse and Recycling, Wastewater Treatment and Storm and
Surface Water Drainage are provided by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department.
Code
The words "the Code" or "this Code" shall mean the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
Commercial Service
Commercial Utility Service is provided to businesses, non-profit organizations, public institutions, and
industrial Customers. The term also applies to Utility Services through Master Meters serving multi-family
Residential dwellings and common areas of multi-family facilities.
Compostable Materials
Organic materials designated by the City as acceptable for collection and processing.
Cubic Foot of Gas (cf)
The quantity of Gas that, at a temperature of sixty (60) degrees Fahrenheit and a pressure of 14.73 pounds
per square inch absolute, occupies one cubic foot.
Curtailment
The act of reducing or interrupting the delivery of natural Gas.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 5
Customer
The Person, corporation, Agency, or entity that receives or is entitled to receive Utility Service(s) from the
City of Palo Alto, or in whose name Service is rendered for a particular Account as evidenced by the
signature on the Application, contract, or agreement for Service. In the absence of a signed instrument, a
Customer shall be identified by the receipt of any payment of bills regularly issued in the name of the
Person, corporation, or Agency regardless of the identity of the actual user of the Utility Service(s).
Dark Fiber
A Fiber Optic cable provided to end-users or resellers by CPAU without any of the light transmitters,
receivers, or electronics required for telecommunications over the Fiber. Infrastructure for Fiber Optic
activation is provided by the reseller or end-user.
Dark Fiber Infrastructure
Components of the CPAU Fiber Optic Distribution System required to provide Service to Customers
(licensees), that are attached, owned, controlled or used by the City, located overhead or underground within
the Public Right-of-Way, the Public Utility Easements and Leased Service Properties.
Dedicated Distribution Transformer
A Distribution Transformer that is dedicated to serving a single premise.
Demand
The highest rate of delivery of Electric energy, measured in Kilowatts (kW) or kilovolt amperes (kVA)
occurring instantaneously or registered over a fixed time period (normally fifteen minutes unless otherwise
specified within a monthly billing cycle).
Demand Charge
An electrical Charge or rate that is applied to a metered Demand reading expressed in Kilowatts to compute
a Demand Charge component of a Customer’s Electric bill.
Demarcation Point
The Demarcation Point for a project shall be the Customer side of the panel onto which the CPAU Fiber
terminates within the Customer Premises, unless otherwise specified in the Proposal for Dark Fiber Services.
Direct Access (DA)
The election by a Customer to procure its Gas Supply Services, from an Energy Service Provider, other than
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 6
CPAU. In this situation, a Customer deals directly with an ESP for commodity supply, while distribution
and applicable transmission services would continue to be provided by CPAU.
Direct Access Service Request (DASR)
The form required to initiate Direct Access Service.
Distribution Services
Includes, but is not limited to, Utility Service provided by the Distribution System and other Services such as
billing, meter reading, administration, marketing, and Customer Services. Does not include Services directly
related to the Interconnection of a Generating Facility as per Rule 27.
Distribution System
The infrastructure owned and operated by CPAU which is capable of transmitting electrical power, other
than Interconnection Facilities, or transporting Water, Wastewater, or Gas within the City of Palo Alto. The
Electric Distribution System transmits power from the City’s Interconnection with PG&E to CPAU’s Meter
located on the Customer’s Premises. The Gas Distribution System transports Gas from PG&E receiving
stations to CPAU’s Meter located on the Customer Premises. The Water Distribution System transports
Water from the San Francisco Water Department receiving stations and CPAU wells to the meter located on
the Customer Premises. The Wastewater Collection System transports sewage from the Customer’s
Premises to the Water Quality Control Plant.
Distribution and Transmission Services
Services provided by CPAU to effect the physical delivery of Energy Services provided by the Energy
Services Provider from the Point of Receipt to the Direct Access Customer’s Service Address.
Effluent
Treated or untreated Wastewater flowing out of a Wastewater treatment facility, sewer, or industrial outfall.
Electric, Electric Service
Utility Service provided to residents and business owners in the City of Palo Alto consisting of generation,
transmission, and distribution of electrical power for retail use. Electric Service is provided by the City of
Palo Alto Utilities Department.
Emergency
An actual or imminent condition or situation, which jeopardizes CPAU’s Distribution System Integrity.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 7
Emergency Service
Electric Service supplied to, or made available to, Load devices which are operated only in Emergency
situations or in testing for same.
Energy Services
Energy commodity and any applicable ancillary Services used to generate and transport such commodity
from its origin to the City’s Point of Receipt. May also mean the sale of value added Services associated or
related to the Provision and/or usage of energy commodity.
Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU)
This is the basic unit for computing storm and surface water drainage fees. All single-family Residential
properties are billed the number of ERU’s specified in the table contained in Utility Rate Schedule D-1,
according to parcel size. All other properties have ERU's computed to the nearest 1/10 ERU using this
formula: No. Of ERU = Impervious Area (sq. ft.) / 2,500 sq. ft.
Fiber Optic, Fiber Optic Service
A solid core of optical transmission material. Fiber Optic Service that is provided by the City of Palo Alto
Utilities Department is referred to as Dark Fiber.
Fiber Optic Backbone
The high-density portion of the Dark Fiber Infrastructure installed and owned by the City.
Force Majeure
The occurrence of any event that has, had or may have an adverse effect on the design, construction,
installation, management, operation, testing, use or enjoyment of the City’s Utility Services, which is beyond
the reasonable control of the parties and which event includes, but is not limited to, an Act of God, an
irresistible superhuman cause, an act of a superior governmental authority, an act of a public enemy, a labor
dispute or strike or a boycott which could not be reasonably contemplated by the City or Customer affected
thereby, a defect in manufactured equipment (including, but not limited to, the Dark Fibers), fire, floods,
earthquakes, or any other similar cause.
Full Service; Fully Bundled Service
Provision by CPAU of both Distribution and Transmission Services and Energy or Gas
Commodity Services to its Customer(s).
Function
Some combination of hardware and software designed to provide specific features or capabilities. Its use, as
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 8
in Protective Function, is intended to encompass a range of implementations from a single-purpose device to
a section of software and specific pieces of hardware within a larger piece of equipment to a collection of
devices and software.
Gas
Any combustible Gas or vapor, or combustible mixture of gaseous constituents used to produce heat by
burning. It shall include, but not be limited to, natural Gas, Gas manufactured from coal or oil, Gas obtained
from biomass or from landfill, or a mixture of any or all of the above.
Gas, Gas Service
Utility Service provided to residents and business owners in the City of Palo Alto consisting of procurement,
transmission, and distribution of Gas for retail use. Gas Service is provided by the City of Palo Alto Utilities
Department.
Gas Direct Access (GDA)
The election by a Customer to procure its natural Gas, and related natural Gas Services, from a Gas Service
Provider, other than CPAU. In this situation, a Customer obtains natural Gas commodity directly from a
GSP, but local transmission of the natural Gas commodity is effectuated by CPAU in accordance with the
terms of CPAU’s Natural Gas Service Agreement with PG&E. Also, Distribution Services would continue
to be provided by CPAU.
Gas Direct Access Service Request (GDASR)
The form required to initiate Gas Direct Access Service.
Gas Service Provider (GSP)
The Person who procures, schedules, nominates and arranges transport of natural Gas to Gas Direct Access
Customers, including its successors and assigns.
Gas Service Provider Agreement (GSPA)
The contract between CPAU and the Gas Direct Access Customer’s Gas Service Provider that establishes
the terms and conditions under which Gas Services may be provided to the Gas Direct Access Customer.
Generating Facility
All Generators, electrical wires, equipment, and other facilities owned or provided by Producer for the
purpose of producing Electric power. This includes a solar or wind turbine electrical generating facility that
is the subject of a Net Energy Metering and Interconnection Agreement and Rule and Regulation 29.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 9
Generator
A device converting mechanical, chemical or solar energy into electrical energy, including all of its
protective and control Functions and structural appurtenances. One or more Generators comprise a
Generating Facility.
Gross Nameplate Rating; Gross Nameplate Capacity
The total gross generating capacity of a Generator or Generating Facility as designated by the
manufacturer(s) of the Generator(s).
Initial Review
The review by CPAU, following receipt of an Application, to determine the following: (a) whether the
Generating Facility qualifies for Simplified Interconnection; or (b) if the Generating Facility can be made to
qualify for Interconnection with a Supplemental Review determining any additional requirements.
Inspector
The authorized Inspector, agent, or representative of CPAU.
Interconnection; Interconnected
The physical connection of a Generating Facility in accordance with the requirements of the City’s Utilities
Rules and Regulations so that Parallel Operation with CPAU’s Distribution System can occur (has
occurred).
Interconnection Agreement
An agreement between CPAU and the Producer providing for the Interconnection of a Generating Facility
that gives certain rights and obligations to effect or end Interconnection. For the purposes of the City’s
Utilities Rules and Regulations, the Net Energy Metering and Interconnection Agreement, and the Power
Purchase Agreements authorized by the City Council may be considered as Interconnection Agreements for
purposes of defining such term.
Interconnection Facilities
The electrical wires, switches and related equipment that are required in addition to the facilities required to
provide Electric Distribution Service to a Customer to allow Interconnection. Interconnection Facilities may
be located on either side of the Point of Common Coupling as appropriate to their purpose and design.
Interconnection Facilities may be integral to a Generating Facility or provided separately.
Interconnection Study
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 10
A study to establish the requirements for Interconnection of a Generating Facility with CPAU’s Distribution
System.
Internet Exchange
Any Internet data center for telecommunications equipment and computer equipment for the purposes of
enabling traffic exchange and providing commercial-grade data center services.
Interstate Transportation (or Transmission)
Transportation of Gas on a pipeline system under the regulation of the FERC.
Island; Islanding
A condition on CPAU’s Electric Distribution System in which one or more Generating Facilities deliver
power to Customers using a portion of CPAU’s Distribution System that is electrically isolated from the
remainder of CPAU’s Distribution System.
Junction
A location on the Dark Fiber Infrastructure where equipment is installed for the purpose of connecting
communication cables.
Junction Site
The area within the Transmission Pathway at which a Junction is located.
Kilovar (kVar)
A unit of reactive power equal to 1,000 reactive volt-amperes.
Kilovar-hours (kVarh)
The amount of reactive flow in one hour, at a constant rate of Kilovar.
Kilowatt (kW)
A unit of power equal to 1,000 watts.
Kilowatt-hour (kWh)
The amount of energy delivered in one hour, when delivery is at a constant rate of one Kilowatt; a standard
unit of billing for electrical energy.
Law
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 11
Any administrative or judicial act, decision, bill, Certificate, Charter, Code, constitution, opinion, order,
ordinance, policy, procedure, Rate, Regulation, resolution, Rule, Schedule, specification, statute, tariff, or
other requirement of any district, local, municipal, county, joint powers, state, or federal Agency, or any
other Agency having joint or several jurisdiction over the City of Palo Alto or City of Palo Alto Utilities or
Public Works Customers, including, without limitation, any regulation or order of an official or quasi-
official entity or body.
Licensed Fibers
One or more fibers comprising a part of the Dark Fiber Infrastructure that are dedicated to the exclusive use
of the Customer under the Provisions of the Dark Fiber License Agreement, Proposal to Dark Fiber Services
Agreement and the Utilities Rules and Regulations.
Licensed Fibers Route
A defined path of Licensed Fibers that is identified by specific End Points.
Load(s)
The Electric power Demand (kW) of the Customer at its Service Address within a measured period of time,
normally 15 minutes or the quantity of Gas required by a Customer at its Service Address, measured in
MMBtu per Day.
Main Wastewater Line
Any Wastewater line not including a building connection (Service) sewer.
Master-metering
Where CPAU installs one Service and Meter to supply more than one residence, apartment dwelling unit,
mobile home space, store, or office.
Maximum Generation
For a customer with a non-utility generator located on the customer’s side of the Point of Common
Coupling, the Maximum Generation for that non-utility generator during any billing period is the maximum
average generation in kilowatts taken during any 15-minute interval in that billing period provided that in
case the generator output is intermittent or subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute
interval.
Meter
The instrument owned and maintained by CPAU that is used for measuring either the Electricity, Gas or
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 12
Water delivered to the Customer.
Metering
The measurement of electrical power flow in kW and/or energy in kWh, and, if necessary, reactive power in
kVar at a point, and its display to CPAU as required by Rule 27.
Metering Equipment
All equipment, hardware, software including Meter cabinets, conduit, etc., that are necessary for Metering.
Meter Read
The recording of usage data from Metering Equipment.
Minimum Charge
The least amount for which Service will be rendered in accordance with the Rate Schedule.
Momentary Parallel Operation
The Interconnection of a Generating Facility to the Distribution System for one second (60 cycles) or less.
Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL)
A laboratory accredited to perform the Certification Testing requirements under Rule 27.
Net Energy Metering
Net Energy Metering means measuring the difference between the electricity supplied through CPAU’s
Electric utility Distribution System and the electricity generated by the customer-generator’s facility and
delivered to CPAU’s Electric utility Distribution System over a specified twelve-month period.
Net Generation Metering
Metering of the net electrical power of energy output in kW or energy in kWh, from a given Generating
Facility. This may also be the measurement of the difference between the total electrical energy produced by
a Generator and the electrical energy consumed by the auxiliary equipment necessary to operate the
Generator.
Net Nameplate Rating
The Gross Nameplate Rating minus the consumption of electrical power of a Generator or Generating
Facility as designated by the manufacturer(s) of the Generator(s).
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 13
Non-Islanding
Designed to detect and disconnect from an Unintended Island with matched Load and generation. Reliance
solely on under/over voltage and frequency trip is not considered sufficient to qualify as Non-Islanding.
Occupied Domestic Dwelling
Any house, cottage, flat, or apartment unit having a kitchen, bath, and sleeping facilities, which is occupied
by a Person or Persons.
Parallel Operation
The simultaneous operation of a Generator with power delivered or received by CPAU while Interconnected.
For the purpose of this Rule, Parallel Operation includes only those Generating Facilities that are
Interconnected with CPAU’s Distribution System for more than 60 cycles (one second).
Performance Test, Performance Tested
After the completion of any Fiber Interconnection work, the City will conduct a Performance Test of each
Fiber constituting a part of the proposed leased fibers to determine its compliance with the Performance
Specifications.
Performance Specifications
These specifications will include, but not be limited to, criteria relating to end-to-end optical time domain
reflectometer data plots that identify the light optical transmission losses in each direction along the leased
fibers whenever the testing is possible, measured in decibels at a wavelength of 1310 or 1550 nanometers
for singlemode Fiber, as a Function of distance, measured in kilometers.
Person
Any individual, for profit corporation, nonprofit corporation, limited liability company, partnership, limited
liability partnership, joint venture, business, family or testamentary trust, sole proprietorship, or other form
of business association.
PG&E Citygate
The PG&E Citygate is the point at which PG&E’s backbone transmission system connects to PG&E’s local
transmission system.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 14
Point of Common Coupling (PCC)
The transfer point for electricity between the electrical conductors of CPAU and the electrical conductors of
the Producer.
Point of Common Coupling Metering
Metering located at the Point of Common Coupling. This is the same Metering as Net Generation Metering
for Generating Facilities with no host load.
Point of Delivery (POD)
Unless otherwise specified, the following definitions apply: For Electric, that location where the Service
lateral conductors connect to the Customer’s Service entrance equipment; for overhead Services, the POD is
at the weather-head connection; for under-ground Services, the POD is located at the terminals ahead of or at
the Meter; for multiple Meter arrangements with connections in a gutter, the POD is at the Meter terminals
(supply-side); for multiple Meter arrangements in a switchboard, the POD is typically at the connectors in
the utility entrance section; for Natural Gas, the POD is the point(s) on the Distribution System where the
City delivers natural Gas that it has transported to the Customer.
Point of Interconnection
The electrical transfer point between a Generating Facility and the Distribution System. This may or may
not be coincident with the Point of Common Coupling.
Point of Receipt
The designated location at which CPAU receives Gas supplied by a GSP on behalf of a GDA Customer. The
Point of Receipt for Gas will be designated in the GSPA.
Point of Service (POS)
Where CPAU connects the Electric Service lateral to its Distribution System. For Fiber Optics Service, this
is where CPAU connects the Fiber Service to the backbone. This point is usually a box located in or near the
street or sidewalk and can be in the Public Right-of-Way. This point is at a mutually agreed upon location
established at the time of installation.
Pole Line
Overhead wires and overhead structures, including poles, towers, support wires, conductors, guys, studs,
platforms, cross arms braces, transformers, insulators, cutouts, switches, communication circuits, appliances
attachments, and appurtenances, located above ground and used or useful in supplying Electric,
communication, or similar or associated Service.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 15
Power Factor
The percent of total power delivery (kVA) which does useful work. For billing purposes, average Power
Factor is calculated from a trigonometric function of the ratio of reactive kilovolt-ampere-hours to the
Kilowatt-hours consumed during the billing month. Power Factor is a ratio that reflects the reactive power
used by a Customer. CPAU maintains an overall system Power Factor above 95% to reduce distribution
system losses caused by low Power Factor.
Power Factor Adjustment
CPAU must install additional equipment to correct for Customers that maintain a low Power Factor, and
may make a Power Factor Adjustment to a Customer’s bill to account for those costs and the additional
energy costs and losses incurred by CPAU due to the Customer’s low Power Factor.
Premises
All structures, apparatus, or portion thereof occupied or operated by an individual(s), a family, or a business
enterprise, and situated on an integral parcel of land undivided by a public street, highway, or railway.
Primary Service
CPAU Electric distribution Service provided to a Customer’s Premises at a voltage level equal to or greater
than 1000 volts.
Producer
The entity that executes an Interconnection Agreement with CPAU. The Producer may or may not own or
operate the Generating Facility, but is responsible for the rights and obligations related to the Interconnection
Agreement.
Proposal for Dark Fiber Services
A project-specific Service agreement that acts as a supplemental document for the Dark Fiber License
Agreement. This Service agreement shall include the proposed Interconnection fees, applicable Fiber
licensing fees, term of the Service, and summary of licensed Fiber elements.
Protective Function(s)
The equipment, hardware and/or software in a Generating Facility (whether discrete or integrated with other
Functions) whose purpose is to protect against Unsafe Operating Conditions.
Provision
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 16
Any agreement, circumstance, clause, condition, covenant, fact, objective, qualification, restriction, recital,
reservation, representation, term, warranty, or other stipulation in a contract or in Law that defines or
otherwise controls, establishes, or limits the performance required or permitted by any party.
Prudent Utility Practices
The methods, protocols, and procedures that are currently used or employed by utilities to design, engineer,
select, construct, operate and maintain facilities in a dependable, reliable, safe, efficient and economic
manner.
Public Right-of-Way
The areas owned, occupied or used by the City for the purposes of furnishing retail and/or wholesale
Electricity, Gas, Water, Wastewater, Storm and Surface Water Drainage, Refuse and recycling or
communications commodity and/or distribution Service, and the means of public transportation, to the
general public, including but not limited to, the public alleys, avenues, boulevards, courts, curbs, gutters,
lanes, places, roads, sidewalks, sidewalk planter areas, streets, and ways.
Public Utility Easements
The areas occupied or used by the City for the purpose of providing Utility Service to the general public, and
all related Services offered by the City’s Utilities Department and/or Public Works Department, the rights of
which were acquired by easements appurtenant or in gross, or are other interests or estates in real property,
or are the highest use permitted to be granted by the nature of the City’s interest in and to the affected real
property. This term incorporates all public Service easements for Utility Services that have been recorded by
the City with the Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, California.
Public Works Department
See City of Palo Alto Public Works Department.
Rate Schedule
One or more Council-adopted documents setting forth the Charges and conditions for a particular class or
type of Utility Service. A Rate Schedule includes wording such as Schedule number, title, class of Service,
applicability, territory, rates, conditions, and references to Rules.
Recyclable Materials
Materials designated by the City as acceptable for recycling collection and processing.
Reserved Capacity
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 17
For a customer with one or more non-utility generators located on the customer’s side of the Point of
Common Coupling, the Reserved Capacity for each billing period is the lesser of 1) the sum of the
Maximum Generation for that period for all non-utility generation sources; or 2) the maximum average
customer demand in kilowatts taken during any 15-minute interval in the billing period provided that in case
the load is intermittent or subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute interval.
Residential Service
Utility Service provided to separately metered single family or multi-family, domestic dwelling.
Rules and Regulations
See Utilities Rules and Regulations
Scheduling Coordinator
An entity providing the coordination of power schedules and nominations to effect transportation and
distribution of Gas, Electric power and energy.
Secondary Service
CPAU Electric distribution Service provided to a Customer’s Premises at a voltage level less than 1000
volts.
Service(s)
Utility Services offered by the City of Palo Alto include Electric, Fiber Optics, Gas, Water, Wastewater
Collection services provided by the Utilities Department (CPAU); and Refuse and Recycling, Wastewater
Treatment, and Storm and Surface Water Drainage Services provided by the Public Works Department.
Service Address
The official physical address of the building or facility assigned by CPAU’s Planning Department, at which
Customer receives Utility Services.
Service Charge
A fixed monthly Charge applicable on certain Rate Schedules that does not vary with consumption. The
Charge is intended to recover a portion of certain fixed costs.
Service Drop
The overhead Electric Service conductors from the last pole or other aerial support to and including the
splices, if any, connecting to the service entrance conductors at the building or other structure. Or, in the case
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 18
of Fiber Optic Drops, the overhead Fiber Optics cable from the last pole or other aerial support to the
building or other structure to and including the termination box.
Services or Service Lines
Facilities of CPAU, excluding transformers and Meters, between CPAU’s infrastructure and the Point of
Delivery to the Customer.
Service Territory
The geographic boundaries within the City of Palo Alto limits served by the physical Distribution System of
the CPAU.
Short Circuit (Current) Contribution Ratio (SCCR)
The ratio of the Generating Facility’s short circuit contribution to the short circuit contribution provided
through CPAU’s Distribution System for a three-phase fault at the high voltage side of the distribution
transformer connecting the Generating Facility to CPAU’s system.
Simplified Interconnection
An Interconnection conforming to the minimum requirements as determined under Rule 27, Section I.
Single Line Diagram; Single Line Drawing
A schematic drawing, showing the major Electric switchgear, Protective Function devices, wires,
Generators, transformers and other devices, providing sufficient detail to communicate to a qualified
engineer the essential design and safety of the system being considered.
Special Facilities
See CPAU’s Rule and Regulation 20 governing Special Facilities.
Splice
A point where two separate sections of Fiber are physically connected.
Standard Refuse Container
A Standard Refuse Container shall have the meaning described in the Palo Alto Municipal Code. A
Standard Container shall also include a wheeled container with a capacity of not to exceed 32 gallons.
Standby Service
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 19
Back-up Energy Services provided by CPAU.
Storm and Surface Water Drainage
Utility Service provided to residents and business owners in the City of Palo Alto.
Storm and Surface Water Drainage Service is provided by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department.
Supplemental Review
A process wherein CPAU further reviews an Application that fails one or more of the Initial Review Process
screens. The Supplemental Review may result in one of the following: (a) approval of Interconnection;
(b) approval of Interconnection with additional requirements; or (c) cost and schedule for an Interconnection
Study.
System Integrity
The condition under which a Distribution System is deemed safe and can reliably perform its intended
Functions in accordance with the safety and reliability rules of CPAU.
Tax
Any assessment, Charge, imposition, license, or levy (including any Utility Users Tax) and imposed by any
Agency, including the City.
Telemetering
The electrical or electronic transmittal of Metering data in real-time to CPAU.
Temporary Service
Service requested for limited period of time or of indeterminate duration such as, but not limited to, Service
to provide power for construction, seasonal sales lots (Christmas trees), carnivals, rock crushers or paving
plants. Temporary Service does not include Emergency, breakdown, or Standby Service.
Therm
A Therm is a unit of heat energy equal to 100,000 British Thermal Units (Btu). It is approximately the
energy equivalent of burning 100 cubic feet (often referred to as 1 ccf) of natural Gas. Since Meters measure
volume and not energy content, a Therm factor is used to convert the volume of Gas used to its heat
equivalent, and thus calculate the actual energy use. The Therm factor is usually in the units therms/ccf. It
will vary with the mix of hydrocarbons in the natural Gas. Natural Gas with a higher than average
concentration of ethane, propane or butane will have a higher Therm factor. Impurities, such as carbon
dioxide or nitrogen lower the Therm factor.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 20
Transfer Trip
A Protective Function that trips a Generating Facility remotely by means of an automated communications
link controlled by CPAU.
Transmission Pathway
Those areas of the Public Right-of-Way, the Public Utility Easements and the Leased Service Properties in
which the Dark Fiber Infrastructure is located.
Trap
Any approved equipment or appliance for sealing an outlet from a house-connection sewer to
prevent the escape of sewer Gas from a main line through a building connection (service) sewer.
Underground Utility District
An area in the City within which poles, overhead electric or telecommunication wires, and associated
overhead structures are prohibited or as otherwise defined in Section 12.04.050 of the PAMC.
Unintended Island
The creation of an Island, usually following a loss of a portion of CPAU’s Distribution System, without the
approval of CPAU.
Unsafe Operating Conditions
Conditions that, if left uncorrected, could result in harm to personnel, damage to equipment, loss of System
Integrity or operation outside pre-established parameters required by the Interconnection Agreement.
Utilities Department
See City of Palo Alto Utilities Department.
Utilities Director
The individual designated as the Director of Utilities Department under Section 2.08.200 of Chapter 2.08 of
Title 2 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and any Person who is designated the representative of the director
of utilities.
Utility(ies) Rules and Regulations, Rules and Regulations
The compendium of Utilities Rules and Regulations prepared by the City’s Utilities and Public Works
Departments and adopted by ordinance or resolution of the Council pursuant to Chapter 12.20 of the Palo
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
RULE AND REGULATION 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES RULES AND REGULATIONS
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-1-2012 2-5-2013
Sheet No 21
Alto Municipal Code, as amended from time to time.
Utility(ies) Service(s), Service(s)
Electric, fiber optics, water, gas, wastewater collection services provided by the City of Palo Alto Utilities
Department (CPAU) and Refuse and Recycling, Wastewater Treatment and Storm and Surface Water
Drainage services provided by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department.
Utilities User Tax (UUT)
City of Palo Alto Tax imposed on Utility Charges to a Water, Gas, and/or Electric Service user. This may
include Charges made for Electricity, Gas, and Water and Charges for Service including Customer Charges,
Service Charges, Standby Charges, Charges for Temporary Services, Demand Charges, and annual and
monthly Charges, as described in Chapter 2.35 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
Wastewater
Utility Service provided to residents and business owners in the City of Palo Alto. Wastewater Utility
Services include collection and treatment of Wastewater. Wastewater Collection Service is provided by the
City of Palo Alto Utilities Department, and Wastewater Treatment Service is provided by the City of Palo
Alto Public Works Department.
Water
Utility Service provided to residents and business owners in the City of Palo Alto for retail use. Water
Service is provided by the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department.
Water Column (WC)
Pressure unit based on the difference in inches between the heights of water columns as measured in a
manometer. 6” WC = 0.217 psi; 7” WC = 0.25 psi.
Yard Trimmings
Yard Trimmings means those materials defined in Section 5.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
(END)
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered secondary Electric Service for customers with a Maximum
Demand below 1,000 kilowatts. This schedule applies to three-phase Electric Service and may
include Service to master-metered multi-family facilities or other facilities requiring Demand-
metered services, as determined by the City.
B. TERRITORY:
This rate schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. UNBUNDLED RATES:
Rates per kilowatt (kW) and kilowatt-hour (kWh):
Commodity Distribution
Public
Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $5.31 $15.23 $20.54
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.06083 0.01767 0.00321 0.08171
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $4.80 $9.04 $13.84
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.05281 0.01716 0.00321 0.07318
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Cost Components
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges and/or taxes. On a customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-2
2. Seasonal Rate Changes
The Summer Period is effective May 1 to October 31 and the Winter Period is effective from
November 1 to April 30. When the billing period includes use both in the Summer and the
Winter Periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each seasonal
period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein. For further discussion of bill
calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
3. Maximum Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kWh for three consecutive months,
a Maximum Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is practicable and thereafter
continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has fallen below 6,000 kWh for twelve
consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the City, it may be removed.
The Maximum Demand in any month will be the maximum average power in kilowatts taken
during any 15-minute interval in the month, provided that in case the load is intermittent or
subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute interval. A thermal-type Demand
meter which does not reset after a definite time interval may be used at the City's option.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts for the current month. An exception is that the Billing
Demand for customers with Thermal Energy Storage (TES) will be based upon the actual
Maximum Demand of such customers between the hours of noon and 6 pm on weekdays.
4. Power Factor
For new or existing customers whose Demand is expected to exceed or has exceeded 300
kilowatts for three consecutive months, the City has the option of installing applicable
metering to calculate a Power Factor. The City may remove such metering from the Service
of a customer whose Demand has been below 200 kilowatts for four consecutive months.
When such metering is installed, the monthly Electric bill will include a “Power Factor
penaltyAdjustment”, if applicable. The penalty adjustment will be applied to a customer’s
bill prior to the computation of any primary voltage discount. The Power Factor penalty
Adjustment is applied by increasing the total energy and Demand charges for any month by
0.25 percent (0.25%) for each one percent (1%) that the monthly Power Factor of the
customer’s load was less than 95%.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-3
The monthly Power Factor is the average Power Factor based on the ratio of kilowatt hours
to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month. Where time-of-day metering is
installed, the monthly Power Factor shall be the Power Factor coincident with the customer's
Maximum Demand.
5. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers may request a rate schedule change at any time to any City of Palo Alto full-
service rate schedule as is applicable to their kilowatt-Demand and kilowatt-hour usage
profile.
6. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2 1/2 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed provided the City is not required to supply Service at a particular line voltage where
it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally or better suited
to the customer's electrical requirements. The City retains the right to change its line voltage
at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any customer receiving a discount
hereunder and affected by such change. The customer then has the option to change his
system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept Service (without voltage
discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to a maximum kilovolt-
ampere size limitation.
7. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(7)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-4
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.69 $15.23 $15.92
Winter Period $0.63 $9.04 $9.67
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand (as defined in Section D.3)
occurs when one or more of the non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the
City’s revenue meter are not operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the
sum of the Maximum Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall
the Customer’s Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4), as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-TOU-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-TOU-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered secondary Electric Service for customers with Demand
between 500 and 1,000 kilowatts per month and who have sustained this level of usage for at least
three consecutive months during the most recent 12 month period. This schedule applies to
three-phase Electric Service and may include Service to master-metered multi-family facilities or
other facilities requiring Demand-metered services, as determined by the City. In addition, this rate
schedule is applicable for customers who did not pay Power Factor penalties Adjustments during the
last 12 months.
B. TERRITORY:
This rate schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. UNBUNDLED RATES:
Rates per kilowatt (kW) and kilowatt-hour (kWh):
Commodity Distribution Public Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW)
Peak $3.12 $8.96 $12.08
Mid-Peak 1.99 5.65 7.64
Off-Peak 1.13 3.26 4.39
Energy Charge (per kWh)
Peak $0.10963 $0.03242 $0.00321 $0.14526
Mid-Peak 0.05617 0.01623 0.00321 0.07561
Off-Peak 0.04298 0.01218 0.00321 0.05837
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW)
Peak $2.77 $5.10 $7.87
Off-Peak 1.49 2.94 4.43
Energy Charge (per kWh)
Peak $0.07003 $0.02296 $0.00321 $0.09620
Off-Peak 0.04088 0.01313 0.00321 0.05722
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-TOU-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-TOU-2
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Cost Components
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges and/or taxes. On a Customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
2. Definition of Time Periods
SUMMER PERIOD (Service from May 1 to October 31):
Peak: 12:00 noon to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
Mid Peak: 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon Monday through Friday (except holidays)
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Off-Peak: 9:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
All day Saturday, Sunday, and holidays
WINTER PERIOD (Service from November 1 to April 30):
Peak: 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
Off-Peak: 9:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
All day Saturday, Sunday, and holidays
HOLIDAYS: “Holidays” for the purposes of this rate schedule are New Years Day,
President’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving
Day, and Christmas Day. The dates will be those on which the holidays are legally observed.
SEASONAL RATE CHANGES: When the billing period includes use in both the Summer
and the Winter periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each
seasonal period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein.. For further discussion
of bill calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-TOU-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-TOU-3
3. Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kilowatt-hours for three
consecutive months, a Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is practicable and
thereafter continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has fallen below 6,000
kilowatt-hours for twelve consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the City, it
may be removed.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts taken during any 15-minute interval in each of the
designated Time periods as defined under Section D.2.
4. Power Factor PenaltyAdjustment
Time of Use customers must not have had a Power Factor penalty Adjustment assessed on
their Service for at least 12 months. Power factor is calculated based on the ratio of kilowatt
hours to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month, and must not have fallen below
95% to avoid the Power Factor penaltyAdjustment.
Should the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department find that the Customer’s Service should be
subject to Power Factor penaltiesAdjustments, the Customer will be removed from the E-4-
TOU rate schedule and placed on another applicable rate schedule as is suitable to their
kilowatt Demand and kilowatt-hour usage.
5. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers electing to be served under E-4 TOU must remain on said schedule for a
minimum of 12 months. Should the Customer so wish, at the end of 12 months, the
Customer may request a rate schedule change to any applicable City of Palo Alto full-service
rate schedule as is suitable to their kilowatt Demand and kilowatt-hour usage.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-TOU-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-TOU-4
6. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2 1/2 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed provided the City is not required to supply Service at a particular line voltage where
it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally or better suited
to the Customer's electrical requirements. The City retains the right to change its line voltage
at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any Customer receiving a discount
hereunder and affected by such change. The Customer then has the option to change his
system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept Service (without voltage
discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to a maximum kilovolt-
ampere size limitation.
7. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(7)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.69 $15.23 $15.92
Winter Period $0.63 $9.04 $9.67
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand occurs when one or more of the
non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter are not
operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the sum of the Maximum
Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall the Customer’s
Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-TOU-5 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-TOU-5
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4), as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-G-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-G-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered secondary Electric Service for Customers with a
Maximum Demand below 1,000 kilowatts (kW) who receive power under the Palo Alto Green plan.
This schedule applies to three-phase Electric Service and may include Service to master-metered
multi-family facilities or other facilities requiring Demand-metered Services, as determined by the
City.
B. TERRITORY:
The rate schedule applies everywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. UNBUNDLED RATES: (1000 kWh block option):
Commodity Distribution Public Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $5.31 $15.23 $20.54
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.06083 0.01767 0.00321 0.08171
Palo Alto Green Charge (per 1000 kWh block) 15.00
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $4.80 $9.04 $13.84
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.05281 0.01716 0.00321 0.07318
Palo Alto Green Charge (per 1000 kWh block) 15.00
(100% Renewable Green option):
Commodity Distribution
Public
Benefits
Palo
Alto
Green Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $5.31 $15.23 $20.54
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.06083 0.01767 0.00321 0.0150 0.09671
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $4.80 $9.04 $13.84
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.05281 0.01716 0.00321 0.0150 0.08818
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-G-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-G-2
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Cost Components
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges, and/or taxes. On a Customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
2. Seasonal Rate Changes
The Summer Period is effective May 1 to October 31 and the Winter Period is effective from
November 1 to April 30. When the billing period includes use both in the Summer and the
Winter Periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each seasonal
period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein. For further discussion of bill
calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
3. Maximum Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kilowatt-hours for three
consecutive months, a Maximum Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is
practicable and thereafter continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has dropped
below 6,000 kilowatt-hours for twelve consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the
City, it may be removed.
The Maximum Demand in any month will be the maximum average power in kilowatts taken
during any 15-minute interval in the month provided that in case the load is intermittent or
subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute interval. A thermal-type Demand
meter, which does not reset after a definite time interval, may be used at the City's option.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts for the current month. An exception is that the Billing
Demand for Customers with Thermal Energy Storage (TES) will be based upon the actual
Maximum Demand of such Customers between the hours of noon and 6 PM on weekdays.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-G-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-G-3
4. Power Factor
For new or existing Customers whose Demand is expected to exceed or has exceeded 300
kilowatts for three consecutive months, the City has the option of installing applicable
metering to calculate a Power Factor. The City may remove such metering from the Service
of a Customer whose Demand has dropped below 200 kilowatts for four consecutive months.
When such metering is installed, the monthly Electric bill will include a “Power Factor
penaltyAdjustment”, if applicable. The penalty adjustment will be applied to a Customer’s
bill prior to the computation of any primary voltage discount. The Power Factor penalty
Adjustment is applied by increasing the total energy and Demand charges for any month by
0.25 percent or (1/4) for each one percent (1%) that the monthly Power Factor of the
Customer’s load was less than 95%.
The monthly Power Factor is the average Power Factor based on the ratio of kilowatt-hours
to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month. Where time-of-day metering is
installed, the monthly Power Factor shall be the Power Factor coincident with the Customer's
Maximum Demand.
5. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers may request a rate schedule change at any time to any applicable full-service rate
schedule as is applicable to their kilowatt-Demand and kilowatt-hour usage profile.
6. Palo Alto Green Participation
Customers choosing to participate shall fill out a Palo Alto Green Power Program application
provided by the Customer Service Center. Customers may request at any time, in writing, a
change to the number of blocks they wish to purchase under the Palo Alto Green plan.
Palo Alto Green provides for either the purchase of enough renewable energy credits (RECs)
to match 100% of the energy usage at the facility every month, or for the purchase of 1000
kilowatt-hour (kWh) blocks. These REC purchases support the production of renewable
energy, increase the financial value of power from renewal sources, and creates a transparent
and sustainable market that encourages new development of wind and solar.
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-G-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-G-4
7. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2.5 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed provided the City is not required to supply Service at a particular line voltage where
it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally or better suited
to the Customer's electrical requirements. The City retains the right to change its line voltage
at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any Customer receiving a discount
hereunder and affected by such change. The Customer then has the option to change the
system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept Service (without voltage
discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to a maximum kilovolt-
ampere size limitation.
8. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(8)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.69 $15.23 $15.92
Winter Period $0.63 $9.04 $9.67
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand (as defined in Section D.3)
occurs when one or more of the non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the
City’s revenue meter are not operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the
sum of the Maximum Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-4-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-4-G-5 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-4-G-5
the Customer’s Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4) , as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered secondary Service for commercial Customers with a
Maximum Demand of at least 1,000KW per month per site, who have sustained this Demand level at
least 3 consecutive months during the last twelve months.
B. TERRITORY:
This rate schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. RATES:
Rates per kilowatt (kW) and kilowatt-hour (kWh):
Commodity Distribution Public Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (kW) $6.42 $12.55 $18.97
Energy Charge (kWh) 0.05662 0.01825 0.00321 0.07808
Winter Period
Demand Charge (kW) $5.50 $6.04 $11.54
Energy Charge (kWh) 0.04990 0.01898 0.00321 0.07209
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Charges
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges and/or taxes. On a Customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-2
2. Seasonal Rate Changes
The Summer Period is effective May 1 to October 31 and the Winter Period is effective from
November 1 to April 30. When the billing period includes use both in the summer and in the
winter periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each seasonal
period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein. For further discussion of bill
calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
3. Request for Service
Qualifying Customers may request Service under this schedule for more than one account or
one meter if the accounts are on one site. A site shall be defined as one or more utility
accounts serving contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of-ways (e.g.
streets) and have a common billing address.
4. Maximum Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kilowatt-hours for three
consecutive months, a Maximum Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is
practicable and thereafter continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has fallen
below 6,000 kilowatt-hours for twelve consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the
City, it may be removed.
The Maximum Demand in any month will be the maximum average power in kilowatts taken
during any 15-minute interval in the month provided that in case the load is intermittent or
subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute interval. A thermal-type Demand
meter which does not reset after a definite time interval may be used at the City's option.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts for the current month. An exception is that the Billing
Demand for Customers with Thermal Energy Storage (TES) will be based upon the actual
Maximum Demand of such Customers between the hours of noon and 6 pm on weekdays.
5. Power Factor
For new or existing Customers whose Demand is expected to exceed or has exceeded 300
kilowatts for three consecutive months, the City has the option to install applicable metering
to calculate a Power Factor. The City may remove such metering from the Service of a
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-3
Customer whose Demand has been below 200 kilowatts for four consecutive months.
When such metering is installed, the monthly Electric bill shall include a “Power Factor
penaltyAdjustment”, if applicable. The penalty adjustment shall be applied to a Customer’s
bill prior to the computation of any primary voltage discount. The Power Factor penalty
Adjustment is applied by increasing the total energy and Demand charges for any month by
0.25 percent (0.25%) for each one percent (1%) that the monthly Power Factor of the
Customer’s load was less than 95%.
The monthly Power Factor is the average Power Factor based on the ratio of kilowatt hours
to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month. Where time-of-day metering is
installed, the monthly Power Factor shall be the Power Factor coincident with the Customer's
Maximum Demand.
6. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers may request a rate schedule change at any time to any applicable full service rate
schedule as is applicable to their kilowatt-Demand and kilowatt-hour usage profile.
7. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2 1/2 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed provided the City is not required to supply Service at a particular line voltage where
it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally or better suited
to the Customer's electrical requirements. The City retains the right to change its line voltage
at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any Customer receiving a discount
hereunder and affected by such change. The Customer then has the option to change his
system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept Service (without voltage
discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to a maximum kVA size
limitation.
8. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(8)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-4
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.84 $12.55 $13.39
Winter Period $0.72 $6.04 $6.76
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand (as defined in Section D.4)
occurs when one or more of the non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the
City’s revenue meter are not operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the
sum of the Maximum Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall
the Customer’s Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4) , as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-TOU-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-TOU-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered secondary Service for commercial customers with a
Maximum Demand of at least 1,000KW per month per site, who have sustained this Demand level at
least 3 consecutive months during the last twelve months. In addition, this rate schedule is
applicable for customers who did not pay Power Factor penalties Adjustments during the last 12
months.
B. TERRITORY:
This rate schedule applies everywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. UNBUNDLED RATES:
Rates per kilowatt (kW) and kilowatt-hour (kWh):
Commodity Distribution Public Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW)
Peak $4.24 $8.25 $12.49
Mid-Peak 2.06 4.13 6.19
Off-Peak 1.17 2.06 3.23
Energy Charge (per kWh)
Peak $0.07029 $0.02296 $0.00321 $0.09646
Mid-Peak 0.05867 0.01901 0.00321 0.08089
Off-Peak 0.04870 0.01567 0.00321 0.06758
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW)
Peak $3.04 $3.38 $6.42
Off-Peak 1.59 1.68 3.27
Energy Charge (per kWh)
Peak $0.05617 $0.02142 $0.00321 $0.08080
Off-Peak 0.04663 0.01767 0.00321 0.06751
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-TOU-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-TOU-2
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Charges
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges and/or taxes. On a Customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
2. Definition of Time Periods
SUMMER PERIOD (Service from May 1 to October 31):
Peak: 12:00 noon to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
Mid Peak: 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon Monday through Friday (except holidays)
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Off-Peak: 9:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday
All day Saturday, Sunday, and holidays
WINTER PERIOD (Service from November 1 to April 30):
Peak: 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
Off-Peak: 9:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays)
All day Saturday, Sunday, and holidays
HOLIDAYS: “Holidays” for the purposes of this rate schedule are New Years Day,
President’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving
Day, and Christmas Day. The dates will be those on which the holidays are legally observed.
SEASONAL RATE CHANGES: When the billing period includes use in both the Summer
and the Winter periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each
seasonal period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein. For further discussion
of bill calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-TOU-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-TOU-3
3. Request for Service
Qualifying customers may request Service under this schedule for more than one account or
one meter if the accounts are on one site. A site shall be defined as one or more utility
accounts serving contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of-ways (e.g.
streets) and have a common billing address.
4. Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kilowatt-hours for three
consecutive months, a Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is practicable and
thereafter continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has fallen below 6,000
kilowatt-hours for twelve consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the City, it may
be removed.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts taken during any 15-minute interval in each of the
designated Time periods as defined under Section D.2.
5. Power Factor PenaltyAdjustment
Time of Use customers must not have had a Power Factor penalty Adjustment assessed on
their Service for at least 12 months. Power factor is calculated based on the ratio of kilowatt
hours to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month, and must not have fallen below
95% to avoid the Power Factor penaltyAdjustment.
Should the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department find that the Customer’s Service should be
subject to Power Factor penaltiesAdjustments, the Customer will be removed from the E-7-
TOU rate schedule and placed on another applicable rate schedule as is suitable to their
kilowatt Demand and kilowatt-hour usage.
6. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers electing to be served under E-7 TOU must remain on said schedule for a
minimum of 12 months. Should the Customer so wish, at the end of 12 months, the
Customer may request a rate schedule change to any applicable City of Palo Alto full-service
rate schedule as is suitable to their kilowatt Demand and kilowatt-hour usage.
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-TOU-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-TOU-4
7. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2 1/2 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed provided the City is not required to supply Service at a particular line voltage where
it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally or better suited
to the Customer's electrical requirements. The City retains the right to change its line voltage
at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any Customer receiving a discount
hereunder and affected by such change. The Customer then has the option to change his
system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept Service (without voltage
discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to a maximum kilovolt-
ampere size limitation.
8. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(8)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.84 $12.55 $13.39
Winter Period $0.72 $6.04 $6.76
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand occurs when one or more of the
non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter are not
operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the sum of the Maximum
LARGE COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC TIME OF USE SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7 TOU
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-TOU-5 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-TOU-5
Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall the Customer’s
Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4) , as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-G-1 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-G-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to Demand metered Service for large commercial Customers who choose
Service under the Palo Alto Green plan. A Customer may qualify for this rate schedule if the
Customer’s Maximum Demand is at least 1,000KW per month per site, who have sustained this
Demand level at least 3 consecutive months during the last twelve months
B. TERRITORY:
The rate schedule applies everywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Electric Service.
C. UNBUNDLED RATES: (1000 kWh block option):
Commodity Distribution Public Benefits Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $6.42 $12.55 $18.97
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.05562 0.01825 0.00321 0.07808
Palo Alto Green Charge (per 1000 kWh block) 15.00
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $5.50 $6.04 $11.54
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.04990 0.01898 0.00321 0.07209
Palo Alto Green Charge (per 1000 kWh block) 15.00 (100% renewable green option):
Commodity Distribution
Public
Benefits
Palo Alto
Green Total
Summer Period
Demand Charge ( per kW) $6.42 $12.55 $18.97
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.05562 0.01825 0.00321 0.0150 0.09308
Winter Period
Demand Charge (per kW) $5.50 $6.04 $11.54
Energy Charge (per kWh) 0.04990 0.01898 0.00321 0.0150 0.08709
LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-G-2 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-G-2
D. SPECIAL NOTES:
1. Calculation of Charges
The actual bill amount is calculated based on the applicable rates in Section C above and
adjusted for any applicable discounts, surcharges and/or taxes. On a Customer’s bill
statement, the bill amount may be broken down into appropriate components as calculated
under Section C.
2. Seasonal Rate Changes
The Summer Period is effective May 1 to October 31 and the Winter Period is effective from
November 1 to April 30. When the billing period includes use both in the Summer and the
Winter Periods, the usage will be prorated based on the number of days in each seasonal
period, and the charges based on the applicable rates therein. For further discussion of bill
calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11.
3. Maximum Demand Meter
Whenever the monthly use of energy has exceeded 8,000 kilowatt-hours for three
consecutive months, a Maximum Demand meter will be installed as promptly as is
practicable and thereafter continued in Service until the monthly use of energy has dropped
below 6,000 kilowatt-hours for twelve consecutive months, whereupon, at the option of the
City, it may be removed.
The Maximum Demand in any month will be the maximum average power in kilowatts taken
during any 15-minute interval in the month provided that in case the load is intermittent or
subject to violent fluctuations, the City may use a 5-minute interval. A thermal-type Demand
meter which does not reset after a definite time interval may be used at the City's option.
The Billing Demand to be used in computing charges under this schedule will be the actual
Maximum Demand in kilowatts for the current month. An exception is that the Billing
Demand for Customers with Thermal Energy Storage (TES) will be based upon the actual
Maximum Demand of such Customers between the hours of noon and 6 PM on weekdays.
LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-G-3 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-G-3
4. Request for Service
Qualifying Customers may request Service under this schedule for more than one account or
one meter if the accounts are at one site. A site shall be defined as one or more utility
accounts serving contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of-ways (e.g.
streets) and have a common billing address.
5. Power Factor
For new or existing Customers whose Demand is expected to exceed or has exceeded 300
kilowatts for three consecutive months, the City has the option of installing applicable
metering to calculate a Power Factor. The City may remove such metering from the Service
of a Customer whose Demand has dropped below 200 kilowatts for four consecutive months.
When such metering is installed, the monthly Electric bill shall include a “Power Factor
penaltyAdjustment”, if applicable. The penalty adjustment shall be applied to a Customer’s
bill prior to the computation of any primary voltage discount. The Power Factor penalty
Adjustment is applied by increasing the total energy and Demand charges for any month by
0.25 percent or (1/4) for each one percent (1%) that the monthly Power Factor of the
Customer’s load was less than 95%.
The monthly Power Factor is the average Power Factor based on the ratio of kilowatt-hours
to kilovolt-ampere hours consumed during the month. Where time-of-day metering is
installed, the monthly Power Factor shall be the Power Factor coincident with the Customer's
Maximum Demand.
6. Changing Rate Schedules
Customers may request a rate schedule change at any time to any applicable full service rate
schedule as is applicable to their kilowatt-Demand and kilowatt-hour usage profile
LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-G-4 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-G-4
7. Palo Alto Green Participation
Customers choosing to participate shall fill out a Palo Alto Green Power Program application
provided by the Customer Service Center. Customers may request at any time, in writing, a
change to the number of blocks they wish to purchase under the Palo Alto Green plan.
Palo Alto Green provides for either the purchase of enough renewable energy credits (RECs)
to match 100% of the energy usage at the facility every month, or for the purchase of 1000
kilowatt-hour (kWh) blocks. These REC purchases support the production of renewable
energy, increase the financial value of power from renewal sources, and creates a transparent
and sustainable market that encourages new development of wind and solar.
8. Primary Voltage Discount
Where delivery is made at the same voltage as that of the line from which the Service is
supplied, a discount of 2 1/2 percent for available line voltages above 2 kilovolts will be
allowed; provided, however, the City is not required to supply Service at a qualified line
voltage where it has, or will install, ample facilities for supplying at another voltage equally
or better suited to the Customer's Electrical requirements. The City retains the right to
change its line voltage at any time after providing reasonable advance notice to any Customer
receiving a discount hereunder and affected by such change. The Customer then has the
option to change the system so as to receive Service at the new line voltage or to accept
Service (without voltage discount) through transformers to be supplied by the City subject to
a maximum kilovolt-ampere size limitation.
9. Standby Charge
a. Applicability: The standby charge, subject to the exemptions in subsection D(9)(e),
applies to Customers that have a non-utility generation source interconnected on the
Customer’s side of the City’s revenue meter and that occasionally require backup
power from the City due to non-operation of the non-utility generation source.
LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN POWER ELECTRIC SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE E-7-G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 2-5-2013
Supersedes Sheet No E-7-G-5 dated 7-1-2009 Sheet No E-7-G-5
b. Standby Charges:
Commodity Distribution Total Standby Charge (per kW of Reserved Capacity)
Summer Period $0.84 $12.55 $13.39
Winter Period $0.72 $6.04 $6.76
c. Meters. A separate meter is required for each non-utility generation source.
d. Calculation of Maximum Demand Credit.
(1) In the event the Customer’s Maximum Demand (as defined in Section D.3)
occurs when one or more of the non-utility generators on the Customer’s side of the
City’s revenue meter are not operating, the Maximum Demand will be reduced by the
sum of the Maximum Generation of those non-utility generators, but in no event shall
the Customer’s Maximum Demand be reduced below zero.
(2) If the non-utility generation source does not operate for an entire billing cycle,
the standby charge does not apply and the Customer shall not receive the Maximum
Demand credit described in this Section.
e. Exemptions.
(1) The standby charge shall not apply to backup generators designed to operate only
in the event of an interruption in utility Service and which are not used to offset
Customer electricity purchases.
(2) The standby charge shall not apply if the Customer meets the definition of an
“Eligible Customer-generator” as defined in California Public Utilities Code Section
2827(b)(4) , as amended.
(3) The applicability of these exemptions shall be determined at the discretion of the
Utilities Director.
{End}
EXCERPTED FINAL MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 3, 2012
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
ITEM 1: ACTION: UAC Recommendation that Council Adopt a Resolution Approving the
Continuation of the Palo Alto Clean Local Energy Accessible Now (CLEAN) Program
Public Comment:
Craig Lewis, representing the CLEAN Coalition, stated that the Palo Alto CLEAN has had no
takers so far, but that the program could be tweaked to be successful. The CLEAN Coalition had
hoped when the program started that property owners rather than developers would develop
and own projects, eliminating the need for a lease payment. He said the price offered seems to
have been too low and developers and that property owners were not attracted by the rate of
return from a project in Palo Alto. He believed property owners would be more interested in
leasing their rooftops to a third party developer. He stated that the lease payment to building
owners translates to a 3 cent/kilowatt-hour (₵/kWh) increase in price so that a price of
17 ₵/kWh or higher would be required to get local solar projects. He recommended
implementing a Volumetric Price Adjustment (VPA) whereby non-participation in the program
over some period of time (e.g. a month) would result in an automatic increase in the price until
participants were attracted.
Resource Planner Jon Abendschein provided a summary of the written report. He stated that
the City has supported local solar photovoltaic (PV) system installations since 1999 and the PV
Partners program has resulted in the City being one of the top utilities nationwide for PV
system installations. Abendschein stated that, despite a large amount of interest, the CLEAN
program has not had any participants, primarily because the PV Partners is a more cost-
effective option for most facilities and the returns for CLEAN program are insufficient.
Abendschein explained the staff recommendation is to extend the program at the current 14
₵/kWh price, eliminate the 100 kW minimum size, and ramp up efforts to market the PV
Partners program. Since the program was evaluated last year, and the price was set at 14
₵/kWh, the City's projection of the avoided cost has fallen to 11.6 ₵/kWh so that additional cost
to ratepayers is $158,000 per year.
Abendschein explained that the alternatives to the recommendation were considered and
included increasing the price, lowering the price, or eliminating the program. Increasing the
price would increase the cost to ratepayers, while lowering the price would not result in any
participation. He also stated that staff had examined other types of renewable energy sources,
but did not find any other energy sources aside from solar that were viable in Palo Alto aside
from City-owned sources that could be developed without a CLEAN program.
Commissioner Melton said that originally the program had been priced at the City's avoided
cost, but now the price was 20% higher than the avoided cost. He asked what the City’s pricing
policy was, and at what price would the cost of the program be too high compared to the City’s
avoided cost. He did not want the program to entirely lose its relationship to avoided costs.
Director Valerie Fong stated that the City Council had been comfortable with a small premium
over avoided cost when the program was adopted, but had not provided specific policy
direction on the maximum acceptable premium.
Commissioner Eglash asked how many PV systems had been installed in Palo Alto since the
CLEAN program had been adopted. Abendschein stated that there had been from 25-50
systems installed in residences, but he did not have the exact numbers. Commissioner Eglash
said that many people were continuing to install solar even without Palo Alto CLEAN. He said
the goal was not to have a feed-in tariff (FIT) simply to have a FIT. It was to stimulate solar
development. He said the PV Partners program was economically more attractive and that
solar was being installed at a healthy rate even without Palo Alto CLEAN. That implied that Palo
Alto CLEAN was obsolete and unnecessary. He said the cost of solar was falling substantially,
and 3rd party developers were offering excellent prices. He was against raising the price, but he
was happy leaving the program operating as it was if it did not cost much to maintain it.
Commissioner Waldfogel asked what the equivalent cost of the PV Partners program was.
Abendschein said the avoided cost was the same, but if PV Partners were translated into a FIT
price it would be equivalent to 20-24 ¢/kWh. PV Partners was a State mandated program,
however. Commissioner Waldfogel asked whether the size of the PV Partners program was
also a State mandate. Abendschein said it was.
Vice Chair Foster asked who paid for the PV Partners program. Director Fong stated the City
did. Vice Chair Foster asked whether it was better to have people participating in PA CLEAN or
PV Partners, since PV Partners was more expensive. Director Fong stated that PA CLEAN
participation would not relieve the City of its SB1 obligation, which the PV Partners program
fulfilled. Abendschein added that even if customers chose to participate in Palo Alto CLEAN,
the PV Partners capacity would still be available. Vice Chair Foster asked how much the
Brannon Solar project factored into the avoided cost calculation. Abendschein said it was a
small part of the calculation. Vice Chair Foster asked whether the staff recommended program
would allow people to fund solar on each other’s roofs if they chose to. Abendschein said the
funding source was not important as long as they sold the energy to the City.
Vice Mayor Scharff asked what it would cost to continue the program. Abendschein said the
staff time involved in maintaining the program without marketing it was minimal, but that the
staff proposal had involved some staff time for marketing which would be absorbed by existing
staff. Utility Marketing Services Manager Joyce Kinnear said that Key Account Representatives,
who market the City’s programs, including energy efficiency, would spend time on marketing
Palo Alto CLEAN, which would replace some of the time they spent marketing other programs
like energy efficiency.
Commissioner Foster stated that the program is an innovative program. The City should be
doing it and would like to see an increase in the price to get more participation. He was not
sensing much support for that proposal, so he would support the staff recommendation. He
would be opposed to eliminating the program.
Chair Cook thanked the CLEAN Coalition for support, but would not want to move much further
away from the avoided cost. He would support the staff recommendation, but would want to
review it again at some point in time, rather than have the program continue indefinitely.
Commissioner Melton remarked that the goal is to increase the amount of renewable power
generated within city limits, so he supported continuing the program despite the small increase
in price.
ACTION:
Vice Chair Foster made a motion to support staff's recommendation. Melton seconded the
motion.
Commissioner Eglash offered a friendly amendment to review the program in one year. Vice
Chair Foster and Commissioner Melton accepted the amendment.
Commissioner Waldfogel asked if the failure of the program could be attributed to a marketing
shortcoming. Abendschein said it was a matter of expanding the marketing to the specific
customers who the program would work for. Commissioner Waldfogel stated that he believed
that anyone who was eligible for the program had already heard about the program and had
determined it was not worthwhile. He was uncomfortable continuing to spend money to
market the program.
Vice Chair Foster said that some level of marketing should exist as not all have heard of the
program and it is being expanded to more customers.
The motion passed by a vote of 5-1 with Commissioner Waldfogel voting no.
EXCERPTED DRAFT MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 7, 2012
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
ITEM 1: PRESENTATION: Presentation on Standby Electric Rates for the City’s Energy/Compost
Facility
Resource Planner Jon Abendschein gave a presentation on standby rates. He stated that
utilities generally have standby electric rates so that customers who have on-site generators
pay for their reliance on backup power provided by the utility. Most utilities have a standby
rate, but the City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) has not needed to have one due to a lack of
previous proposals to develop large or non-renewable generators. Renewable generators
smaller than one megawatt (MW) are exempt from standby rates under State Law. The Public
Works Department, however, was seeking proposals for its Energy/Compost (E/C) Facility
project, which could involve on-site generation, and would need to know the CPAU standby
rate in order to evaluate proposals. Abendschein stated that the standby rate is designed to
recover distribution system costs, generating capacity costs, and billing and administrative
costs. The costs the standby rate was intended to recover were part of the demand charges in
the E-4 and E-7 retail rate schedules, and the standby charge would be designed to recover all
of the distribution system demand charge and the portion of the generation demand charge
related to providing reserve generating capacity. Staff expected to propose a rate based on the
generator size, and had calculated a preliminary standby rate for E-7 customers of $13.51/kW
in the summer billing periods and $6.86/kW in the winter. Abendschein gave an example
calculation of a customer bill for a customer with an on-site generator. He noted that with no
standby rate, the utility would not recover costs unless the generator had an outage during the
month, and that cost recovery would be irregular, dependent on the frequency of generator
outages. With a standby rate the customer’s share of the utility’s costs were properly collected
each month regardless of outages. He also showed that the proposed rate was in-line with
those of other California utilities.
Commissioner Foster asked who this rate was needed for, and whether it was only necessary
for the Energy/Compost Facility. Abendschein stated that it would apply to any non-renewable
generator or large renewable generator in Palo Alto, but that the Energy/Compost Facility was
the only project he was currently aware of that might involve such a facility. Commissioner
Foster asked Abendschein to summarize why the rate was necessary. Abendschein stated that
the rate was necessary for the utility to recover its costs associated with providing standby
service. The State prohibited CPAU from recovering those costs for small renewable
generators, but the rate was still necessary for other generators.
Commissioner Hall asked whether the standby rate would provide an incentive for a customer
to build their own gas-fired generator to reduce their electric bill. Abendschein stated that the
rate was designed to recover the utility’s costs and was not an incentive. He stated that gas-
fired generators were unlikely to be cost-effective due to the low electric rates compared to the
CPAU gas rates.
Commissioner Waldfogel asked if the rate could be avoided if the customer built more than
1 MW of on-site generation capacity but used multiple renewable generators, keeping each
generator smaller than 1 MW. Abendschein said he believed the State’s exemption applied to
the total generation behind the customer meter, not each individual generator, so the rate
could not be avoided under that scenario. Commissioner Waldfogel then asked how the
reduced customer load would affect the CPAU RPS requirements. Assistant Director, Resource
Management Jane Ratchye stated that CPAU’s RPS requirements were based on sales, so the
reduced customer load would reduce the RPS requirement some. Commissioner Waldfogel
also asked what would happen if the generator ran infrequently in a month, asking whether the
customer would be charged both the standby rate as well as the applicable retail demand rate.
Abendschein said the customer would pay only one or the other, not both.
Commissioner Melton asked whether staff had reviewed both investor-owned and publicly-
owned utilities’ rates when developing the rate. Abendschein said staff had surveyed large and
small publicly-owned utilities’ rate schedules as well as Pacific Gas and Electric’s (PG&E’s) rate.
Commissioner Melton asked whether staff had reviewed the CPUC rules applicable to PG&E
and related to standby rates and asked whether there were any that should be incorporated
into the CPAU rates and policies. Abendschein said he had looked at PG&E's rate and found it
very complex. He said it included some features not necessary for CPAU’s rate schedule, but
that there were some other features he had incorporated. Staff had done a comprehensive
review of State regulations as well. Commissioner Melton then asked would this rate would be
an incentive for customers to install gas-fired generation like Bloom Energy fuel cells to avoid
the City's electric charges. Abendschein stated that since fuel cells ran on natural gas they were
unlikely to be cost-effective due to the low electric rates compared to the CPAU gas rates. Fuel
cells were also relatively high cost solutions and were currently dependent on significant
rebates and incentives in other utilities’ territories.
Commissioner Hall asked whether the E/C Facility developer could the market the power
outside the City. Abendschein said that it is possible, but unlikely. Commissioner Hall asked
whether staff had conceived of a situation in which part of the E/C Facility output was used on
site and the remainder was exported. Abendschein said that the owner would pay the standby
charge for the portion of the output used on site and a wheeling charge for the remainder.
EXCERPTED DRAFT MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 5, 2012
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
ITEM 1: ACTION: Recommendation that Council Adopt a Resolution Amending Utility Rule and
Regulation 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) and the Six Rate Schedules Covering Medium and
Large Commercial Customers (E-4 and E-7) to Include Standby Service Charges
Chair Cook stated that the UAC received a presentation and had a discussion at its last meeting
and had few questions at the time. After receiving confirmation from the other commissioner,
he requested that commissioners commence with any questions and that there was no need
for the prepared presentation.
Commissioner Waldfogel stated that the rate being proposed is highly technical in nature and
that the UAC may not have fully understood all of its details, but is being asked to weigh in on
the rate. Director Fong stated that the details are in the rate schedule, but noted that the UAC
does rely on the descriptions of the rate provided by staff in the report.
Vice Chair Foster asked if anyone would be on the proposed standby rate now. Resource
Planner Jon Abendschein stated that the first project that could be under the rate would be the
waste to energy facility that is being evaluated by the Public Works Department. Director Fong
stated that any customers with large generators would be subject to the rate. Abendschein
added that he does receive calls from time to time from customers who are considering adding
a generator on their site.
ACTION:
Commissioner Waldfogel moved to support the staff's recommendation. Vice Mayor Foster
seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously (6-0) with Commissioner Hall absent.
City of Palo Alto
COLLEAGUES MEMO
January 28, 2013 Page 1 of 1
(ID # 3492)
DATE: January 28, 2013
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Mayor Scharff, Council Member Klein
SUBJECT: COLLEAGUES MEMO FROM MAYOR SCHARFF AND COUNCIL
MEMBER KLEIN TO ADD A 4TH MEMBER TO THE COUNCIL’S COMMITTEE ON
INFRASTRUCTURE
Draft Motion: I move that the Infrastructure Committee be a Brown Act committee composed
of four Council Members, appointed by the Mayor.
Background
Per Council Motion the membership of the Council’s committee on Infrastructure is presently
limited to three Council Members. Given the importance of this subject we believe this should
be increased to four Council Members. We hope you will agree. We also wish to clarify that
the Infrastructure Committee will be a Brown Act committee.
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3494)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 1/28/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: RFP Scope of Services for Downtown Cap Study
Title: Review and Input Regarding Scope of Services for Downtown Cap Study
Request for Proposals and Direction Regarding Public Outreach and Input
(Staff requests this item be continued to February 11, 2013)
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Staff recommends the City Council continue the Downtown Development CAP Request for
Proposal (RFP) Scope of Work item to the February 11th regular meeting. The continuation will
allow the Council to consider the Downtown Development CAP RFP within the context of an
overall visioning process for the Downtown Area and 27 University site, which will also be
discussed on the same agenda date.
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3491)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 1/28/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: City Council Retreat Agenda and Materials for Council
Approval
Title: Discussion and Adoption of the Agenda for the City Council’s Annual
Retreat on February 2, 2013 for the Possible Purposes of: (a) Setting the
Council’s Priorities with Action Steps for 2013; (b) Discussion and Possible
Action on Core Principles and Guiding Values; (c) Discussion and Possible
Action on Meeting Management and the Length of Council Meetings; and (d)
Other Potential Topics as Determined by the Council.
From: City Manager
Lead Department: City Manager
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council review and approve an agenda for the City Council Retreat
to be held on February 2, 2013 (Draft included as Attachment A).
Background
On December 17, the City Council adopted the following process to be used at the Council’s
Annual Retreat to identify the 2013 Council Priorities:
1. Establish a two member committee consisting of Council Member Klein and Council
Member Schmid to work with the City Manager’s Office to group the Council priority
suggestions into categories for use at the retreat, including information on items
potentially actionable in 2013 in each category.
2. During the first hour of the retreat each Council Member would have a chance to talk
for six minutes advocating and clarifying his or her priorities and placing any of them in a
different category if he or she so chooses. At the end of the hour, Council Members
would be free to change or delete any of their priorities; and
3. During the second hour, Council Members would work to refine each of the remaining
categories and identify those specific actions that could be accomplished during the
City of Palo Alto Page 2
current year. At the end of the hour there would be a rank order voting with a goal to
narrow to three priorities for 2013.
The City Manager, working with Council Member Klein and Council Member Schmid, grouped
the individual Council priority suggestions into categories and staff provided input on items
potentially actionable in 2013 in each category. The draft list of potential council priorities and
potential action items is included as Attachment B. The guidelines specify that staff is to collect
and organize the Council recommended priorities into a list and provide to the Council no later
than two weeks in advance of the 2013 Retreat. Staff is providing the list 10 days in advance of
the retreat to coincide with the posting and distribution of packets for the Council meeting on
January 28 and the discussion on the working agenda.
Previously, on October 1, 2012, the City Council approved the Council Priority Setting
Guidelines included as Attachment C. The guidelines define a Council priority and lay out the
purpose, process and general parameters for annual priority setting. Consistent with these
guidelines, staff received input on recommended priorities from Council members and
community members included as Attachment D and E respectively.
Also included in this staff report as background material for the Council’s discussion at the
retreat is a list of the previous Council priorities from 2002 to 2012 (Attachment F), and an
update on the status of 2012 Council priorities and action items (Attachment G).
Discussion
The City Council will conduct their annual Council Retreat at the Art Center on Saturday,
February 2, 2013 from 9:00 am-2:00 pm. Gathering for coffee and bagels begins at 8:30 a.m.
There were specific directives from Council of what to include at the retreat (which includes the
Council decision on January 22, 2013 to refer Council Meeting Management to the retreat for
up to an hour for discussion and possible action). There have also been some suggestions
which individual Council Members have made and a proposal from the Finance Committee. The
staff is including all of these for decisions at this point, to allow for structuring an agenda in
advance of the retreat itself, to maximize use of the Council’s time at the retreat.
1. Section 3.1 of the Council’s Protocols and Procedures states that “at the beginning of
each legislative year the Council will hold a special meeting to review the Council
protocols, adopted procedures for meetings , the Brown Act, conflict of interest and
other important procedural issues.” The Council, in the past, has often discussed this at
its retreat.
Q: Does the Council want to add this item to the retreat agenda as part of the Meeting
Management Item or schedule for a regular Council Meeting?
2. At its December 4, 2012 meeting, the Finance Committee voted to “direct the City
Manager and Mayor to bring to the annual Council retreat whether to refer to the
Finance Committee consideration of dedicating certain revenue streams to certain
infrastructure projects.” This was partly in response to an update related to increased
revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT).
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Q: Does the Council want to add this item to your Retreat Agenda or schedule it for a regular
Council Meeting, or make that decision at your meeting tonight?
3. Other topics for suggestion for possible consideration at the retreat (time may be a
factor) is whether the Council wants to schedule a mid-year retreat and/or discuss the
2013 Council schedule (summer recess, winter break and first meeting of 2014).
Q: Does the Council wish to discuss either of these issues at the retreat?
Before making your decision, please refer to the Draft Working Agenda (Attachment A) to see if
there is adequate time to add any of these items. Item 1 relating to Protocols etc., is suggested
to be included in the Meeting Management agenda slot. Items 2 and 3 would need to be added
to the agenda (Other Items).
Draft Motion:
I move approval of the Council Retreat agenda, included as Attachment A to the staff report, for
the City Council Retreat to be held on February 2, 2012.
Alternate Motion:
I move approval of the working agenda, amended as follows:
Alternate Motion 2:
I move referral of the following suggested agenda topics to a future Council meeting for
discussion and action:
Attachments:
Attachment A. Council Retreat Draft Working Agenda (PDF)
Attachment B. Categories and Action Item (PDF)
Attachment C. Priority Setting Guidelines (PDF)
Attachment D. City Council Recommended 2013 Priorities (PDF)
Attachment E. Community Recommended 2013 Council Priorities (PDF)
Attachment F. Previous Council Priorities (PDF)
Attachment G. 2012 Council Priorites Update (PDF)
Attachment A. Council Retreat Draft Working Agenda
City Council Retreat
Special Meeting
February 2, 2013
Palo Alto Art Center
1313 Newell Rd. Palo Alto, CA 94303
9:00 a.m. ‐ 2:00 p.m.
Draft Working Agenda
Working Schedule
1. Breakfast/Gathering 8:30 a.m.
2. Mayor Welcome/Overview to Day 9:00 a.m.
3. 2013 Council Priorities and Action Items
a. Process foundation (5 minutes)
b. Individual's nominees (55 minutes – six minutes per Council member)
c. Public comment (10‐20 minutes)
9:10 a.m.
Break 10:30 a.m.
d. Final individual regrouping of nominees by category (5 minutes)
e. Possible action steps under each of the categories (30 minutes)
f. Formal votes and approval (15 minutes – rank or ballot vote)
Working Lunch 12:00 p.m.
4. Guiding Principles/Core Values (set up a future session) 12:15 p.m.
5. Meeting Management 12:35 p.m.
6. Other Items?? 1:35 p.m.
7. Wrap and Next Steps 1:50 p.m.
8. Meeting Adjourned 2:00 p.m.
Attachment B. Draft List of Potential 2013 Council Priorities & Potential Action Items
Page 1 1/24/2013
The City Council established a two member committee consisting of Council Member Klein and
Council Member Schmid to work with the City Manager to group the individual Council priority
suggestions into categories for use at the 2013 Council retreat, including information on items
potentially actionable in 2013 in each category. At the retreat each Councilmember will have a
chance to explain/clarify his or her priorities and place any of them in different category if he or
she so chooses. The Council may also refine categories and/or create new categories at the
retreat.
The Potential Action Items beneath each Category have been generated by staff and are meant
to be illustrative and not exhaustive.
Category: Downtown & Parking
Councilmember Input
1. Land Use and Transportation, with an Emphasis on Parking (Berman)
2. The Future of Downtown (Burt)
3. Downtown/Commercial Development Cap (Holman)
4. Downtown (Klein)
5. Traffic and Downtown Parking Issues (Kniss)
6. Build a Parking Garage (Scharff)
7. Investigate the Impacts of Rapid Commercial Growth (Schmid)
Potential Action Items
1. Downtown Cap Study
2. Finance Options for Parking Structures
3. Downtown Parking Studies (includes RPP Assessment)
4. 27 University Avenue
5. Downtown Post Office
6. Ground Floor Overlay: Expand ground floor (GF) retail restrictions to Emerson Street and
evaluate other related actions
7. Future of the Roth Building
8. Police will continue to staff the Downtown Detail with two police officers to manage traffic,
homeless issues and have a visible presence in the downtown area
Category: Infrastructure
Councilmember Input
1. Infrastructure Improvements (Berman)
2. Infrastructure Strategy and Funding (Burt)
3. Infrastructure (Klein)
4. Funding and Planning for Infrastructure Improvements, Including New Facilities (Price)
5. Infrastructure Strategy and Funding ‐ Revenue Measure (Shepherd)
Attachment B. Draft List of Potential 2013 Council Priorities & Potential Action Items
Page 2 1/24/2013
Potential Action Items
1. Mitchell Park Library & Community Center opening
2. Potential 2014 Infrastructure Finance Measure (progress towards decision)
3. Cubberley Community Center (Community process completion; lease decision)
4. Public Safety Building: Potential public‐private partnership (395 Page Mill Project?)
5. Municipal Services Center Facilities Study
6. Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
7. Newell Street Bridge
8. Golf Course Renovation
9. Energy Compost Facility
10. Main Library
11. Waste Water Treatment Master Plan
12. Completion of water storage reservoir, new well, and park improvements at El Camino
Park.
13. Achieve conceptual agreement with all parties on a second transmission line connection to
Palo Alto.
14. Completion of the gas pipeline and sewer inspection safety “crossbore” program.
15. City Street Repair Program
Category: Technology & the Connected City
Councilmember Input
1. Technology Innovation (Burt)
2. Technology (Klein)
3. Technology (Scharff)
4. Connecting in Multiple Ways: Transit, Shuttle, Internet, Fiber to the Premises, etc.
(Shepherd)
Potential Action Items
1. Technologies for Improved Service Delivery
2. Wi‐Fi Deployment at Cogswell Plaza
3. Community Apps Challenge & Palo Alto Mobile App
4. Virtual Library Branch
5. Dark Fiber network and Fiber to the Premises
6. Feasibility Study on Municipal Wi‐Fi
7. Emerging Technology Program
8. Wireless Communications (DAS)
9. Infrastructure Management System (IMS)
10. Design Commercial Customer Connect (smart meter) pilot program to complement the
recently approved Residential CustomerConnect pilot program for 300 residential
customers
11. Implement new Utilities emergency outage management system
12. Emergency Services: Silicon Valley Resilient Network: solar‐powered WiFi to keep
community connected after a major earthquake, etc.
13. New Computer Aided Dispatch System with the cities of Mountain View and Los Altos
Attachment B. Draft List of Potential 2013 Council Priorities & Potential Action Items
Page 3 1/24/2013
14. New Records Management System with Los Altos and Mountain View
15. Implement FLIR Thermal Imaging Cameras in the Foothill’s to create early warning &
notification of fires (Fire)
Category: Livability & Urban Design
Councilmember Input
1. Walkable Streets, Livable Neighborhoods (Holman)
2. Increase Resident and Visitor Enjoyment of our Commercial Areas (Scharff)
3. Assure that the Cities Commercial Sites are Vibrant and Attractive (Schmid)
Potential Action Items
1. Design Competition for the Highway 101 Pedestrian/Bicycle Overpass Project
2. 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
3. Comprehensive Plan update
4. California Avenue Streetscape
5. California Avenue/Fry’s Area Concept Plan
6. Rinconada Park Long‐Range Plan
7. Art policy: Private Commercial Developments
Category: Healthy Community
Councilmember Input
1. Healthy City/Healthy Community (Holman)
2. Community Collaboration for Youth Well Being (Price)
3. Grow HSRAP Funding by 10‐20% (Schmid)
Potential Action Items
1. Stanford Funding Agreement Funding for Community.
2. Automated External Defibrillators (AED) Program
3. Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
4. Buena Vista Mobile Home Park
5. HSRAP Grant Program
6. Healthy Staff/Healthy Community Policy
7. Project Safety Net
Category: Other (no alignment)
Councilmember Input
1. City Finances (Berman)
2. Misuse of the PC (Kniss)
3. Quality of Life (Kniss)
4. Environmental Sustainability (Price)
5. Public‐private Partnerships (Shepherd)
Attachment B. Draft List of Potential 2013 Council Priorities & Potential Action Items
Page 4 1/24/2013
Potential Action Items
Environmental Sustainability:
1. Stanford Funds for Sustainability
2. Sustainability Planning & Staff Reorganization
3. Carbon Neutral Plan
4. PaloAltoGreen Program
5. Palo Alto CLEAN
6. Renewable Portfolio Standard Goals
7. Recycled Water Project
8. Light‐Emitting Diode (LED) Street Light Conversion
9. Residential Trash Pilot program
City Finances:
1. Explore Options on New Employee Benefit Structures
2. Cost of Service Study
3. Alternative Service Delivery
4. PEPRA Clean‐up Legislation
Public‐Private Partnerships:
1. 395 Page Mill Road (Jay Paul): Potential Public‐Private Partnership for Public Safety
Building.
2. Arts and Innovation District/27 University
Planned Community Zoning:
1. Economic Evaluations of Projects: Evaluate cost‐benefits of Planned Community zoning and
specific “public benefits” in large projects
City of Palo Alto
City Council Priority Setting Guidelines
Approved by City Council: October 1, 2012
Last revised: October 1, 2012
Background
The City Council adopted its first Council priorities in 1986. Each year the City Council reviews
it’s priorities at its Annual Council Retreat. On October 1, 2012 the City Council formally
adopted the definition of a council priority, and the Council’s process and guidelines for
selection of priorities.
Definition
A Council priority is defined as a topic that will receive particular, unusual and significant
attention during the year.
Purpose
The establishment of Council priorities will assist the Council and staff to better allot and utilize
time for discussion and decision making.
Process
1. Three months in advance of the annual Council Retreat, staff will solicit input from the City
Council on the priorities to be reviewed and considered for the following year.
a. Council members may submit up to three priorities.
b. Priorities should be submitted no later than December 1.
c. As applicable, the City Manager will contact newly elected officials for their input by
December 1.
d. The City Clerk will provide timely notice to the public to submit proposed priorities by
December 1. The Policy and Services Committee shall recommend to the Council
which suggestions if any shall be considered at the City Council retreat.
2. Staff will collect and organize the recommended priorities into a list for Council
consideration, and provide to Council no less than two weeks in advance of the retreat.
3. The Policy and Services Committee, each year at its December meeting, shall make
recommendations about the process that will be used at the Annual Retreat paying
particular attention to the number of priorities suggested by Council members. The
recommended process is to be forwarded to Council for adoption in advance of the Council
retreat.
Guidelines for Selection of Priorities
1. There is a goal of no more than three priorities per year.
2. Priorities generally have a three year time limit.
$WWDFKPHQW &
City of Palo Alto
City Council Priority Setting Schedule
Last Updated: 8/17/201
$WWDFKPHQW &
Attachment D. City Council Recommended 2013 Council Priorities
Date Name Priority Area
Councilmember Burt 1. Infrastructure Strategy and Funding
2. Technology Innovation
3. The Future of Downtown
Councilmember Price 1. Funding and Planning for Infrastructure Improvements (including new facilities)
2. Environmental Sustainability
3. Community Collaboration for Youth Well Being
Councilmember Holman 1. Healthy City/Healthy Community
2. Walkable Streets, Livable Neighborhoods
3. Downtown/Commercial Development Cap
Councilmember Klein 1. Infrastructure
2. Technology
3. Downtown
Councilmember Scharff 1. Build a Parking Garage
2. Increase Resident and Visitor Enjoyment of our Commercial Areas
3. Technology
Councilmember Schmid 1. Investigate the Impacts of Rapid Commercial Growth
2. Assure that the Cities Commercial Sites are Vibrant and Attractive
3. Grow HSRAP Funding by 10‐20%
Councilmember Shepherd 1. Connecting in Multiple Ways: Transit, Shuttle, Internet, Fiber to the Premises (FTTP) etc.
2. Public‐private Partnerships
3. Infrastructure Strategy and Funding (revenue measure)
Councilmember Elect Berman 1. Infrastructure Improvements
2. Land Use and Transportation, with an Emphasis on Parking
3. City Finances
Councilmember Elect Kniss 1. Misuse of the PC
2. Traffic and Downtown Parking Issues
3. Quality of Life
City Council Recommended Priorities
Page 1 of 1 January 3, 2013
Councilmember Burt
The following recommendations are intended to follow the new Council adopted Priority Setting
Guidelines. I have tried to avoid terms that are subjects, for example “Infrastructure”. Instead the
Guidelines suggest topics that and will receive “particular, unusual and significant attention” should be
achievable within three years or less, such as “Infrastructure Strategy and Funding”. At the same time,
the Priorities should not be as specific as actions or plans.
In addition, I believe that it remains important for the Council to state our enduring “Core Values” (or
Guiding Principles) as a community. These values have comprised the majority of what the Council has
defined as Priorities in recent years. By establishing our new Guidelines, the Policy and Services
Committee has moved the Council toward more clear and meaningful actual Priorities, but we have not
included discussion of the purpose and importance of defining our core community values. Clearly,
these lasting values are important the past and present Councils and the community. Consequently,
included is a separate set of prospective values. I hope that we will have part of our discussion at the
January retreat on this subject and either act upon the Core Values or agendize the subject for future
consideration.
Recommended Priorities:
1. Infrastructure Strategy and Funding
a. This has been the top Council priority over the past year, even though it was not
officially defined as a Priority. The need to re‐build our aging infrastructure and
adequately invest in its maintenance has been the subject of Council initiatives for over
15 years (and resulted in a $10 Million per year Infrastructure Management Plan).
However, our current goal is the large task of developing a strategy and funding sources
for major remaining infrastructure needs.
2. Technology Innovation
a. Use of technology in city government is not new, nor will it end in three years. However,
including it as a priority is intended to identify it as an area of ‘particular and significant
attention’ over the next three years. Consistent with the vision of the City Council and
City Manager, we have already begun a focused program of transforming our use of
technology to improve efficiency and reduce costs, improve service, and conserve
resources.
3. The Future of Downtown
a. The council and staff have recently discussed a variety of important and converging
downtown issues including; neighborhood parking, parking garages, traffic, the
development cap, downtown TDM programs, the and the 27 University/Intermodal
Center Master Plan. We have already recognized that most of these issues will be
emphasized in the coming 1‐2 years.
Core Values:
1. Sustainable City Finances
2. Emergency Preparedness
3. Environmental Sustainability
4. Youth Well Being
5. Valued Quality of Life
Councilmember Price
While I recognize that all of the priorities we have recently chosen (for 2012) have merit, I believe some
of them will naturally occur as a participant of the work plan for next year.
For example, I do not believe we need a heading Land Use and Transportation since so many of these
issues are constantly brought to us for our review and action. Our current committees support
important project and policy work in land use, transportation, and housing. Many City sponsored
projects are underway and several public private partnership options are being examined.
Also, City Finances is an ongoing and critical part of local government. I do not believe this needs to be
detailed as a separate priority since it is a key participant of supporting and implementing local
government.
City Council Priorities for 2013
Rather than have a very broad framework and many focus areas, I think focusing on three areas makes it
possible to make more progress in each area. More progress and examination would yield better and
more important results for the community.
Within this framework, I propose the following three areas:
1. Funding and Planning for Infrastructure Improvements (including new facilities)
With the results of the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission and several presentations to City Council,
this focus area would continue work that has begun. A critical timetable has also already been
established in preparation for a potential bond measure, including examining of various potential
revenue sources and public private partnerships. The problem statement and needs have been clearly
identified. This broader effort will require concerted effort and work by many departments, the Council,
and the community.
2. Environmental Sustainability
While this concept should be integrated into all that we do, the monitoring of our progress across
departments is still needed. We need to be more explicit about our progress while identifying areas of
further work and promise. Many of the items within this current focus area have been completed but
additional work needs to be identified. The work on additional collaborations with business, technology,
and academic institution still needs refinement, for example.
3. Community Collaboration for Youth Well Being
With the recent hire of a Project Safety Net manager, PSN work continues to be more collaborative and
focused. While significant progress has been made there is much that needs to be expanded and
coordinated to ensure stronger work in education about mental health, suicide prevention, and youth
well being.
Many milestones have been achieved: establishment of MOUs with provider organizations, educational
and community‐based groups, the PSN structure, the PSN Report identifying initiatives and actions that
need to be accomplished and strategic planning work.
The retention of this focus area is important because it notes the significance, concern, and value of this
work in the community. This focus area also supports additional partnerships and collaborations and
options for funding to further the work. It sends a clear message and call to action about the mental
health and well‐being of our youth.
Councilmember Holman
1. Healthy City/Healthy Community
http://www.enotes.com/healthy‐communities‐reference/healthy‐communities
Examples of actions Council might pursue:
a. Adopt a Healthy City/Healthy Community policy
b. Identify and pursue opportunities to expand HSRAP funding
c. Incorporate Compassionate Communities programs
2. Walkable Streets, Livable Neighborhoods
Examples of actions could include:
a. Increase sidewalk widths to meet El Camino Real Design Guidelines and Grand
Boulevard Initiative & Principals
b. Strengthen development standards to deliver buildings that better relate to the street
through frequent building entrances, windows, etc. as described in LEED‐ND and the
Grand Boulevard Initiative
c. Evaluate incorporation of such project components as increased public spaces, canopy,
community gardens, and art
3. Downtown/Commercial Development Cap
Examples of what is known or assumed to be included:
a. Complete the Development Cap Study
b. Incorporate study of Ground Floor Retail protections
c. Incorporate update of parking standards and requirements
Councilmember Klein
1. Infrastructure. By this I mean acting on the IBRC report, readying ourselves for a possible
2014 revenue measure for infrastructure and the various items we refer to as Cubberley.
2. Technology. We talk a lot about using technology to enhance the City’s job performance
and its ability to interact with our citizens but we have yet to develop an overarching
technology plan. Items we could engage under this rubric: Should we have a 311 plan or its
equivalent? Is it time for us to go a Smart Grid System? Should we have an official
Innovation Program in the City Manager’s Office?
3. Downtown. We are going to be studying the parking problem downtown and the square
footage cap and we’re going to consider what’s appropriate at 27 University. This priority
would include those issues but also ask and try to answer broader questions such as: What
do we see as Downtown’s future? What do we want Downtown to look like from a strictly
architectural standpoint? Could we—or should we‐‐ underground the railroad tracks and
thus expand Downtown?
Councilmember Scharff
1. Build a Parking Garage. Address the downtown parking issues by committing to build a
parking garage where it will do the most good.
a. We have an additional 7.6 million going to the infrastructure Reserve Fund. This
combined with the money in the parking fund allows us to build a parking garage if we
so choose.
b. This garage would not have to be encumbered by Parking Assessment rules and the City
could choose to permit it to draw the maximum number of cars out of the
neighborhoods. The City would have a free hand to determine how best to do this. This
would open up a lot of possibilities on how to address the parking issues.
2. Infrastructure. This has been a defacto priority and should be a formal priority until we
accomplish the goals that we started with the Blue Ribbon Task Force.
3. Increase Resident and Visitor Enjoyment of our Commercial areas. Possible thoughts as to
how to accomplish this:
a. Phase out non‐conforming non‐retail uses
b. Protect existing retail uses
c. Expand Ground Floor retail uses in mixed use areas
d. Build retail linkages and corridors to the SOFA area
e. Extend a Percent for Art Policy to non‐municipal projects
f. Look at sidewalk widths and uses
g. Look at making King Plaza a vibrant area with Food Trucks or outside cafe with tables
and chairs like a European plaza
h. Look at sidewalk widths and uses
i. Encourage public spaces and the use of public spaces, e.g. free wifi hot spots with tables
4. Technology. Identify areas of the City that technology could be used to:
a. Increase productivity
b. Save money or resources (sustainability)
c. Increase transparency
d. Increase residence convenience or quality of life
e. More efficiently use existing resources (i.e. parking)
Councilmember Schmid
1. Investigate the impacts of rapid commercial growth
Potential Actions:
Complete the update of the Development Cap, including the areas directly abutting the
Downtown; take a comprehensive look at the parking issue and the current parking gap;
establish better criteria for measure traffic (e.g. time per segment); understand the link
between Economic Development and City Finances‐‐answer the question of how the city
benefits from expansion of office space and retail.
2. Assure that the cities commercial sites are vibrant and attractive
Potential Actions:
Look at the sidewalk widths and uses; expand ground floor retail in mixed use areas;
encourage public spaces, art and canopy; foster relationship to neighboring buildings
through LEED‐ND.
3. Grow HSRAP funding by 10‐20%
Potential Actions:
Look at the range of city activities that can be helped with a modest expansion of HSRAP
funding: seniors, Downtown Streets Team; counseling at the Opportunity Center; Vehicular
Dwelling program; etc.
Councilmember Shepherd
1. Making the connection in multiple ways: transit, shuttle, Internet, FTTP, etc. Focus on
getting Palo Alto to move smart, and connect.
2. Public‐private Partnerships. Help focus our community on how to build capacity for all the
services and opportunities we offer. I hope to see a full time staff member assigned to
supporting the activities. I have already reached out to community members for their
thinking and efforts.
3. Infrastructure Strategy and Funding (revenue measure)
Councilmember Elect Berman
1. Infrastructure Improvements
2. Land Use and Transportation, with an emphasis on parking
3. City Finances
Councilmember Elect Kniss
1. Misuse of the PC. Stated in many ways, but clearly the public feels the developers have
more influence than appropriate.
2. Traffic and downtown parking issues. Traffic in particular, and its increase, along with
bikes, walkers, etc.
3. Quality of life. Sense of being “taken over” by wealthy (and therefore privileged) new
homeowners. Losing the “community” feel of Palo Alto. Overcrowding in the schools, as
well.
Attachment E. Summary of Community Recommended
2013 Council Priorities and Detailed Correspondence
Date Name Priority Area
1 11.28.12 Liz Browne Stagnant water in street gutters ‐ mosquito breeding/exposure to West Nile virus
2 11.28.12 Ken Dinwiddie Stagnant water in street gutters
3 11.18.12 Pat Marriott 1. Recommends distinguishing between mandatory priorities vs. discretionary
priorities; focus on discretionary priorities
2. Infrastructure
4 11.14.12 Sharleen Fiddaman 1. Financial (balanced budget)
2. Traffic
3. Street parking
4. Insufficient parking
5. Drop ABAG
5 11.08.12 Larry and Zongqi Alton 1. Downtown area parking relief
2. Reducing City salaries/benefits in line with industry
3. How to keep zoning regulations from being waived for developers
4. Improve streets, sidewalks, landscaping, buildings in downtown Palo Alto
5. Restrooms in Johnson Park and others
6. Increase support for our senior center
7. Bicycle paths and crossing over 101 on University Ave.
6 11.17.12 Jeff Hoel Fiber to the Premises (FTTP)
*Demonstrates how FTTP aligns with current Council Priorities/email provides links to
resources to provide a broader context for FTTP
7 11.23.12 Andy Poggio Fiber to the Premises
Community Recommended Priorities
Page 1 of 2 December 6, 2012
Attachment C. Summary of Community Recommended
2013 Council Priorities and Detailed Correspondence
Date Name Priority Area
Community Recommended Priorities
8 11.21.12 Christina Llerena (on
behalf of Project Safety
Net Steering
Committee)
Community Collaboration for Youth Bell Being ‐ Project Safety Net
9 11.26.12 Bill Terry Fire safety in Foothills
10 11.28.12 Jo Guttadauro Affordable Housing
11 11.28.12 Robert and Mary
Carlstead
1. Honest and "transparency"
2. Reduce ALL unnecessary spending and have strict audits
3. Reduce the size of number of personnel
4. Repair the infrastructure
5. Stop the incessant utility 'green' harping and deluge of "don't" reminders
6. Rein in the Utility Department and cut back on the amount our utilities pad the
General Fund
7. Concentrate on the wellbeing of those who live here,not focus on those who want
to and for whom we have no more room
*Additional detail on proposed priorities attached.
Page 2 of 2 December 6, 2012
,. ,
From: Ken Dinwiddie <kend@daise.com>
Date: November 28,2012, 1:16:47 PM PST
To: <donna.grider@cityofpaloalto.org>
Subject: Focus 2013 Priorities
Donna,
For many years, the gutter in front of our home at 543 Jackson Drive has accumulated water
from rain or irrigation runoff. The problem is even more serious further toward Edgewood Drive,
with a sizable pond following each rain.
Noting that a segment of sidewalk/gutter was recently replaced on Hamilton Avenue at the
intersection with Jackson Drive, we are hoping that similar action may transpire soon on Jackson
Drive.
Ken Dinwiddie
543 Jackson Drive
Palo Alto, CA 94303-2832
kend@daise.com
1
From: Pat Marriott [mailto:patmarriott@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2012 5:17 PM
To: Council, City; Liz@knissforcouncil.com; marc@voteberman.com
Cc: Grider, Donna
Subject: Priorities
Council Members,
Each year there is considered and considerable debate about the Top 5 Council Priorities. And each year there is debate
over the meaning of a priority.
The November 13, 2012 document calling for public input for 2013 priorities says, "A Council Priority is defined as a
topic that will receive particular, unusual and significant attention during the year./I
I'm pleased to see that the city is attempting to define "priority./I
However, I think part of the confusion comes from the distinction between what I will call mandatory priorities and
discretionary priorities.
Mandatory Priorities Discretionary Priorities
Legal imperatives Not required by law
Drive the budget in funding and staffing Funded if there is money available after the
mandatory priorities have been funded
Must be city priorities, not just council priorities, Do not necessarily require participation of all
i.e., Council, Commissions and Staff must all march branches of the city government
to these priorities
Cannot change from year-to-year Can change year-to-year if they can be achieved
in a year
Examples: Finances and core services, e.g., public Examples: Youth well-being
safety, roads, infrastructure
See Cities must define core services at
http://sfgate.com/cgi-
bin[article.cgi7f=[c[a[2010[03[08[EDL21CBFUP.DTL
In the past, annual discussions and retreats have mixed the two. For example, the 2012 priorities are
1. City Finances (obviously essential for both mandatory and discretionary priorities)
2. Land Use & Transportation Planning (awfully broad and subject to interpretation)
3. Emergency Preparedness (mandatory)
4. Environmental Sustainability (also subject to interpretation)
5. Community Collaboration for Youth Well Being (discretionary and very vague)
1
http://gigao m. com/2012/ 11/09/ gotta-get-a-gig-kc-sta rtu ps-a re-b uyi ng-hom es-to-get-google-fi be r /
3. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS.
Part of emergency preparedness is having a telecommunications network that is ultra-reliable and has enough capacity.
FTIP meets these requirements.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/susan-crawford/hurrican-sandy-infrastructure-recovery_b_2079116.htm I
11-06-12: "The Two Key Investments To Build Back Better Post-Sandy" Susan Crawford.
(Fiber is one.)
http://isen.com/blog/2012/11/storm-recovery-chattanooga-style-versus-sandy-and-athena/
11-09-12: "Storm Recovery --Chattanooga Style versus Sandy and Athena" David Isenberg.
4. ENVIRONMENTALSUSTAINABILITY
A citywide municipal FTIP network can be used to implement smart grid. Smart grid can schedule the recharging of
electric cars so that the electrical grid doesn't have to be beefed up.
5. COMMUNITY COLLABORATION FOR YOUTH WELL BEING
A citywide municipal FTIP network can contribute to the well being of the community generally, including our youth.
Thanks.
Jeff
Jeff Hoel
731 Colorado Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94303
PS: Perhaps Council members should take a moment to reflect on the merits of using retreats to pick priorities.
As far as I know, the very first Council retreat at which priorities were identified formally occurred on May 15, 2000, at
the Foothills Interpretive Center.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/cityagenda/publish/citycouncil-archive/2000/000515.htm I
Frank Benest (in his 36th day as Palo Alto's City Manager) invited Council to playa parlor game: fill flip charts with ideas
for priorities, and then vote for them using an allocated number of colored stick-on dots. Council Member Mossar
objected in principle, saying that colleagues might propose and vote for their own parochial pet projects, knowing full
well that the City would have to do all the really important things anyway, whether or not this parlor game identified
them as priorities. "Humor me," said Frank.
In 2009, during Jim Keene's first year as City Manager, the process evolved into picking a hierarchy of 3 priorities, 16
strategies for accomplishing the priorities, and 75 actions for accomplishing the strategies. As I remember it, Council
picked the priorities during the retreat, and then staff made up the strategies and actions later, more or less based on
Council's discussion during the retreat.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/15359
The City invested in some gee-whiz animated "See-It" software for displaying priorities, strategies, and actions on
computer screens --including displaying an assessment of how well actions had been accomplished.
2
Leif Erikson, Youth Community Services
Roni Gilenson, LMFT, Adolescent Counseling Services.
Terry Godfrey, Parent and Partners in Education
Shashank Joshi, MD, Lucile Packard Children's Hospital
Linda Lenoir, Palo Alto Unified School District
Jessica Lewis, City of Palo Alto, Teen Services
Christina Llerena, MSW, Project Safety Net Director
Pat Markevitch, Parks and Recreation Commissioner
Sigrid Pinsky, Council of PTA's
Minka van der Zwaag, City of Palo Alto Human Services
From: robert/marycarlstead [mailto:rhmlcar7@att.net]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 11:16 PM
To: Grider, Donna
Cc: robert/marycarlstead
Subject: Council priorities
Sent of November 30th
STICK TO THE BASICS. NO PIE-IN-THE SKY ISSUES.
1. Honest and "transparency" !!Restore resident confidence in
city management which has been shattered. by the 27 Arrillaga project.
2. Reduce ALL unnecessary spending and have strict audits
3. Reduce the size of number of personnel.
4. Repair the infrastructure - starting with streets in north Palo Alto.
5. Stop the incessant utility 'green' harping and deluge of "don't' reminders.
6. Rein in the Utility Department and cut back on the amount our utilities
pad the General Fund.
7.Concentrate on the wellbeing of those who live here,not focus on those
who want to and for whom we have no more room.
Mary Carlstead
147 Walter Hays Drive
Palo Alto,CA 94303
Attachment F. Previous City Council Priorities
2012 Priorities: 1) City Finances; 2) Land Use and Transportation; 3) Emergency
Preparedness; 4) Environmental Sustainability; 5) Community Collaboration for Youth
Well Being
2011 Priorities: 1) City Finances; 2) Land Use and Transportation; 3) Emergency
Preparedness; 4) Environmental Sustainability; 5) Community Collaboration for Youth
Well Being
2010 Priorities: 1) City Finances; 2) Land Use and Transportation; 3) Emergency
Preparedness; 4) Environmental Sustainability; 5) Community Collaboration for Youth
Well Being
2009 Priorities: 1) Civic Engagement for the Common Good; 2) Economic Health; 3)
Environmental Protection
2008 Priorities: 1) Civic Engagement; 2) Climate Protection; 3) Library Plan/Public Safety
Building; 4) Economic Health
2007 Priorities: 1) Emergency Planning; 2) Global Climate Change; 3) Library Plan/Public
Safety Building; 4) Sustainable Budget
2006 Priorities: 1) Emergency and Disaster Preparedness and Response; 2)
Infrastructure; 3) Increase Infrastructure Funding
2005 Priorities: 1) City Finances; 2) Infrastructure; 3) Affordable Housing; 4) Land Use
Planning; 5) Alternative Transportation/Traffic Calming
2004 Priorities: 1) City Finances; 2) Infrastructure; 3) Affordable Housing; 4) Land Use
Planning; 5) Alternative Transportation/Traffic Calming
2003 Priorities: 1) Long Term Finances; 2) Infrastructure; 3) Land Use Planning; 4)
Alternative Transportation/Traffic Calming; 5) Affordable/ Attainable Housing
2002 Priorities: 1) Long Term Finances; 2) Infrastructure; 3) Land Use Planning; 4)
Alternative Transportation/Traffic Calming; 5) Affordable/ Attainable Housing
Attachment G. 2012 Council Priorities Update
2012 Strategic Priorities Summary
A. City Finances (CF)
Goals
1. Complete labor negotiations with major bargaining groups
2. Complete refuse fund study and stabilization
3. Complete and implement economic development policy
4. Execute budget/fiscal measures to ensure long‐term financial stability
5. IBRC completes long‐term infrastructure needs report to City Council
B. Emergency Preparedness (EP)
Goals
1. Conduct community exercise
2. Evaluate a secondary electrical transmission line source
3. Implement recommendations of Foothills Fire Management Plan
4. Implement Office of Emergency Services (OES) restructure
5. Improve emergency operations readiness
C. Environmental Sustainability (ES)
Goals
1. Evaluate construction of composting digester or alternatives
2. Evaluate and implement plan to introduce electric vehicle (EV) charging stations
3. Establish formal collaboration with Stanford University
4. Explore methods to integrate Palo Alto Green into City Sustainability Programs
5. Prepare Urban Forest Master Plan
D. Land Use & Transportation Planning (LUTP)
Goals
1. Complete Development Center plans improving customer service/accountability
2. Complete Rail Corridor Study
3. Complete Stanford University Medical Center project
4. Substantially complete Comprehensive Plan update
5. Facilitate efforts to sustain Caltrain
6. Participate in regional SB375 & Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
7. Prepare Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan update
E. Youth Well Being (YWB)
Goals
1. Implement Project Safety Net
2. Magical Bridge Playground Project
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 2
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 3
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
City Finances (CF)
Executive Summary:
City finance strategies form the foundation for the City Council identified priorities. A stable
financial picture in the short and long‐term ensures the City’s ability to deliver on all five Council
priorities. Sound City finances are integral to Palo Alto’s quality of life.
A key principle of the City’s finance objectives is to provide for the City’s finances in the near and
long‐term. For example, the City negotiates labor agreements and the contracts envisioned during
this cycle are ones where the City plans to make meaningful long‐lasting changes to key City legacy
costs (e.g., pension and health care). The City is working toward developing a sustainable business
model for funding ongoing infrastructure needs, while eliminating a major backlog of City projects.
These efforts will take time, yet this investment is well worth the effort. This work will result in
improving the overall high quality of life that Palo Alto citizens have come to rely and expect from
their City government. Identified below are goals for Fiscal Year 2011‐2012:
1. Complete labor negotiations with major bargaining groups
2. Complete refuse fund study and stabilization
3. Complete and implement economic development policy
4. Execute budget/fiscal measures to ensure long‐term financial stability
5. IBRC completes long‐term infrastructure needs report to City Council
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 4
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
1. Project: Complete labor negotiations with major bargaining groups
Department: Human Resources Department
Secondary Department: City Attorney
Project start date: May 2010
Target completion date: June 2013
Current status:
During this reporting period, April to December 2012, several new agreements were finalized. Since
2011, IAFF (Fire fighters), FCA (Fire managers), SEIU, and Management employees (more than 800
employees) have made important concessions, including paying a portion or all of the employee
retirement contributions required by CalPERS, 10% medical premium contributions for actives and
retirees, new pension tiers for new hires, and, in the case of IAFF, providing flexibility to the city to
make staffing changes.
In May 2012, the city reached agreement with the Palo Alto Police Officers’ Association (PAPOA).
The city and PAPOA were able to reach agreement on a package of similar concessions with the
exception of changing the retiree medical benefit. At this time, there is no agreement for a
contribution toward retiree medical coverage by future retirees as exists with the other bargaining
units. In July 2012, the city and PAPOA completed a fact finding process regarding this dispute. This
new fact finding law (AB 646) was made effective January 1, 2012 and requires non‐binding fact
finding, should the union request it, after the parties reach impasse but before the Council can
impose new economic terms. The timeline for steps involved are established by law. The city is still
waiting to receive the Fact Finder’s decision on the unresolved PAPOA issue.
After negotiating in good faith for close to two years, the city declared impasse with the Police
Managers’ Association (PMA) in May 2012. The city was compelled to declare impasse due to the
lengthy negotiations process that had taken place with no indication that agreement would be
reached. Because PMA did not pursue fact finding, a resolution was adopted in July 2012 to
implement changes to the terms and conditions of employment for the employees in this group.
The city has not yet reached agreement with UMPAPA, a newly formed unit of management
employees in the Utilities Department. This Unit was established in April 2011 as a result of an
arbitration decision. Twenty‐eight meetings have been held to‐date in this bargaining process.
While UMPAPA employees that were formerly part of the city‐wide unrepresented management
group are paying some medical and retirement contributions, this group has not yet agreed to
similar concessions as other employee units. The city is expecting to reach resolution in early FY
2013.
Next steps:
In 2013, staff’s goal is to bring negotiations with UMPAPA, SEIU Hourly Unit and PMA to a close in
order to provide the city and employees with resolution, and consistency with employee
contributions toward benefit plans. Staff will then initiate contract negotiation meetings with the
SEIU Classified Unit in summer 2013, in attempt to reach agreement prior to the expiration of the
current Memorandum of Agreement in December 2013.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 5
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
2. Project: Complete refuse fund study and fund stabilization
Department: Public Works Department
Secondary Department: Administrative Services Department
Project start date: August 2010
Target completion date: Ongoing
Current status:
Major progress has been made this Fiscal Year in returning the Refuse Fund to financial health and
stability. As a result of closing the Palo Alto Landfill, and other expense reductions and increases in
Refuse Rates in the last several years, the Refuse Fund has been returned to stability, with revenues
balancing expenses. Rates for Refuse Fund services such as street sweeping and household
hazardous waste are now separately broken out on Utility bills, increasing transparency.
Next steps:
Going forward, the challenge will be to maintain this stability and begin to rebuild the financial
reserves in the Refuse Fund. This is a challenge because revenues are currently tied to the amount
of residuals being landfilled, which is decreasing. A new rate structure will be needed in the coming
years which charges for residuals being recycled and composted, activities which also have
substantial costs.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 6
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
3. Project: Complete and implement Economic Development Policy
Department: City Manager’s Office
Project start date: January 2011
Target completion date: January 2013
Current status:
The Policy for the Office of Economic Development has gone through several iterations, and was
presented to the Policy & Services Committee in November 2012 for final consideration. The Policy
is nearly developed; staff anticipates returning to the City Council for adoption in January 2013.
Next steps:
The City Council will consider adoption of the final Economic Development Policy in January 2013.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 7
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
4. Project: Execute budget/fiscal measures to ensure long‐term financial stability
Department: Administrative Services Department
Secondary Department: City Manager’s Office
Project start date: May 2011
Target completion date: Ongoing
Current status:
A balanced General Fund budget was adopted by the City Council for FY2013. The budget
eliminated a projected $5.8 million gap with a combination of increased revenue and spending
reductions. In December, staff presented the FY2013‐2023 Long Range Financial Forecast (LRFF) to
the Finance Committee. For the first time in several years, the LRFF forecasts a surplus in the
General Fund. This is an indication that the economy is improving and revenues are increase. Along
with improving revenues, the City’s actions to curb rising employee pension and healthcare cost
contributed to the positive balance in the General Fund. Staff received feedback from the Finance
Committee and will revise the LRFF to take into account a longer span for establishing revenue
trends.
Next steps:
In January 2013, the Office of Management and Budget will begin the FY2014 budget process. The
City Manager will present the FY2014 Proposed Budget to the City Council in the May timeframe.
Based on the LRFF, staff expects the FY2014 budget to be balanced with a modest surplus, pending
Council direction on infrastructure funding.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 8
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
5. Project: IBRC completes long‐term infrastructure needs reports for City Council
Department: Public Work’s Department
Secondary Department: City Manager’s Office, Administrative Services Department
Project start date: November 2010
Target completion date: Completed
Current status:
Beginning in October 2010, the City Council appointed a 17‐member Infrastructure Blue Ribbon
Commission (IBRC) to analyze and make recommendations to the City Council for meeting the
challenges and improving the City’s extensive infrastructure inventory. On December 22, 2011, the
IBRC issued its final report, Palo Alto’s Infrastructure: Catching Up, Keeping Up, and Moving Ahead.
The report identified an infrastructure backlog and on‐going maintenance needs of $95 million, and
an additional $210 million in new projects for a total of $305 million. It was found approximately
$4.2 million would be necessary each year for the next ten years to "catch up" on the infrastructure
backlog that has been historically underfunded totaling approximately $42 million. Once the City’s
infrastructure is brought up to the appropriate level, the Commission estimated $2.2 million a year
for the next 25 years for a total of nearly $54 million to maintain or "keep up" the City’s
infrastructure to avoid another backlog in the future. Separate from this the report identified $95
million in funding needs for large, once‐in‐a‐generation‐type investments. For example, our fire
stations, new public safety building, municipal services center, treatment plant, civic center, and
bike/pedestrian bridges, as identified by the Commission. While the estimated costs of these
projects continue to be refined and may be offset by other revenue sources, these significant
projects were estimated to total over $200 million and excluded some known potential project
areas (like Cubberley Community Center).
Next steps:
The IBRC report was completed an adopted by Council in December 2011. In 2012, the City Council
held four retreats to focus on the IBRC’s recommendations. On September 18, 2012, the City Council
adopted the plan and high level schedule of the work to be completed over the next two years for a
potential 2014 infrastructure finance measure. In December 2012, the City entered into an
agreement with a polling firm to conduct opinion research beginning in the spring of 2013. Council
will also consider approval of an agreement with a communications consultant in February 2013.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 9
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
B. Emergency Preparedness (EP)
Executive Summary:
The City, like any community in the Bay Area, is susceptible to a variety of natural hazards including
earthquakes, floods, wild‐land fires, and manmade disasters. The City is committed to protecting
life, property, and the environment through a number of activities including preplanning, training,
rapid emergency response, and public safety education. Identified below are goals for Fiscal Year
2011:
1. Conduct community exercise
2. Evaluate a secondary electrical transmission line source
3. Implement recommendations of Foothills Fire Management Plan
4. Implement Office of Emergency Services (OES) restructure
5. Improve emergency operations readiness
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 10
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
1. Project: Conduct community exercise
Department: Police Department
Secondary Department: Fire Department
Project start date: January 2011
Target completion date: Ongoing
Current Status:
In September 2012, OES partnered with Emergency Services Volunteer leadership to develop the
3rd Annual Quakeville Community‐Based Disaster Exercise. This entailed a full activation of a Red
Cross Shelter, supported by City Staff (CSD), Red Cross, and other volunteers, where a few brave
souls, including the Mayor slept overnight, simulating the true conditions of such a shelter. In
addition, ESVs conducted hands‐on drills in search and rescue, medical triage and treatment, and
radio communications.
Next steps:
Quakeville 2013 planning will commence next quarter. The exercise may involve an even larger
cross‐section of the community and other City departments.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 11
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
2. Project: Evaluate a secondary electrical transmission line source
Department: Utilities Department
Project start date: July 2010
Target completion date: December 2013
Current Status:
Staff’s evaluation on the economics and feasibility of the transmission project, to provide a second
electric transmission line source for the City, identified the SLAC project as the preferred option. This
project would connect the City’s Quarry Substation to the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory
(SLAC’s) 230 kV substation. This would not only increase reliability by providing a second
connection point, but also provide savings in the Electric Fund by avoiding certain transmission
charges that the utility currently pays because it is connected to Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s
(PG&E) low voltage transmission system. Another pending alternative would be a PG&E project to
establish a 115kV line from Ames to Colorado on the existing 60kV lines. As noted in the last
quarterly update, staff and PG&E agreed that the SLAC project is a viable alternative to the Ames
project. The initial evaluation of alternatives has been completed and the next phase is for potential
parties to the SLAC project to sign a Letter of Intent to facilitate further discussion and development
of a project agreement.
Since the last quarterly report, staff submitted the SLAC project to the California Independent
System Operator’s (CASIO) 2013 transmission planning process. This was necessary to keep the
SLAC project as a viable alternative to PG&E’s Ames project, which was also resubmitted by PG&E to
the CAISO for consideration.
Next steps:
Staff will continue to work with all parties of interest as needed including the Department of Energy,
SLAC, the Western Area Power Administration, and Stanford on an updated engineering analysis and
a set of guiding principles for an agreement or letter/memorandum of understanding to move
forward with project development.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 12
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
3. Project: Implement recommendations of Foothills Fire Management Plan
Department: Fire Department
Secondary Department: Police Department
Project Start Date: January 2011
Target Completion Date: Ongoing
Current status:
A City committee consisting of representatives from Fire, OES, Public Works, Purchasing, Police and
Community Services took over responsibility of the Foothills Fire Management Plan. The prescribed
burn planning for two nine acre burns in the Arastradero Preserve had been completed, but
emergency mutual aid requests for crews to respond to out of county wildland fires delayed the
project until spring 2013. Staff continues to work with local and state fire partners in project
planning. Further committee meetings are planned for early 2013 to discuss project burn
preparations and other fuel treatment objectives.
Three community fire safety and awareness meetings have occurred, and further community
meetings will occur once the burns are scheduled in early summer 2013. The community meetings
supported project information updates and wildland fire safety education.
To support brush clearing along Los Trancos Woods Road, the City created a Hold Harmless
agreement for private land owners. Vegetation clearing reduces community risk and supports
emergency egress out of the area.
Next steps:
Purchasing and the City Attorney’s Office are negotiating a contract with the Fire Safe Council (FSC).
The contract is similar to that of Acterra and will be presented to Council for approval in early 2013.
The contract would be for five years and annual work would be determined each year depending on
need. The FSC applied for a grant to assist in their treatment efforts, but the project was not
selected for funding. The FSC will continue to apply for future grants.
Cal Fire hand crews were unable to complete the vegetation risk reduction treatment work in the
fall due to ongoing wildland fire emergencies that took crews out of Santa Clara County. Staff is
rescheduling this work for the spring of 2013, prior to the prescribed burn. The priority continues to
be vegetation clearance along Los Trancos Woods Road. With the signed Hold Harmless
agreements, Cal Fire hand crews will be able to clear the entire area within the City of Palo Alto.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 13
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
4. Project: Implement Office of Emergency Services (OES) restructure
Department: City Manager’s Office/Police Department
Secondary Department: Fire Department, City Manager’s Office
Project start date: May 2011
Target completion date: Completed
Current status:
In December 2011, staff selected and Council confirmed the appointment of Officer Kenneth Dueker
to serve as the Director of the Office of Emergency Services.
The Office of Emergency Services has commenced an all hazards training plan for staff, stakeholders,
and community members. Between April and December 2012, OES hosted or supported over 60
trainings, exercises, planning meetings, and special events for ESVs, the general public, and Stanford
University. With the uptick in residential burglaries, the popularity of the Block Preparedness
Coordinator Program training (which subsumed the old Neighborhood Watch) has increased, and
has been coordinated with the Police Department's "Lock It or Lose It" education campaign. In
addition, special training was developed for senior citizens, those with functional needs, and those
who live/work in the Wildland Urban Interface (foothills of Palo Alto and Stanford).
Next steps:
OES is working on a training plan for staff, Emergency Services Volunteers, and the general public
that will span multiple years and include all disciplines and community planning elements.
There are numerous public safety scenarios and training requirements to build on known needs. For
example: OES was invited by the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) Office of Emergency
Management to collaborate on the design and execution of a large, multi‐agency, multi‐discipline
Full Scale Exercise with a scenario of a gunman at the Hospital. This event was held in June 2013.
Responding agencies included PAPD, PAFD, Stanford University Department of Public Safety, Santa
Clara County EMS, Santa Clara County Public Health, and others. Now, OES is working with
the Stanford University Department of Public Safety on a full scale exercise covering a critical
incident scenario at the Stanford Stadium.
An example of what is on the 2013 ESV Calendar can be found on
http://www.paneighborhoods.org/ep
*This City Council priority has been completed.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 14
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
5. Project: Improve emergency operations readiness
Department: Police Department
Secondary Department: Fire Department
Project start date: January 2011
Target completion date: Ongoing
Current status: Emergency operational readiness is now defined by FEMA as a “whole community”
task, meaning that government entities are to collaborate with non‐government organizations
(NGOs), community‐based organizations (CBOs), and the private sector.
Emergency Operations Center (EOC): The legacy EOC has been substantially updated to
match current best practices and state‐of‐art. The City’s EOC is now much better suited for
all‐hazards prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery. The EOC now supports day‐
to‐day monitoring of risks, evolving hazards, and special events, providing situational
awareness to Public Safety, Public Works, Utilities, and other staff.
Mobile Emergency Operations Center (MEOC): The MEOC continues to serve Palo Alto and
Stanford University communities, with deployments to various events ranging from Stanford
football games to real‐world police operations. For example, earlier this year the MEOC
served as the field command post for multiple agencies assigned to protect the President of
Israel during his visit to Palo Alto and the Stanford campus.
Emergency Services Volunteers (ESVs): OES restructured disparate volunteer programs,
placing them in a new, unified structure: Block Preparedness Coordinator Community
Emergency Response Team, and ARES/RACES (ham radio) volunteers.
Quakeville Community‐Based Disaster Exercise: OES partnered with ESV leadership and
the Red Cross to develop the 3rd Annual Quakeville Exercise. This entailed a full activation of
a Red Cross Shelter (per the City plan, at Cubberley), supported by city staff, Red Cross, and
other volunteers. In addition, ESVs conducted hands‐on drills in search and rescue, medical
triage and treatment, and radio communications.
Community Emergency Preparedness: OES continued to work with the Police Department
and Stanford University to provide training and educational sessions for both disaster‐
response entities as well as the general public. With the uptick in residential burglaries, the
popularity of the Block Preparedness Coordinator Program (which subsumed the old
Neighborhood Watch) has increased and has been coordinated with the Police
Department’s “Lock It or Lose It” education campaign.
Next steps:
The Police Department and OES will continue work in collaboration with the Information Technology
Department (IT) to update plans, staff training, disaster supplies and equipment, and technology
(communications, IT systems) to support extended operations under the all‐hazard planning
environment.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 15
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
C. Environmental Sustainability (ES)
Executive Summary:
Environmental sustainability is a core value and ongoing priority for the City. The City has been a
leader in this area in the Bay Area metropolitan region and in North America. The City is a Certified
Green Business and has adopted a Climate Protection Plan, Sustainability Policy, Palo Alto Green
Program, and continues to make strides in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Identified below are
goals for Fiscal Year 2011:
1. Evaluate construction of composting digester or alternatives
2. Evaluate and implement plan to introduce electric vehicle (EV) charging stations
3. Establish formal collaboration with Stanford University
4. Explore methods to integrate Palo Alto Green into City Sustainability Programs
5. Prepare Urban Forest Master Plan
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 16
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
1. Project: Evaluate construction of composting digester or alternatives
Department: Public Works Department
Project start date: October 2010
Target completion date: Ongoing
Current status:
In February 2012, Council directed staff to work with Alternative Resources, Inc. (ARI) to develop an
action plan and timeline and to return to Council to present it. The action plan and timeline
describes the necessary steps and schedule to obtain and analyze vendor proposals for an
Energy/Compost Facility through a Request for Proposals process that would allow Council to make
a decision on the Facility in February 2014. It also includes coordination with the Regional Water
Quality Control Plant’s (RWQCP) efforts to retire the existing biosolids incinerators, and
development of an Organics Resource Recovery Strategy. Palo Alto continues to be at the cutting
edge of diverting residuals from landfills, having diverted approximately 80% since the base year and
exceeding State goals. In 2012, the City developed a new pilot program for residential food scraps,
one of few remaining residuals still being landfilled here. The pilot program will cover one
neighborhood , begin in early 2013, and result in the composting of the residential food scraps from
that area.
Next steps:
Proposals are being evaluated, and a Council decision to 1) move forward with an Energy/Compost
Facility; 2) utilize a vendor‐provided export option 3) continue with current programs for organics
management; or 4) a combination of two or more strategies will be made. The environmental
review process is being run concurrently with the RFP process. An Environmental Checklist will be
performed for the range of expected options. The bulk of the foundational work for the
environmental review process will be completed before the proposals are received, but to ensure
that all possible environmental impacts (and benefits) are fully evaluated, the environmental
process will be finalized after the proposals are received.
Following Council’s decision in February 2014, the City will implement either an Energy/Compost
Facility option or an export option. Export options may be those provided by vendors through the
RFP process or the current programs that are in place. Biosolids may be managed as part of an
Energy/Compost Facility, through an export option, or through an on‐site management option at the
RWQCP.
Byxbee Park Expansion & Energy/ Compost Facility Consideration: Substation portions of the City's
closed 126 acre landfill will be capped in preparation for further expansion and improvements to
Byxbee Park. Simultaneously, 10 acres of the old landfill will be considered for an Energy/Compost
facility.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 17
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
2. Project: Evaluate and implement plan to introduce electric vehicle (EV) charging stations
Department: City Manager’s Office
Secondary Department: Planning and Community Environment, Utilities Department
Project start date: 2011
Target completion date: On‐going
Current status:
A multi‐departmental task force developed an EV Infrastructure Policy for Council approval in
December 2011. In 2012, a number of steps were taken to implement Council policy:
1. Residential time‐of‐use (TOU) electric rates were approved by Council for implementation in
January 2013. This retail rate provides incentives for residential customers to charge their
electric vehicles at late night. In addition to customers receiving a lower electric rate, late
night charging also reduces the adverse impact on the electric distribution and transmission
grid. Approximately 150 residential customers are expected to sign‐up for this pilot scale
electric rate.
2. City facilitated a residential customer’s request to install a charging station on city
maintained planting strip in front of his home, utilizing electricity from his home. In return,
the customer was willing to make the charging stations available to other EV owners in the
vicinity. City is now evaluating the merits of such approach and examining the
implementation of a 20 person, 2 year pilot project to accommodate similar requests from
residents.
3. Stanford shopping mall attracted the first ‘high speed publicly available fast charger’ in the
Bay Area. This device has the capability to fully charge a car within 30 minutes for a fee of
$7.
4. The five EV chargers installed at 3 downtown parking garages in the summer of 2011 has
continued to see increased utilization rates. Utilization rates increased 90% between
January and December of 2012, with 650 combined charging sessions at the 3 locations
during the month of December 2012. Staff has received numerous requests to increase the
number of charging stations and spots at these locations and are in the process evaluating
options to meet the increasing demand.
5. Staff has made the permitting process for EV charger installation more streamlined during
the year, with forms and instructions made available on the web. With an appointment and
all appropriate documentation, over the counter permits are being issued.
6. City continues to educate customers on the benefits of EV for customers to make informed
decisions. Staff is collaborating with regional organizations in this regard.
7. Due to reduced level of staffing and competing priorities in 2012, the project to attract
private sector EV charger installer/operator partners through an open solicitation process
(with existing grant funds) was not undertaken.
Next Steps:
Staff expects to continue facilitating EV infrastructure development to meet our community’s needs
and meet City’s community carbon reduction goals.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 18
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
3. Project: Establish formal collaboration with Stanford University
Department: City Manager’s Office
Project start date: 2011
Target completion date: Complete, but partnership will be ongoing
Current Status:
As reported previously, there are three main connection points which could be explored and
expanded to develop a stronger relationship between Stanford University and the City. They are
internships or academic exchange, faculty knowledge or City projects, and intra‐departmental
development or utility relationships.
A team at the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) has formed a “Water Team” with
graduate students and faculty at Stanford to review potential projects, including a system of
recycled water usage. A new pilot project to test technology (reverse osmosis) for removing salts
and toxics was implemented at the RWQCP in 2012. A pilot to concentrate organics as a first step
toward energy recovery was conducted at the RWQCP in early 2012 as part of the collaboration.
Staff is an “industrial partner” in Stanford’s new Engineering Research Center on Reinventing Urban
Water Use and will continue to participate in 2013.
Next Steps:
Staff will be working with the Office of Government and Community Relations to determine an
appropriate way to celebrate the internships discussed above, and further develop the process to
encourage future internships. Staff will continue to collaborate with the many different departments
on issues or programs where the City could add value to the process or the community. Such
programs or events could include the Solar Decathlon which Stanford students are participating in,
Earth Day events, and joint community groups such as the Community Environmental Action
Partnership.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 19
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
4. Project: Explore methods to integrate PaloAltoGreen into City Sustainability Programs
Department: City Manager’s Office
Secondary Department: Planning and Community Environment, Utilities Department
Project Start Date: 2011
Target Completion Date: PAG redesign by December 2013. On‐going
Current Status:
Staff is implementing a Sustainability Board and a multi‐department Sustainability Team whose goal
is to provide an integrated, seamless approach to promoting sustainable behaviors. This Team is
directed by the Board lead by the City Manager and the directors from the Utilities, Planning,
Community services and Public Works Departments. This new team will seek out opportunities to
work across departments.
Next Steps:
As PaloAltoGreen needs to be revised, the Utilities Advisory Commission discussed several options
to migrate the program to different types of programs to promote greenhouse gas reduction in
December 2012. A City Council study session will be held in February 2013 to provide staff with
further input. With that input, staff will develop a redesign proposal for PaloAltoGreen that will
continue to provide a venue for customers to voluntarily work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
and to work within the larger comprehensive multi‐departmental sustainability plan.
Staff is developing a strategy to implement a comprehensive multi‐departmental outreach
education plan for the public, as well as, metrics and a framework for a sustainability strategy. The
first step in the plan is for a sustainability webpage which has been developed in conjunction with
the City’s website project.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 20
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
5. Project: Prepare Urban Forest Master Plan
Department: Planning and Community Environment
Secondary Department: Fire Department
Project start date: December 2010
Target completion date: Summer 2013
Current status:
Further work on the Urban Master Plan was deferred, pending the hiring of an Urban Forester in the
Public Work’s Department. That position has been filled and the new Urban Forester has reviewed
the Urban Forest Master Plan and developed a working plan. In December, the Urban Forester
engaged a technical editor to begin finalizing the report.
Next steps:
In early 2013, the City’s technical writer will revise/edit the draft Plan and subsequently staff will
schedule community meetings, workshops and hearings with Boards, Commissions, and the Council.
In summer 2013, the Urban Forest Master Plan is tentatively scheduled to return to the Council for
adoption.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 21
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
D. Land Use & Transportation Planning (LUTP)
Executive Summary:
Land use and transportation are key indicators of quality of life in Palo Alto. The overarching
principle of the City’s land use and transportation objectives is to provide for sustainable
development and services: growth, rehabilitation, and services that are sustainable in economic and
fiscal terms, as well as in environmental respects. The City desires to develop in ways that promote
the efficient delivery of services, assures high‐quality development and design, protects and
broadens the City’s tax and revenue base, preserves and enhances key environmental attributes,
minimizes energy and water use, and promotes transportation alternatives such as walking,
bicycling and transit. Identified below are goals for Fiscal Year 2011‐2012.
1. Complete Development Center plans improving customer service/accountability
2. Complete Rail Corridor Study
3. Complete Stanford University Medical Center project
4. Substantially complete Comprehensive Plan update
5. Facilitate efforts to sustain Caltrain
6. Participate in regional SB375 & Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
7. Prepare Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan update
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 22
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
1. Project: Complete Development Center plans improving customer service/accountability
Department: Development Services Director
Secondary Department: City Manager’s Office
Project start date: July 2010
Target completion date: January 2013 (Phase 2)
Current status:
The Development Center (DC) Blueprint Project has entailed a series of efforts by the Steering
Committee (department heads and upper level managers), Staff Action Committee (approximately
20 staff members involved in the DC process from multiple departments), and a Development
Center Advisory Committee (professionals and others with periodic or regular interaction with the
DC). In late 2011, the Council authorized the City Manager to hire staff to implement program
actions, including piloting new project management and point of contact procedures, as well as
maintaining adequate levels of service at the DC counter. Budget for the additional staff, technology
improvements, and additional office space was subsequently approved by Council on December 6,
2011 and January 9, 2012. The Development Services Director was created in the 2013 budget and
Peter Pirnejad was hired into that position in October 2012. The Development Center Manager
position was filled as well, and other project coordinator positions have been filled and will begin
work in mid‐December. Space on the second floor of the 285 Hamilton building has been leased to
accommodate other support for the Development Center and the floor is now furnished and
occupied. Substantial remodeling of the first floor to a more customer‐service orientation was
completed in fall 2012. Extensive technology enhancements are also underway to facilitate more
online permitting and customer convenience. The DC Advisory Committee meets periodically to
advise staff regarding the process changes.
Next steps:
The Development Services Director has hired an interim Chief Building Official until the first quarter
of 2013 when a more permanent solution will be identified. The DC continues to use contract plan
check and inspection services to supplement staff as workload dictates. Staff will be developing
performance measurement objectives and procedures for presentation to Council in early 2013, and
will continue to meet with the DC Advisory Group to assure that customer service enhancements
are consistent with their desired outcomes (and those of the public in general). In early 2013, the
DC Manager recruitment will begin to fill the position that is currently being filled on an interim
basis. The department’s technology needs continue to be explored and refined in an effort to
provide the best and most efficient solution. Over the course of the next two years, the department
is exploring ways to be fully cost recoverable through the collection of fees for service.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 23
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
2. Project: Complete Rail Corridor Study
Department: Planning and Community Environment
Project start date: November 2010
Target completion date: February 2013
Current status:
The Rail Corridor Task Force met 15 times to discuss a variety of issues, opportunities, and vision
concepts for the Corridor. Study Sessions with the Planning and Transportation Commission and the
Council were conducted on June 8 and June 27, 2011 to summarize activity and progress to date. A
tour of the Rail Corridor Study Area was held on September 10, 2011 and included 28 participants. A
preliminary draft Plan was reviewed at two meetings of the Task Force and a revised draft was
reviewed on January 19, 2012. The Draft was reviewed by the public at a community workshop, and
by the Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee, Citizens Traffic Safety Committee, Planning and
Transportation Commission, and the Council’s Rail Committee. The final draft report was developed
by the Task Force in May and was subsequently recommended for approval by the Planning and
Transportation Commission in June. The City Council deferred review due to its busy schedule, and
in September referred the report back to the Rail Committee, to assure consistency with evolving
Guiding Principles and positions regarding Caltrain. On December 6, 2012, the Rail Committee
recommended approval with some modifications to the Study.
Next steps:
The Council will review the final report in January 2013. The document will be incorporated by
reference into the Comprehensive Plan.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 24
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
3. Project: Complete Stanford University Medical Center Project
Department: Planning and Community Environment
Secondary Department: City Manager’s Office
Project start date: Early 2007
Target completion date: Completed
Current status:
On June 6, 2011 the Council approved all entitlements, the Development Agreement, and certified
the Environmental Impact Report for the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) Renewal and
Replacement Project. The second reading of the Development Agreement and zoning ordinances
were approved on August 1, 2011.
Next steps:
SUMC has made Initial payments (approximately 1/3 of total) to the City for community benefits.
Construction of improvements on Welch Road and the upgrade of the Hoover Pavilion have
commenced. In 2012, Stanford hospitals will undergo review by the State (California Office of
Statewide Health Planning and Development) for building permit review and approval. In 2013,
hospital construction will commence. The completion of the entire project, including hospitals,
clinics, and parking garages is expected in 2025.
*This City Council priority has been completed.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 25
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
4. Project: Substantially complete Comprehensive Plan Update
Department: Planning and Community Environment
Project start date: 2008
Target completion date: Early 2014
Current status:
The Comprehensive Plan is expected to be completed, in draft form, by early 2013 and then undergo
environmental review (Environmental Impact Report) prior to adoption. The East Meadow/West
Bayshore Area Concept Plan was tentatively accepted in February 2012, and the California
Avenue/Fry’s Area Concept Plan alternatives were considered at a community meeting in October
2012. A draft Housing Element was considered by the Council in June 2012, and was forwarded to
the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review. The Planning and
Transportation Commission has completed its review of the policies and programs contained in the
Housing, Land Use/Community Environment, Community Services, and Transportation chapters.
Next steps:
The Planning and Transportation Commission will finalize its review of policies and programs by
early 2013 for presentation to the Council. Staff has responded to comments of the State HCD and
has shared its responses with the Council’s Regional Housing Mandate Committee, with the hope of
bringing the Draft Housing Element to the Committee in January and to the PTC and Council for final
adoption and certification in February or March. In February 2013, the Planning and Transportation
Commission will review the California Avenue/Fry’s Area Concept Plan. Environmental review of the
Comprehensive Plan is anticipated to begin in the spring 2013, and the Plan would be adopted in the
end of 2013 or early 2014.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 26
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
5. Project: Facilitate efforts to sustain Caltrain
Department: City Manager’s Office
Secondary Department: Planning and Community Environment
Project start date: March 2011
Target completion date: Ongoing
Current status:
The Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (PCJPB) continues to evaluate long‐term Caltrain
strategies to sustain Caltrain service on the Peninsula. The City continues to work with other public
agencies, Federal and State legislative advocacy firms, and the Silicon Valley Leadership Group
(SVLG) to consider strategies and plans to address Caltrain’s operating and capital modernization
fiscal issues. The City Council Rail Committee has regularly invited Caltrain technical and policy staff
to present information on Caltrain’s plans to modernize rail lines through electrification, install a
new positive train control system (mandated by the Federal government), and develop a fiscally
sustainable business model with or without high speed rail (HSR) on the Peninsula. There has been
no definitive progress to date on a long‐term fiscal plan which would include a dedicated funding
stream for Caltrain service (e.g., Peninsula‐wide sales tax). The City Council’s Rail Committee has
taken strong positions opposed to the State’s HSR project, including financing and ridership
projections. The Committee recently commented on a MOU between the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission (MTC), Caltrain and other regional agencies that sets a framework
necessary for obtaining available funding from the California High Speed Rail Authority to help
support the Caltrain electrification effort as part of a Blended System. The Committee has also
commented on the revised Program EIR for the Bay Area to Central Valley segment of the HSR
project.
Next steps:
It is anticipated that discussions will continue during Fiscal Year 2012‐13 between partners including
San Francisco County and City, San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, the MTC, Valley
Transportation Authority (VTA), major private employers, Stanford University, City of Palo Alto, and
other Peninsula cities to come up with a viable funding plan for Caltrain. The Rail Committee will
continue to stay actively involved in both High Speed Rail and Caltrain proposals.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 27
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
6. Project: Participate in SB375 & Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
Department: Planning and Community Environment
Project Start Date: 2009
Target Completion Date: 2013
Current status:
Staff attended many regional and countywide meetings to participate in these regional planning
discussions about the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) required by SB375. Council Member
Scharff and the Planning and Community Environment Director attended monthly meetings of the
Regional Housing Needs Methodology Committee through the spring of 2012. The regional agencies
released an Initial Vision Scenario of the SCS on March 11, 2011. Alternative growth scenarios were
released by the Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission
in July 2011. On July 18, 2011 the Council directed staff to work with its Regional Housing Mandate
Committee to formulate an action plan to focus on coordination with State legislators and other
cities, particularly with respect to demographic and economic assumptions. The City, upon the
recommendations of the Committee, has commented to the regional agencies regarding the One
Bay Area Grant Program and housing allocations with the sphere‐of‐influence (Stanford). A Draft
Preferred Scenario was released on March 9, 2012, and resulted in somewhat reduced housing
projections for the region and for Palo Alto. ABAG and MTC are now in the process of preparing
environmental review of the SCS Preferred Scenario, with a target date of providing the final version
in spring 2013. ABAG has released its draft regional housing needs assessment (RHNA) allocations
for the 2015‐2022 planning period, and has assigned Palo Alto a housing objective of 2,179 units to
be planned and zoned for. The Regional Housing Mandate Committee and the Council have
requested revisions by ABAG, which were denied, and are now in the process of appealing the
allocation.
Next steps:
Staff continues to meet with the Council’s Regional Housing Mandate Committee to implement a
Council strategy and to prepare a response to the regional agencies regarding the RHNA allocations.
Staff will present an appeal letter to the Committee in January and to the Council in late January or
February. Staff will continue to monitor the status of the SCS scenario, the latest version of which is
anticipated to be presented in early 2013.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 28
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
7. Project: Prepare Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan update
Department: Planning and Community Environment
Project start date: September 2012
Target completion date: Ongoing
Current status:
The Council adopted the City’s updated Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan in July 2012. The
Plan included approximately $86 million in improvements to be implemented over the next 5‐10
years. The City has taken an initial major step to funding the improvements by obtaining a $5.5
million grant from Santa Clara County to support design and development of a bike/pedestrian
bridge at Adobe Creek over Highway 101 ($4 million) and a trail along Matadero Creek ($1.5 million).
Another $50,000 grant would fund the construction of a gap link in the Bay Trail. Signage and
striping improvements have begun for the Castilleja/Park Boulevard bicycle boulevard. A number of
innovative bicycle treatments are ongoing, including installation of bike corrals downtown and
green‐colored bike lanes on safe routes to school streets.
Next steps:
Staff expects to present to the Council an implementation work program and timeframe in the first
quarter of 2013, including possible use of Stanford University Medical Center community benefit
(“sustainability”) funds. Traffic engineering firms will be retained early in 2013 to accelerate design
of Plan projects. The Adobe Creek/101 bridge plans will be presented to Council early in 2013 to
initiate environmental review and a proposed design competition. Design studies and community
outreach will begin for the Matadero Creek trail. Extensive signage and striping improvements,
particularly related to bike boulevard development, will be ongoing throughout the coming year.
Staff will be proposing approximately $1.2 million per year in the Capital Improvements Program for
the next five years to be devoted to these efforts.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 29
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
E. Youth Well Being (YWB)
Executive Summary:
The City plays two important roles with regard to community collaboration for youth well being.
First, the City plays a role of convener and coordinator, bringing the community together in order to
effectively harness the community’s talent, expertise, and goodwill so that the community may have
the greatest impact in fostering youth well being. A meaningful example of the City’s role as
convener and coordinator is seen in the Project Safety Net (PSN) Community Task Force. PSN is
focused on developing and implementing a comprehensive community‐based mental health plan for
overall youth and teen well being. A focus in 2011 is to support PSN as defined in the PSN Plan
(www.PSNPaloAlto.org).
Secondly, the City plays a direct role in providing programs, services, and facilities for youth and
teens. Examples include the variety of afterschool programs at the Palo Alto Teen Center, Children’s
Theatre, Junior Museum and Zoo, Art Center, and Rinconada Pool. The City’s capacity to provide
programs, services, and facilities for youth well being is dependent on community collaboration
through substantial support of Friends Groups and foundations. An example of community
collaboration can be seen in the vision to build the Magical Bridge Playground in coordination with
the Friends of the Palo Alto Parks. The Magical Bridge Playground is planned for Mitchell Park and
will be Palo Alto’s first playground accessible to people of all abilities and ages. Identified below are
goals for Fiscal Year 2011:
1. Implement Project Safety Net
2. Magical Bridge Playground Project
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 30
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
1. Project: Implement Project Safety Net (PSN)
Department: Community Services Department
Secondary Department: Police Department
Project start date: September 2009
Target completion date: Ongoing
Current status:
Project Safety Net continues to be very active in working towards suicide prevention and youth well
being. Recent progress made includes the hiring of a Project Safety Net Director hired (March 2012)
who conducted an audit of the effort which resulted in a “41 Days Report” which identified the
following three overarching themes: 1) Re‐engage collaboration with all levels of PSN; 2) Activate
youth voice and participation in collaborative; and 3) Balance and sustain the combined work of
suicide prevention and youth well being. Findings were shared with PSN community coalition
members at the June 2012 PSN meeting, PSN Steering Committee Meeting, PAUSD School Board,
City Council, Human Relations Commission and the Parks and Recreation Commission.
Other key accomplishments in the area of QPR (suicide prevention training) were the creation of
youth‐based role playing and the scheduling of over 14 QPR trainings which resulted in the training
of approximately 300 people. PSN also secured a $30,000 grant from the Palo Alto Weekly Holiday
fund to support the work of the Palo Alto Youth Collaborative CCT, Developmental Assets CCT, and
the creation of a Communications Plan for PSN. PSN worked with Palo Alto Fire Fighters and
Stanford University to host a Community Pancake Breakfast on October 20, 2012 with large
community collaboration and support. Over 900 community members attended and $4,500 was
earned for PSN.
Next steps:
The following are next steps for PSN: 1) Develop a Crisis Protocol Plan and Mental Health Tool Kit
that is in keeping with the City of Palo Alto’s Suicide Prevention Policy; 2) Report back to the Finance
Committee on the use of and future plans for the Stanford University Medical Center Development
Agreement funds; 3) Develop a Communications Plan; and 4) Explore the development of a strategic
plan for PSN.
Project Tracking Report (April 2012‐December 2012) Page 31
Ci
t
y
of
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
Re
p
o
r
t
2. Project: Magical Bridge Playground Project
Department: Community Services Department
Project start date: July 2011
Target completion date: June 2013
Current status:
After approving the Letter of Intent between the City and the Friends of the Palo Alto Parks (Friends)
on July 18, 2011 staff began working with the Friends to create a Scope of Work for landscape
design services. In January 2012, members of Friends together with staff from Public Works
Engineering and Community Services began working with the selected landscape design firm of
Royston, Hanamoto, Alley and Abey, who was the firm who initially designed Mitchell Park. Over
the year a number of community meetings have been hosted for comments, suggestions and
concerns from neighbors, park users and parent of special needs children for the design of the new
playground and pathways leading to and through this area of Mitchell Park. The conceptual designs
have been vetted with the Parks and Recreation Commission at their June 26, 2012, regular meeting
and with the Human Relations Commission at their July 12, 2012, regular meeting. On November 19,
2012, Council approved a fundraising plan and naming designation plan for the playground. To‐date
two of the ten zones of the playground have received pledges from donors. The Friends of the
Magical Bridge have continued to develop marketing and fundraising materials and outreach
strategies. The Friends have been successful in partnering with the Sobrato Family Foundation for
an awareness raising campaign through local newspapers.
Next steps:
Staff anticipates that the design for the playground will be finished by February 2013, and will then
be reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission, Architectural Review Board, and Council by
April 2013. The design firm will then be able to finalize their design concepts and prepare final cost
estimates for the project.
Under the terms of the Letter of Intent, the Friends have until June 30, 2013 to raise the funds for
the project and be able to enter into a construction agreement with the City.
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3479)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 1/28/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Investment Activity Report
Title: City of Palo Alto Investment Activity Report for the Second Quarter,
Fiscal Year 2013
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Administrative Services
Background
The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the City’s investment portfolio status as of the
end of the second quarter. The City’s investment policy requires that staff report quarterly to
Council on the City’s portfolio composition compared to Council-adopted policy, portfolio
performance, and other key investment and cash flow information.
Discussion
The City’s investment portfolio is detailed in Attachment B. It is grouped by investment type
and includes the investment issuer, date of maturity, current market value, the book and face
(par) value, and the weighted average maturity of each type of investment and of the entire
portfolio.
The par value of the City’s portfolio is $441.5 million; in comparison, last quarter it was $417.8
million. The growth in the portfolio of $23.7 million since the last quarter primarily results from
$26.1 million in receipts from the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) Development
Agreement including impact fees related to the project.
The portfolio consists of $33.8 million in liquid accounts and $407.7 million in U. S. government
treasury investments, agency securities, and certificates of deposit. The $407.7 million includes
$106.5 million in investments maturing in less than two years, comprising 26.1 percent of the
City’s investment in notes and securities. The investment policy requires that at least $50
million be maintained in securities maturing in less than two years.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
The current market value of the portfolio is 103.6 percent of the book value. The market value
of securities fluctuates, depending on how interest rates perform. When interest rates
decrease, the market value of the securities in the City’s portfolio will likely increase; likewise,
when interest rates increase, the market value of the securities will likely decrease.
Understanding and showing market values is not only a reporting requirement, but essential to
knowing the principal risks in actively buying and selling securities. It is important to note,
however, that the City’s practice is to buy and hold investments until they mature so changes in
market price do not affect the City’s investment principal. The market valuation is provided by
Union Bank of California, which is the City’s safekeeping agent. The average life to maturity of
the investment portfolio is 3.78 years compared to 3.86 years last quarter.
Investments Made During the Second Quarter
During the second quarter, $25.4 million of government agency securities with an average yield
of 1.9% percent matured. During the same period, government securities totaling $32.0 million
with an average yield of 1.9% percent were purchased. Though yields on purchased securities
were similar to maturing ones in the second quarter, it’s expected that higher yielding maturing
investments will be re-invested at lower interest rates and interest rates will remain at
historically low levels in future quarters. As a result, the portfolio’s yield is expected to further
decline. The City’s short-term money market and pool account increased by $17.1 million
compared to the first quarter. Investment staff continually monitors the City’s short-term cash
flow needs and adjusts liquid funds to meet those needs.
Availability of Funds for the Next Six Months
Normally, the flow of revenues from the City’s utility billings and General Fund sources is
sufficient to provide funds for ongoing expenditures in those respective funds. Projections
indicate receipts will be $216.1 million and expenditures will be $213.6 million over the next six
months, indicating an overall growth in the portfolio of $2.5 million.
As of December 31, 2012, the City had $33.8 million deposited in the Local Agency Investment
Fund (LAIF) and a money market account that could be withdrawn on a daily basis. In addition,
investments totaling $20.0 million will mature between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2013. On
the basis of the above projections, staff is confident that the City will have more than sufficient
funds or liquidity to meet expenditure requirements for the next six months.
Compliance with City Investment Policy
During the second quarter, staff complied with all aspects of the investment policy.
Attachment C lists the major restrictions in the City’s investment policy compared with the
portfolio’s actual performance.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Investment Yields
Interest income on an accrual basis for the second quarter was $2.7 million. As of December
31, 2012, the yield to maturity of the City’s portfolio was 2.44 percent. This compares to a yield
of 2.54 percent in the first quarter. The portfolio yield is expected to further decrease in future
quarters as staff continues to re-invest higher-yielding maturing securities at lower interest
rates. The City’s portfolio yield of 2.44 percent compares to LAIF’s average yield for the quarter
of 0.33 percent and an average yield on the two-year and five-year Treasury bonds during the
second quarter of approximately 0.26 percent and 0.69 percent, respectively.
Yield Trends
During the last 4 ½ years, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) maintained the
historically low federal funds and discount rate at 0.25 and 0.75 percent, respectively. FOMC
continued outlook is that there will be moderate economic growth and improvements though
household spending and the housing sector rate of growth have slowed down. Inflation
continues to remain low with key commodities such as gasoline prices declining. The concerns
of economic problems in Europe, slowdowns in Asia, and job data in the U.S. continue. The
FOMC remains committed to keeping interest rates at exceptionally low levels as long as the
unemployment rate remains above 6.5 percent and inflation remain low to stimulate the
economy and boost job growth. The FOMC monetary policy will continue to exert considerable
downward pressure on the City’s portfolio yield.
Funds Held by the City or Managed Under Contract
Attachment A is a consolidated report of all City investment funds, including those not held
directly in the investment portfolio. These include cash in the City’s regular bank account with
Wells Fargo. The bond proceeds, reserves, and debt service payments being held by the City’s
fiscal agents are subject to the requirements of the underlying debt indenture. The trustees for
the bond funds are U.S. Bank and California Asset Management Program (CAMP). Bond funds
with U.S. Bank are invested in federal agency and money market mutual funds that consist
exclusively of U.S. Treasury securities. Bond funds in CAMP are invested in banker’s acceptance
notes, certificates of deposit, commercial paper, federal agency securities, and repurchase
agreements. The most recent data on funds held by the fiscal agent is as of December 31, 2012.
Fiscal Impact
This is an information report.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Environmental Review
This information report is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act;
therefore, an environmental review is not required.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Consolidated Report of Cash Management (PDF)
Attachment B: Investment Portfolio (PDF)
Attachment C: Investment Policy Compliance (PDF)
Book Value Market Value
City Investment Portfolio (see Attachment B)446,980,947$ 463,214,263$
Other Funds Held by the City
Cash with Wells Fargo Bank 1,151,516 1,151,516
(includes general and imprest accounts)
Petty/Working Cash 98,653 98,653
Total - Other Funds Held By City 1,250,169 1,250,169
Funds Under Management of Third Party Trustees *
US Bank Trust Services **
2002 Downtown Parking Impvt. (Taxable) Certificates of Participation
Reserve Fund 238,367 238,367
2009 Water Revenue Bonds (Build America Bonds)
Project, Debt Service, Reserve, Cost of Issuance Funds 17,274,240 17,274,240
2011 Utility Revenue Refunding Bonds
Debt Service, Reserve, and Cost of Issuance Funds 1,484,695 1,484,695
2012 University Ave. Parking Refunding Bonds
Cost of Issuance Fund 16,624 16,624
California Asset Management Program (CAMP) ***
2010 General Obligation (Library) Bond
Project Fund 17,687,216 17,687,216
2012 University Ave. Parking Refunding Bonds
Reserve Fund 2,523,712 2,523,712
Total Under Trustee Management 39,224,854 39,224,854
GRAND TOTAL 487,455,970$ 503,689,286$
* These funds are subject to the requirements of the underlying debt indenture.
** U.S. Bank investments are in money market mutual funds that exclusively invest in U.S. Treasury securities.
*** CAMP investments are in money market mutual fund which invest in bankers acceptance, certificate of deposit,
commercial paper, federal agency securities, and repurchase agreements.
Second Quarter, Fiscal Year 2012-13
(Unaudited)
(Debt Service Proceeds)
Attachment A
Consolidated Report of Cash Management
City of Palo Alto Cash and Investments
City of Palo Alto City of Palo Alto
Administration Svcs. Dept.
250 Hamilton Ave., 4th Floor
Palo Alto, CA 94301(650)329-2362
December 31, 2012
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket ValueCUSIPInvestment #Issuer
PurchaseDate Book Value
YTM
360
YTM
365
Managed Pool Accounts
Fidelity Investments158 4,057,374.55SYS158 10.01007/01/2011 4,057,374.55 0.009 0.0104,057,374.55
Local Agency Investment Fund159 29,749,742.20SYS159 10.32007/01/2011 29,787,593.09 0.315 0.32029,749,742.20
Subtotal and Average 33,807,116.75 33,807,116.75 33,844,967.64 0.279 0.283 1
Federal Agency Issues - Coupon
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1028 3,000,000.0031315PPC7 02/21/2019 2,2421.79002/21/2012 3,064,320.00 1.765 1.7903,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1031 2,000,000.0031315PQC6 09/06/2018 2,0741.55003/06/2012 2,060,220.00 1.528 1.5502,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1052 1,500,000.0031315PTW9 04/10/2019 2,2901.87004/10/2012 1,555,515.00 1.844 1.8701,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1053 Call 2,000,000.0031315PTC3 04/12/2022 3,3882.87504/12/2012 2,010,820.00 2.835 2.8752,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1055 1,500,000.0031315PTQ2 04/10/2017 1,5601.26004/10/2012 1,527,915.00 1.242 1.2601,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1090 2,000,000.0031315PZQ5 06/05/2017 1,6161.11006/05/2012 2,031,940.00 1.094 1.1102,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1096 2,000,000.0031315PZQ5 06/05/2017 1,6161.11006/20/2012 2,031,940.00 0.998 1.0122,008,429.89
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1098 2,000,000.0031315PPK9 07/03/2017 1,6441.02007/03/2012 2,015,800.00 1.006 1.0202,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1109 2,000,000.0031315PSX8 08/23/2017 1,6951.03008/23/2012 2,023,260.00 1.015 1.0302,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1122 Call 1,000,000.0031315PNY1 11/21/2022 3,6112.19011/21/2012 988,630.00 2.163 2.193999,752.78
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1123 Call 1,500,000.0031315PQL6 11/29/2021 3,2542.00011/29/2012 1,484,175.00 1.972 2.0001,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1124 Call 1,750,000.0031315PNY1 11/21/2022 3,6112.19011/21/2012 1,730,102.50 2.166 2.1961,749,134.72
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1130 1,500,000.0031315PPX1 07/05/2022 3,4722.20012/13/2012 1,517,280.00 1.930 1.9571,531,468.07
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1134 750,000.0031315PB32 11/21/2022 3,6112.00012/19/2012 750,142.50 2.081 2.110742,667.22
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1136 1,500,000.0031315PTY5 12/27/2019 2,5511.48012/27/2012 1,500,405.00 1.395 1.4151,506,454.74
Federal Agricultural Mortgage820 2,000,000.0031315PLR8 08/11/2014 5873.25008/11/2009 2,086,300.00 3.205 3.2502,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage838 2,000,000.0031315PES4 12/30/2014 7282.82012/30/2009 2,091,580.00 2.781 2.8202,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage839 1,500,000.0031315PEY1 12/30/2019 2,5544.50012/30/2009 1,760,895.00 4.438 4.5001,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage840 2,000,000.0031315PGE3 01/19/2017 1,4794.12501/19/2010 2,231,060.00 4.068 4.1252,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage866 1,000,000.0031315PAT6 05/17/2017 1,5973.75005/17/2010 1,116,970.00 3.698 3.7501,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage923 1,500,000.0031315PNM7 12/28/2017 1,8223.15012/28/2010 1,649,040.00 3.106 3.1501,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage935 1,500,000.0031315PQN2 02/03/2014 3981.34002/03/2011 1,518,660.00 1.321 1.3401,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage936 1,500,000.0031315PRG6 01/31/2016 1,1252.44002/03/2011 1,591,530.00 2.406 2.4401,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage942 1,500,000.0031315PTU3 03/09/2021 2,9894.16003/09/2011 1,720,680.00 4.103 4.1601,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage951 1,500,000.0031315PUN7 04/29/2016 1,2142.41004/29/2011 1,591,170.00 2.376 2.4101,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage975 1,000,000.0031315PA25 07/27/2016 1,3032.00007/27/2011 1,048,080.00 2.063 2.092996,892.17
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/23/2013 - 12:06 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2012
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 2
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM
360
YTM
365
Federal Agency Issues - Coupon
Federal Farm Credit Bank1002 2,000,000.0031331KF96 10/14/2014 6510.70010/14/2011 2,014,980.00 0.690 0.7002,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank1006 2,000,000.0031331KK90 10/26/2016 1,3941.35010/26/2011 2,058,020.00 1.331 1.3502,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank1032 950,000.003133EAGE2 03/07/2016 1,1610.75003/07/2012 958,721.00 0.739 0.750950,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank1046 1,000,000.003133EAJU3 03/28/2016 1,1821.05003/28/2012 1,019,980.00 1.035 1.0501,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank1088 2,000,000.003133EASF6 11/20/2014 6880.50005/29/2012 2,007,940.00 0.458 0.4652,001,310.75
Federal Farm Credit Bank1092 1,500,000.003133EAUF3 06/14/2019 2,3551.50006/14/2012 1,515,750.00 1.479 1.5001,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank653 2,000,000.0031331VY91 08/16/2013 2275.28009/26/2006 2,063,400.00 4.827 4.8942,004,086.89
Federal Farm Credit Bank655 4,000,000.0031331V4E3 09/15/2014 6225.18010/12/2006 4,333,360.00 5.059 5.1304,002,746.16
Federal Farm Credit Bank657 2,039,000.0031331VWS1 04/17/2014 4715.20010/16/2006 2,169,863.02 5.100 5.1712,039,626.18
Federal Farm Credit Bank658 1,500,000.0031331S3H4 02/18/2014 4134.75010/16/2006 1,576,860.00 5.104 5.1751,494,050.91
Federal Farm Credit Bank659 3,000,000.0031331XBS0 11/25/2013 3285.05010/25/2006 3,129,810.00 4.979 5.0483,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank660 2,000,000.0031331XCY6 05/06/2015 8555.05011/06/2006 2,219,360.00 4.980 5.0502,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank662 2,000,000.0031331VTY2 03/20/2013 785.20011/16/2006 2,022,000.00 4.877 4.9452,000,945.65
Federal Farm Credit Bank677 2,000,000.0031331XPB2 02/07/2013 375.15002/07/2007 2,009,780.00 5.079 5.1502,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank690 2,000,000.0031331XSR4 03/14/2014 4374.87503/27/2007 2,111,800.00 4.807 4.8742,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank702 3,500,000.0031331XB27 08/05/2013 2165.20006/05/2007 3,603,845.00 5.130 5.2013,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank703 2,000,000.0031331XC26 06/05/2014 5205.25006/05/2007 2,142,460.00 5.178 5.2502,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank705 2,000,000.0031331XD74 12/18/2013 3515.33006/12/2007 2,098,860.00 5.257 5.3302,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank707 3,000,000.0031331XC26 06/05/2014 5205.25006/08/2007 3,213,690.00 5.409 5.4842,991,729.44
Federal Farm Credit Bank715 3,000,000.0031331XU75 08/13/2014 5895.30008/20/2007 3,232,080.00 5.128 5.1993,004,015.87
Federal Farm Credit Bank720 1,500,000.0031331X3H3 09/17/2014 6245.00009/17/2007 1,616,775.00 4.931 5.0001,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank721 1,500,000.0031331X5Y4 10/03/2014 6405.00010/03/2007 1,623,825.00 4.931 5.0001,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank722 2,000,000.0031331YCJ7 10/30/2017 1,7634.90010/30/2007 2,385,540.00 4.832 4.9002,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank725 2,000,000.0031331YHQ6 12/15/2017 1,8094.62512/12/2007 2,365,480.00 4.561 4.6242,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank742 2,000,000.0031331VCQ7 10/19/2015 1,0214.80001/30/2008 2,248,360.00 3.945 4.0002,038,172.70
Federal Farm Credit Bank744 1,000,000.0031331SKH5 01/22/2015 7514.50001/30/2008 1,085,820.00 3.820 3.8731,011,209.39
Federal Farm Credit Bank747 1,500,000.0031331YSV3 02/11/2015 7713.85002/11/2008 1,611,300.00 3.797 3.8501,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank785 1,500,000.0031331GPN3 03/04/2013 622.60003/04/2009 1,506,405.00 2.564 2.6001,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank788 1,000,000.0031331GLT4 01/29/2016 1,1233.75003/04/2009 1,100,910.00 3.698 3.7491,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank823 2,000,000.0031331GL80 09/22/2014 6293.00008/21/2009 2,095,080.00 2.959 3.0002,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank850 2,000,000.0031331JFZ1 03/08/2017 1,5273.37503/08/2010 2,223,320.00 3.328 3.3752,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank870 1,000,000.0031331JQB2 06/02/2017 1,6133.00006/02/2010 1,096,620.00 2.958 3.0001,000,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/23/2013 - 12:06 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2012
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 3
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM
360
YTM
365
Federal Agency Issues - Coupon
Federal Farm Credit Bank872 2,000,000.0031331YEL0 11/15/2016 1,4145.00006/04/2010 2,317,560.00 3.027 3.0702,134,651.31
Federal Farm Credit Bank903 1,000,000.0031331JN90 09/29/2020 2,8282.87509/29/2010 1,091,010.00 2.835 2.8751,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank910 2,000,000.0031331JX32 10/28/2016 1,3961.70010/28/2010 2,084,440.00 1.676 1.7002,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank918 2,000,000.0031331J5F6 12/16/2020 2,9063.62512/16/2010 2,312,160.00 3.575 3.6252,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank925 1,500,000.0031331JX32 10/28/2016 1,3961.70001/04/2011 1,563,330.00 2.576 2.6111,451,737.31
Federal Farm Credit Bank932 3,000,000.0031331J2M4 11/22/2016 1,4211.87501/14/2011 3,147,210.00 2.483 2.5182,930,574.73
Federal Farm Credit Bank937 2,000,000.0031331KBX7 02/10/2017 1,5012.87502/10/2011 2,171,760.00 2.835 2.8752,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank959 1,500,000.0031331KQD5 06/27/2017 1,6382.30006/27/2011 1,590,300.00 2.268 2.3001,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1100 Call 1,500,000.003133EAZN1 07/24/2020 2,7611.84007/24/2012 1,500,195.00 1.814 1.8401,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1117 Call 1,500,000.003133EA3N6 07/09/2020 2,7461.72010/09/2012 1,497,285.00 1.696 1.7201,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1012 2,000,000.00313376BR5 12/14/2018 2,1731.75012/16/2011 2,072,660.00 1.725 1.7492,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1017 2,000,000.00313376V36 01/25/2017 1,4851.00001/25/2012 2,035,180.00 0.986 1.0002,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1021 2,000,000.00313376VN2 12/22/2016 1,4511.10001/30/2012 2,034,980.00 1.084 1.1002,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1027 2,000,000.003133787M7 02/27/2017 1,5181.05002/21/2012 2,029,660.00 1.035 1.0492,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1038 1,500,000.003133782N0 03/10/2017 1,5290.87503/08/2012 1,511,310.00 0.999 1.0131,491,546.42
Federal Home Loan Bank1039 1,500,000.003133782M2 03/08/2019 2,2571.50003/08/2012 1,531,815.00 1.574 1.5961,491,582.47
Federal Home Loan Bank1041 1,500,000.00313378LA7 02/25/2022 3,3422.33003/20/2012 1,563,720.00 2.298 2.3301,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1042 2,000,000.00313378LY5 07/30/2015 9400.60003/20/2012 2,011,920.00 0.591 0.6002,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1045 2,000,000.00313378QP9 03/28/2017 1,5471.26003/28/2012 2,046,640.00 1.242 1.2602,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1049 1,500,000.00313378VG3 05/22/2019 2,3321.85004/09/2012 1,560,450.00 1.824 1.8501,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1057 1,500,000.00313378ZW4 04/17/2017 1,5671.05004/17/2012 1,521,525.00 1.035 1.0501,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1058 1,500,000.003133792L2 10/20/2017 1,7531.23004/20/2012 1,523,460.00 1.213 1.2301,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1065 Call 1,500,000.003133796H7 01/26/2022 3,3122.50004/26/2012 1,508,415.00 2.465 2.5001,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1068 1,500,000.00313379BL2 12/29/2017 1,8231.25004/30/2012 1,530,825.00 1.232 1.2501,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1070 1,500,000.00313379BG3 04/27/2017 1,5771.07004/27/2012 1,516,230.00 1.055 1.0701,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1073 2,000,000.00313379EC9 11/18/2020 2,8782.00005/18/2012 2,055,020.00 1.972 2.0002,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1078 Call 2,000,000.00313379E96 05/23/2022 3,4292.60005/23/2012 2,011,020.00 2.564 2.6002,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1087 Call 2,000,000.00313379LL1 05/25/2017 1,6051.75005/25/2012 2,013,220.00 1.399 1.4192,028,019.20
Federal Home Loan Bank1089 2,000,000.00313379PD5 09/20/2017 1,7231.09006/07/2012 2,028,420.00 1.075 1.0902,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1101 Call 1,500,000.003133805L7 08/08/2022 3,5062.25008/08/2012 1,500,240.00 2.219 2.2501,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1102 Call 1,500,000.003133802M8 07/30/2018 2,0361.37507/30/2012 1,500,120.00 1.356 1.3751,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1104 Call 1,500,000.003133807E1 08/15/2022 3,5132.29008/15/2012 1,500,255.00 2.258 2.2901,500,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/23/2013 - 12:06 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2012
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 4
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM
360
YTM
365
Federal Agency Issues - Coupon
Federal Home Loan Bank1105 Call 1,500,000.00313380E86 11/30/2018 2,1591.33008/30/2012 1,500,135.00 1.311 1.3301,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1112 Call 333,333.34313380JH1 08/23/2022 3,5212.48008/23/2012 333,393.34 2.446 2.480333,333.34
Federal Home Loan Bank1116 Call 1,500,000.00313380WT0 10/11/2022 3,5702.25010/11/2012 1,498,350.00 2.227 2.2581,498,900.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1121 Call 2,000,000.00313381AY1 11/21/2022 3,6112.25011/21/2012 1,997,920.00 2.224 2.2551,999,011.11
Federal Home Loan Bank1125 1,500,000.00313381C94 12/13/2019 2,5371.25011/30/2012 1,489,320.00 1.196 1.2121,503,709.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1126 Call 1,500,000.00313381DA0 12/05/2022 3,6252.19012/05/2012 1,497,450.00 2.165 2.1951,499,255.42
Federal Home Loan Bank1127 1,500,000.00313381GB5 11/30/2018 2,1591.00011/30/2012 1,493,430.00 0.986 1.0001,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1128 Call 2,000,000.00313381HW8 12/19/2022 3,6392.19012/19/2012 1,988,040.00 2.168 2.1981,998,505.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1129 Call 1,500,000.00313381HW8 12/19/2022 3,6392.19012/19/2012 1,491,030.00 2.176 2.2061,497,757.50
Federal Home Loan Bank1131 1,500,000.00313381C94 12/13/2019 2,5371.25012/13/2012 1,489,320.00 1.232 1.2491,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1135 1,500,000.00313376BR5 12/14/2018 2,1731.75012/19/2012 1,554,495.00 1.075 1.0901,556,898.89
Federal Home Loan Bank652 2,000,000.0031339Y7K2 07/16/2013 1965.00009/26/2006 2,051,080.00 4.850 4.9182,000,735.78
Federal Home Loan Bank654 2,000,000.003133XHBL5 06/13/2014 5284.87510/12/2006 2,133,760.00 5.020 5.0891,994,817.81
Federal Home Loan Bank663 2,000,000.003133XHXW7 11/27/2013 3304.87511/27/2006 2,084,840.00 4.808 4.8752,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank667 2,000,000.003133XHW57 12/13/2013 3464.87512/14/2006 2,088,820.00 4.806 4.8732,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank699 2,000,000.003133XGJ96 09/13/2013 2555.25005/16/2007 2,070,180.00 4.943 5.0112,002,811.07
Federal Home Loan Bank706 1,000,000.003133XGJ96 09/13/2013 2555.25006/08/2007 1,035,090.00 5.369 5.444998,852.31
Federal Home Loan Bank710 2,500,000.003133XLDG5 06/13/2014 5285.37506/28/2007 2,684,475.00 5.300 5.3742,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank713 3,000,000.003133XLDG5 06/13/2014 5285.37508/20/2007 3,221,370.00 5.099 5.1703,007,379.93
Federal Home Loan Bank730 2,000,000.003133XPBA1 03/13/2015 8013.50001/25/2008 2,138,700.00 3.451 3.4992,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank741 3,000,000.003133XPBA1 03/13/2015 8013.50001/30/2008 3,208,050.00 3.869 3.9232,975,785.75
Federal Home Loan Bank777 3,000,000.003133XSP93 12/13/2013 3463.12501/16/2009 3,083,580.00 2.794 2.8333,015,028.44
Federal Home Loan Bank789 2,000,000.003133XTCS3 03/13/2014 4363.00003/16/2009 2,066,740.00 2.958 2.9992,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank793 3,000,000.003133XTFQ4 04/01/2014 4552.90004/01/2009 3,100,290.00 2.860 2.9003,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank818 2,000,000.003133XTYD2 06/16/2015 8964.00006/16/2009 2,178,040.00 3.945 4.0002,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank822 3,000,000.003133XUMS9 09/13/2019 2,4464.50008/12/2009 3,616,380.00 4.437 4.4993,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank827 1,000,000.003133XUMR1 09/12/2014 6193.25010/21/2009 1,050,280.00 2.594 2.6311,009,781.78
Federal Home Loan Bank830 3,000,000.003133XDTL5 12/21/2015 1,0845.00010/21/2009 3,406,290.00 3.101 3.1453,149,229.66
Federal Home Loan Bank832 3,000,000.003133XVRJ2 12/09/2016 1,4383.50011/19/2009 3,323,940.00 3.325 3.3723,013,313.40
Federal Home Loan Bank833 1,200,000.003133MJQF0 08/15/2016 1,3225.50011/19/2009 1,412,376.00 3.304 3.3501,283,000.19
Federal Home Loan Bank847 2,000,000.003133XWX95 03/13/2015 8012.75002/19/2010 2,105,880.00 2.711 2.7492,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank859 1,500,000.003133XEUG2 03/11/2016 1,1654.87504/26/2010 1,709,970.00 3.227 3.2721,569,334.40
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/23/2013 - 12:06 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2012
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 5
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM
360
YTM
365
Federal Agency Issues - Coupon
Federal Home Loan Bank860 1,500,000.003133XHVS8 12/09/2016 1,4385.00004/26/2010 1,751,685.00 3.430 3.4781,579,671.01
Federal Home Loan Bank878 3,000,000.003133XVNU1 12/12/2014 7102.75006/23/2010 3,143,970.00 2.052 2.0813,037,129.02
Federal Home Loan Bank879 1,500,000.003133XUMR1 09/12/2014 6193.25006/23/2010 1,575,420.00 1.975 2.0031,530,282.51
Federal Home Loan Bank883 1,500,000.003133XWNB1 06/12/2015 8922.87506/29/2010 1,591,935.00 2.099 2.1281,525,859.30
Federal Home Loan Bank885 2,000,000.003133XBDM4 02/13/2015 7734.75006/29/2010 2,186,420.00 2.022 2.0512,108,456.78
Federal Home Loan Bank887 1,500,000.003133705T1 04/08/2013 971.08007/08/2010 1,503,840.00 1.065 1.0801,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank900 2,000,000.00313370TB4 07/29/2013 2090.85008/30/2010 2,007,740.00 0.838 0.8502,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank901 1,000,000.003133717D2 02/27/2014 4221.00009/27/2010 1,009,180.00 0.986 1.0001,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank907 2,000,000.00313371FB7 08/28/2015 9691.35010/22/2010 2,051,480.00 1.331 1.3502,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank911 1,500,000.00313371PV2 12/09/2016 1,4381.62511/09/2010 1,561,320.00 1.602 1.6241,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank912 1,500,000.00313371PU4 12/13/2013 3460.50011/09/2010 1,503,120.00 0.589 0.5971,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank913 2,000,000.00313371VF0 12/11/2015 1,0741.62511/19/2010 2,068,940.00 1.602 1.6242,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank914 2,000,000.00313371WB8 07/24/2014 5691.15011/24/2010 2,027,800.00 1.134 1.1502,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank920 1,500,000.00313371PV2 12/09/2016 1,4381.62512/15/2010 1,561,320.00 2.550 2.5851,447,693.97
Federal Home Loan Bank921 1,500,000.00313371NW2 12/11/2015 1,0741.37512/15/2010 1,543,875.00 2.191 2.2211,464,765.03
Federal Home Loan Bank924 1,500,000.003133MJQF0 08/15/2016 1,3225.50001/04/2011 1,765,470.00 2.516 2.5501,648,379.20
Federal Home Loan Bank926 1,500,000.00313371PV2 12/09/2016 1,4381.62501/04/2011 1,561,320.00 2.592 2.6291,445,382.63
Federal Home Loan Bank931 3,000,000.003133XFPR1 06/10/2016 1,2565.37501/14/2011 3,507,300.00 2.363 2.3963,286,835.50
Federal Home Loan Bank938 1,500,000.00313372Q56 02/26/2016 1,1512.65002/18/2011 1,603,395.00 2.613 2.6491,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank940 2,000,000.003133X0PF0 08/15/2018 2,0525.37502/17/2011 2,467,400.00 3.423 3.4702,187,096.22
Federal Home Loan Bank947 1,500,000.00313373GQ9 10/29/2014 6661.75004/29/2011 1,539,855.00 1.726 1.7501,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank982 2,000,000.00313375KP1 03/15/2017 1,5341.50009/15/2011 2,066,620.00 1.479 1.5002,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank985 2,000,000.00313375M87 10/14/2016 1,3821.27009/14/2011 2,050,040.00 1.252 1.2702,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank990 2,000,000.00313370TW8 09/09/2016 1,3472.00009/13/2011 2,112,940.00 1.163 1.1802,058,576.93
Federal Home Loan Bank992 2,000,000.00313371ZX7 12/08/2017 1,8022.62509/13/2011 2,174,260.00 1.526 1.5472,100,968.43
Federal Home Loan Bank - S & P792 2,000,000.003133XTFD3 03/27/2014 4502.85003/27/2009 2,065,080.00 2.810 2.8502,000,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1007 Call 2,000,000.003134G23Y6 11/15/2016 1,4141.57011/15/2011 2,021,440.00 1.548 1.5702,000,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1024 Call 2,000,000.003134G3MD9 11/14/2017 1,7781.50002/14/2012 2,026,440.00 1.479 1.5002,000,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1025 Call 2,000,000.003134G3MF4 02/07/2019 2,2282.00002/07/2012 2,029,120.00 1.972 2.0002,000,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1036 1,500,000.003137EABA6 11/17/2017 1,7815.12503/01/2012 1,807,695.00 1.227 1.2441,773,187.82
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1074 Call 2,000,000.003134G3VH0 05/24/2017 1,6041.20005/24/2012 2,005,880.00 1.183 1.2002,000,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1081 Call 2,000,000.003134G3VS6 05/30/2017 1,6101.25005/30/2012 2,005,980.00 1.232 1.2502,000,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/23/2013 - 12:06 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2012
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 6
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM
360
YTM
365
Federal Agency Issues - Coupon
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1085 Call 2,000,000.003134G3VW7 06/14/2017 1,6251.25006/14/2012 2,008,160.00 1.232 1.2502,000,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1086 Call 2,000,000.003134G3WB2 06/07/2017 1,6181.30006/07/2012 2,008,220.00 1.282 1.3002,000,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1097 Call 1,500,000.003134G3XT2 07/17/2017 1,6581.05007/17/2012 1,511,730.00 1.035 1.0501,500,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1103 Call 3,000,000.003134G3A26 08/06/2020 2,7743.00008/06/2012 3,047,820.00 2.602 2.6383,073,845.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1106 Call 1,500,000.003134G3A91 08/22/2019 2,4241.40008/22/2012 1,498,575.00 1.380 1.4001,500,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1113 Call 1,500,000.003134G3L73 12/26/2019 2,5501.50009/26/2012 1,511,520.00 1.479 1.5001,500,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.679 1,500,000.003128X1KG1 06/12/2013 1624.00002/07/2007 1,525,785.00 5.010 5.0801,493,866.85
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.682 2,000,000.003128X1KG1 06/12/2013 1624.00002/15/2007 2,034,380.00 4.970 5.0401,992,110.51
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.714 2,000,000.003134A4UM4 01/15/2014 3794.50008/20/2007 2,088,840.00 5.033 5.1031,989,411.18
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.734 Callable 1,500,000.003128X6N85 01/31/2015 7604.30001/31/2008 1,623,810.00 4.241 4.3001,500,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.828 2,000,000.003128X33E1 01/26/2015 7555.05010/21/2009 2,195,140.00 2.713 2.7512,087,989.25
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.884 4,000,000.003128X2RA5 12/01/2015 1,0645.30006/29/2010 4,550,760.00 2.327 2.3604,320,149.73
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.890 4,000,000.003134A4VG6 11/17/2015 1,0504.75007/07/2010 4,497,160.00 2.135 2.1654,279,451.61
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.927 1,500,000.003134A4ZT4 01/19/2016 1,1134.75001/04/2011 1,697,475.00 2.215 2.2451,607,731.04
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.970 Callable 1,500,000.003134G2TE2 07/28/2017 1,6692.35007/28/2011 1,502,250.00 2.317 2.3501,500,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.993 2,000,000.003137EAAY5 08/23/2017 1,6955.50009/13/2011 2,432,400.00 1.415 1.4352,360,683.21
Federal National Mortgage Asso1016 Call 1,500,000.003136FTZY8 02/08/2017 1,4991.25002/08/2012 1,501,770.00 1.232 1.2501,500,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1019 Call 1,500,000.003136FTD55 08/01/2017 1,6731.40002/01/2012 1,501,605.00 1.380 1.4001,500,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1022 2,000,000.0031398ADM1 06/12/2017 1,6235.37501/25/2012 2,404,960.00 1.317 1.3362,345,492.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1023 2,590,000.003136FPXN2 11/24/2017 1,7882.30001/25/2012 2,774,459.80 1.406 1.4262,695,985.61
Federal National Mortgage Asso1026 Call 1,500,000.003133EABR8 02/01/2019 2,2222.00002/01/2012 1,502,085.00 1.972 2.0001,500,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1033 3,000,000.003135G0JA2 04/27/2017 1,5771.12503/01/2012 3,054,870.00 1.134 1.1502,996,856.14
Federal National Mortgage Asso1034 1,500,000.003135G0AL7 03/15/2016 1,1692.25003/01/2012 1,584,540.00 0.856 0.8681,565,156.55
Federal National Mortgage Asso1035 2,000,000.0031398ALG5 01/23/2018 1,8484.37703/01/2012 2,348,860.00 1.388 1.4082,287,381.43
Federal National Mortgage Asso1047 Call 3,000,000.003136G0AX9 04/17/2019 2,2972.00004/17/2012 3,046,260.00 1.972 2.0003,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1048 Call 2,000,000.003136G0AW1 10/16/2020 2,8452.35004/16/2012 2,044,780.00 2.317 2.3502,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1050 Call 1,500,000.003136FT7B9 03/28/2022 3,3732.12503/29/2012 1,506,480.00 2.880 2.9201,500,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1051 Call 2,000,000.003136G0CG4 04/26/2017 1,5761.40004/26/2012 2,008,660.00 1.380 1.4002,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1054 Call 2,000,000.003136G0CY5 04/30/2019 2,3102.05004/30/2012 2,035,680.00 2.021 2.0502,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1056 Call 1,500,000.003136G0CL3 07/26/2017 1,6671.50004/26/2012 1,505,835.00 1.479 1.5001,500,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1059 Call 2,000,000.003136G0DU2 04/30/2020 2,6762.00004/30/2012 2,028,440.00 1.972 2.0002,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1061 Call 1,500,000.003136G0EC1 04/30/2020 2,6762.05004/30/2012 1,521,000.00 2.021 2.0501,500,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/23/2013 - 12:06 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2012
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 7
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM
360
YTM
365
Federal Agency Issues - Coupon
Federal National Mortgage Asso1062 Call 2,000,000.003136G0DL2 10/30/2019 2,4932.00004/30/2012 2,009,780.00 1.972 2.0002,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1063 Call 1,500,000.003136G0DQ1 07/26/2016 1,3021.00004/26/2012 1,503,645.00 0.986 1.0001,500,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1064 Call 1,500,000.003136G0GA3 05/16/2017 1,5961.20005/16/2012 1,517,280.00 1.183 1.2001,500,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1066 Call 2,000,000.003136G0FJ5 10/30/2020 2,8592.00004/30/2012 2,018,660.00 1.972 2.0002,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1071 Call 2,000,000.003136G0DL2 10/30/2019 2,4932.00004/30/2012 2,009,780.00 1.972 2.0002,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1072 Call 1,180,000.003136G0FG1 11/14/2016 1,4131.12505/14/2012 1,183,752.40 1.109 1.1251,180,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1077 Call 1,000,000.003136G0FV8 11/15/2019 2,5092.00005/15/2012 1,003,540.00 1.972 2.0001,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1080 Call 2,000,000.003136G0JB8 05/30/2017 1,6101.20005/30/2012 2,006,720.00 1.183 1.2002,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1082 450,000.003136FPYB7 05/23/2017 1,6032.05005/11/2012 475,695.00 1.070 1.085468,520.40
Federal National Mortgage Asso1094 Call 2,000,000.003136G0PB1 06/28/2017 1,6391.16006/28/2012 2,008,640.00 1.144 1.1602,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1099 Call 1,500,000.003136G0UB5 02/15/2018 1,8711.15008/15/2012 1,504,125.00 1.134 1.1501,500,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1110 Call 475,000.003136G0YX3 09/13/2022 3,5422.50009/13/2012 476,159.00 2.465 2.500475,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1111 Call 2,000,000.003136G0YT2 09/06/2022 3,5352.35009/06/2012 2,011,680.00 2.317 2.3502,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1114 Call 2,000,000.003136G0J36 10/11/2022 3,5702.50010/11/2012 2,008,680.00 2.465 2.5002,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1115 Call 1,500,000.003136G0J36 10/11/2022 3,5702.50010/11/2012 1,506,510.00 2.465 2.5001,500,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1118 500,000.003136FPXN2 11/24/2017 1,7882.30010/18/2012 535,610.00 0.927 0.940532,439.05
Federal National Mortgage Asso1119 Call 1,500,000.003136G02Z3 11/15/2022 3,6052.25011/15/2012 1,500,960.00 2.235 2.2661,497,778.75
Federal National Mortgage Asso1120 Call 1,000,000.003135G0RC9 10/25/2022 3,5842.20010/25/2012 991,860.00 2.196 2.226997,644.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso743 3,000,000.00313586UB3 12/10/2015 1,07310.35001/30/2008 3,870,810.00 3.987 4.0433,472,620.85
Federal National Mortgage Asso761 Callable 1,000,000.0031398APN6 04/08/2013 974.00004/08/2008 1,010,340.00 3.945 4.0001,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso763 Callable 1,000,000.003136F9ES8 04/02/2013 914.00004/02/2008 1,009,690.00 3.945 4.0001,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso776 3,000,000.0031398ANT5 02/25/2013 554.25001/16/2009 3,018,240.00 2.298 2.3303,008,191.67
Federal National Mortgage Asso829 2,000,000.0031359MXX6 03/02/2015 7905.00010/21/2009 2,201,940.00 2.736 2.7742,089,141.58
Federal National Mortgage Asso891 2,000,000.0031359MZC0 10/15/2015 1,0174.37507/07/2010 2,220,700.00 2.100 2.1292,117,824.53
Federal National Mortgage Asso928 1,500,000.0031359MS61 07/15/2016 1,2915.37501/04/2011 1,754,235.00 2.422 2.4551,644,059.26
Federal National Mortgage Asso988 2,000,000.003135G0AL7 03/15/2016 1,1692.25009/13/2011 2,112,720.00 1.029 1.0442,075,330.16
Federal National Mortgage Asso991 2,000,000.0031359M4D2 02/13/2017 1,5045.00009/13/2011 2,353,440.00 1.272 1.2902,294,089.60
Federal National Mortgage Asso995 Callable 2,000,000.003136FR4R1 03/21/2019 2,2702.00009/21/2011 2,007,080.00 1.972 2.0002,000,000.00
Tennessee Valley Authority1132 500,000.00880591EL2 02/15/2021 2,9673.87512/14/2012 580,225.00 1.596 1.618585,512.83
Tennessee Valley Authority1133 1,010,000.00880591EN8 08/15/2022 3,5131.87512/14/2012 1,001,970.50 1.893 1.9201,006,014.89
Tennessee Valley Authority656 1,500,000.00880591CW0 03/15/2013 736.00010/16/2006 1,517,535.00 5.054 5.1251,502,272.21
Tennessee Valley Authority661 3,000,000.00880591CW0 03/15/2013 736.00011/16/2006 3,035,070.00 4.825 4.8923,005,804.86
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/23/2013 - 12:06 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2012
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 8
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM
360
YTM
365
Federal Agency Issues - Coupon
Tennessee Valley Authority716 3,000,000.00880591DY5 06/15/2015 8954.37508/20/2007 3,287,280.00 5.163 5.2352,948,486.20
Tennessee Valley Authority861 2,000,000.00880591EA6 07/18/2017 1,6595.50004/26/2010 2,418,820.00 3.602 3.6522,146,386.30
Tennessee Valley Authority954 2,000,000.00880591CU4 12/15/2017 1,8096.25005/23/2011 2,521,740.00 2.624 2.6612,324,382.86
Subtotal and Average 411,170,140.21 405,727,333.34 427,343,275.06 2.586 2.622 1,498
Treasury Securities - Coupon
U.S. Treasury939 2,000,000.00912828JW1 12/31/2013 3641.50002/17/2011 2,026,020.00 1.292 1.3102,003,690.36
Subtotal and Average 2,003,690.36 2,000,000.00 2,026,020.00 1.292 1.310 364
Total Investments and Average 446,980,947.32 441,534,450.09 463,214,262.70 2.406 2.439 1,380
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/23/2013 - 12:06 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
1 General Investment Guidelines:
a) The max. stated final maturity of individual securities in the portfolio should be 10 years.Full Compliance
b) A max. of 30 percent of the par value of the portfolio shall be invested in securities with maturities
beyond 5 years.26.3%
c) The City shall maintain a minimum of one month's cash needs in short term investments.Full Compliance
d) At least $50 million shall be maintained in securities maturing in less than 2 years.
Plus two managed pool accounts which provide instant liquidity:
- Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) - maximum investment limit is$50 million
- Fidelity Investments
e) Should market value of the portfolio fall below 95 percent of the book value, report this fact within a
reasonable time to the City Council and evaluate if there are risk of holding securities to maturity.103.6%
d) Commitments to purchase securities newly introduced on the market shall be made no more than three (3)
working days before pricing.Full Compliance
f) Whenever possible, the City will obtain three or more quotations on the purchase or sale of
comparable securities (excludes new issues, LAIF, City of Palo Alto bonds, money market
accounts, and mutual funds).Full Compliance
2 U.S. Government Securities:Full Compliance
a) There is no limit on purchase of these securities.
b) Securities will not exceed 10 years maturity.
3 U.S. Government Agency Securities:Full Compliance
a) There is no limit on purchase of these securities except for:
Callable and Multi-step-up securities provided that:
- The potential call dates are known at the time of purchase;Full Compliance
- the interest rates at which they "step-up" are known at the time of purchase; and Full Compliance
- the entire face value of the security is redeemed at the call date.Full Compliance
- No more than 25 percent of the par value of portfolio.23.4%
b) Securities will not exceed 10 years maturity.
4 Bonds of the State of California Municipal Agencies None Held
a)Having at time of investment a minimum Double A (AA/AA2) rating as provided by a nationally
recognized rating service (e.g., Moody’s and/or Standard and Poor’s).
b)May not exceed 10 percent of the par value of the portfolio.
5 Certificates of Deposit:Full Compliance
a) May not exceed 20 percent of the par value of the portfolio;None Held
b) No more than 10 percent of the par value of the portfolio in collateralized CDs in any institution.
c) Purchase collateralized deposits only from federally insured large banks that are rated by
a nationally recognized rating agency (e.g. Moody's, Standard & Poor's, etc.).
d) For non-rated banks, deposit should be limited to amounts federally insured (FDIC)
e) Rollovers are not permitted without specific instruction from authorized City staff.
6 Banker's Acceptance Notes:None Held
a) No more than 30 percent of the par value of the portfolio.
b) Not to exceed 180 days maturity.
c) No more than $5 million with any one institution.
7 Commercial Paper:None Held
a) No more than 15 percent of the par value of the portfolio.
Attachment C
Investment Policy Compliance
As of December 31, 2012
Investment Policy Requirements
Compliance
Check
$106.5 million
$29.7 million
$4.1 million
Attachment C
Investment Policy Compliance
As of December 31, 2012
Investment Policy Requirements
Compliance
Check
b) Having highest letter or numerical rating from a nationally recognized rating service.
c) Not to exceed 270 days maturity.
d) No more than $3 million or 10 percent of the outstanding commercial paper of any one institution,
whichever is lesser.
8 Short-Term Repurchase Agreement (REPO):None Held
a) Not to exceed 1 year.
b) Market value of securities that underlay a repurchase agreement shall be valued at 102 percent or
greater of the funds borrowed against those securities.
9 Money Market Deposit Accounts Full Compliance
a) Liquid bank accounts which seek to maintain a net asset value of $1.00.
10 Mutual Funds:None Held
a) No more than 20 percent of the par value of the portfolio.
b) No more than 10 percent of the par value with any one institution.
11 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit (NCD):None Held
a) No more than 10 percent of the par value of the portfolio.
b) No more than $5 million in any one institution.
12 Medium-Term Corporate Notes:None Held
a) No more than 10 percent of the par value of the portfolio.
b) Not to exceed 5 years maturity.
c) Securities eligible for investment shall have a minimum rating of AA from a nationally recognized
rating service.
d) No more than $5 million of the par value may be invested in securities of any single issuer, other
than the U.S. Government, its agencies and instrumentality.
e) If securities owned by the City are downgraded by either rating agencies to a level below AA it
shall be the City's policy to review the credit situation and make a determination as to whether
to sell or retain such securities.
13 Prohibited Investments:
a) Reverse Repurchase Agreements
b) Derivatives as defined in Appendix B of the Investment Policy
14 All securities shall be delivered to the City's safekeeping custodian, and held in the name of the
City, with the exception of :
- Certificates of Deposit, Mutual Funds, and LAIF
Full Compliance
None Held
Full Compliance